The Orwellian Doublespeak of Big Abortion

George Orwell published Nineteen Eighty-Four in 1949 [1], which introduced the totalitarian overlord, Big Brother, into our cultural lexicon. The dystopian story follows Winston, a member of the middle class of a fictional country called Oceania, who subversively begins to question Big Brother’s controlling regime. Similarities to the Third Reich were obvious but the scenario of the novel seemed impossible to imagine in a ruggedly individualistic country like America. After all, Big Brother’s mantras were blatantly contradictory:

War is Peace

Freedom is Slavery

Ignorance is Strength

Big Brother’s propaganda machine operated via a communication method called Doublespeak which originated from Doublethink, described as “the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”  Citizens of Winston’s society were brainwashed through various Ministries: the Ministry of Peace (which perpetuated war), the Ministry of Truth (which told continuous lies), the Ministry of Plenty (which insured an absence of goods leading to abject poverty and lack), and the Ministry of Love (which tortured and killed people). Doublespeak was broadcast through the media as Newspeak and was enforced by the ever-present Thought Police, who used technological and human spies to detect and punish any infractions to the party line.

Gradual and relentless revisionism of historical facts that were felt to be harmful to Big Brother took place continuously so that it soon became impossible to know what was the actual “Truth.”  Events, books, and newspapers that contradicted Big Brother’s current position were altered, removed from circulation and thrown down the “Memory Hole.” Individuals who resisted Big Brother were “disappeared” and the historical record was altered to remove all mention of them. In present-day society, Planned Parenthood and the behemoth of pro-abortion businesses, and academic, cultural, and social engineers — collectively called “Big Abortion” — seem to have used Orwell’s novel as a playbook for desensitizing America to the voluntary killing of the unborn. Thus slow, measured predictive programming has transformed a practice once considered an atrocity to one deemed beneficial and even banal, like getting a root canal. Painful perhaps, but necessary for life to proceed as usual.

The structure of society in 1984 was made up of the Inner Party (the financial and political elite who directed and controlled society), the Outer Party, who were a type of middle management (“True Believers” [2] who facilitated the propagation of Inner Party ideas), and the proles (short for proletariat, a worker/slave class [3] whose intellectual capacity was diminished and whose “needs” were completely irrelevant to the elite). The duty of the Outer Party was to disseminate the Inner Party’s goals for the transformation of society by defusing critical thinking skills through the use Doublespeak, under the watchful eye of the Thought Police. Harmful words were eliminated and the universal media used Newspeak to teach citizens not to question Big Brother’s views, because Big Brother was always watching you. The proles received even more “rubbishy entertainment and spurious news” called Prolefeed which they absently absorbed while they were encouraged to be content with their role as the dumb brutes of manual labor.

Similarly, modern efforts to remind the public that Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger was an avowed eugenicist (quality people should reproduce, lesser-thans should not) are usually met with blank stares. Revisionist viewpoints seek to sanitize her motives or excuse her positions as “complex.” [4,5] While statues of historical figures whose words and actions clash with modern sensibilities are being pulled down, Sanger maintains a protected status with elites and the middle class [6]. Sanger continues to be revered (Hillary Clinton was given the Margaret Sanger award [7]) even though she was warmly received as a guest speaker of the Ku Klux Klan [8].  Although Sanger openly conspired to undermine African American birth rates by using Black clergy to spread her rhetoric, that history is largely ignored by community leaders who receive financial backing for their political complicity. Even pro-life Reverend Martin Luther King was duped into believing that he was helping his community by supporting Planned Parenthood’s population-control-disguised-as-social-justice tactics [9]. The founders of modern Birth Control/Family Planning organizations were all eugenicists bent on reducing the propagation of “undesirables.” Sanger admitted the self-empowerment rhetoric of her speeches was merely a rebranding, writing that “birth control propaganda is thus the entering wedge of the eugenic educator.” [10] American eugenicists’ cultural and political power were the impetus for the United States’ forced sterilization laws which were admired and replicated by the Nazis [11].  Save a few persistent pro-life voices, Sanger’s ugly legacy has entered the Memory Hole of modern society.

How has Big Abortion changed the public perception of abortion? After all, the common historical view was that the womb was a protective haven for growing babies. Most women had maternal instincts and looked forward to having children. Planned Parenthood was initially quite honest about the fact that abortion meant killing a baby and emphasized prevention through birth control. This approach acknowledged that society at large was horrified by abortion and appealed to the “social responsibility” of not being put in that position. However, this focus gradually gave way to the dehumanization of the unborn with the term “fetus,” which has a clinical, alien tone and is meant to emotionally distance a woman from her growing baby.  To further disengage a woman from the innate connectivity of pregnancy, messaging centered on terminology like “clumps of cells” and “parasites.” If Doublespeak could make women accept that her baby was not human or not a person, then something “bad” could be changed to something “neutral,” like having a wart removed. There were still enough religious citizens who saw this message as disturbing, so the Ministers of Truth reassured society that Big Abortion understood this was a hard decision and wanted it to be rare.

In the Big Abortion hierarchy, most Inner Party elitists still have quite strong beliefs about population control. They have never really varied from their eugenics goals. They have merely disguised their motives through propagating humanitarian Doublespeak utilizing Sanger’s “empowerment” language. Whether they are true racists, arrogant classists or simply rabid “Population Bomb” climate change evangelists [12] matters not. Their financial resources and stranglehold on mainstream media ensure that they have dominant influence on academia, politics, and communication to society at large. True Believers or Outer Party members are third-wave feminists, journalists, and academics who have transformed into Social Justice Warriors, earnestly fighting for the “Right to Choose.” The fact that one is “choosing” to kill a human baby is downplayed, with the result that the “choice” of death is equated with the “choice” of what flavor of ice cream to eat or any other innumerable mundane daily life choices.  Thus “difficult decision” has been transformed into “constitutional right to relieve a human being of their life.”  The proles and plebes do not usually bother to understand all the fuss and many merely shrug their shoulders, matter-of-factly showing up for their own abortions from the “free abortion fund” pot. They do not bother to question why the biggest “free abortion” fund is financed by one of the wealthiest Inner Party members in the world [13]. They are unconcerned that the bulk of abortion facilities are in their own communities. After all, Newspeak says that is to prevent barriers to access for those “most in need.”

The Inner Party eventually gained the courage to take Big Abortion Doublethink to the next level. The twin prongs of population control (birth control and abortion) would be rebranded as “Reproductive Healthcare” and “Reproductive Justice.” These particularly successful aspects of Doublespeak made the removal of a woman’s fertility and her baby sound like it was essential to her “health.” So, while fertility and pregnancy are not diseases, the removal of them is implied to be healthy. Despite the US Constitution’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the term “Reproductive Justice” is used to encourage society that unfettered access to the removal of fertility and pregnancy is noble and honorable. The ultimate goal is government financing of abortion through all gestational ages for any reason. An unsuspecting public has now been mesmerized with the familiar terms of “Health” and “Justice” to finance the suppression of fertility and accept open season on even viable babies. The natural progression of such a thinking process is to eventually legitimize infanticide (so-called after-birth abortion) [14] and even euthanasia of non-terminally ill adults, as it is currently on the docket in the Netherlands [15].  Philosophers and bioethicists accuse those who oppose this downward spiral as “specieists,” claiming that killing babies, the disabled, or the elderly is no different than putting down a dog or eating a salmon [16,17].

Since being a human being does not matter, abortion then becomes a business transaction between a woman and her doctor. This proposal accomplished the Doublethink concept that society had no business discussing or decrying “mutually agreed upon killing,” and set up the final stage of Doublespeak. That is, that “Abortion is Good” and “Those who oppose Abortion are Bad.” Pro-lifers are anti-choice, and who on Earth would oppose the Free Will of a Person from making a choice? Being against choice sounds downright un-American. Therefore, the Orwellian climax is:

Killing is Moral.

Opposition to Killing is Immoral.

As such, there is no longer any delicacy required around the topic. If all goes according to the 1984 playbook, taxpayers will willingly finance the wholesale slaughter of the unborn, up until the age of birth (and maybe after), on demand, with no apology, even for sex selection [18].  With the election of Hillary Clinton, there would have been no barriers to this plan. Currently, pro-abortion memes (“Abortion is Awesome”) are shared on social media. Women are encouraged to celebrate their abortions to eliminate abortion stigma (#ShoutYourAbortion). A woman live-tweets her abortion [19]. A visibly pregnant woman narcissistically posts that she will get an abortion unless she gets a certain number of Retweets [20]. A Big Abortion-financed media blitz is arranged to elevate “Christian” abortionist Dr. Willie Parker, who believes it is his religious duty to remove a woman’s burdensome offspring from her previously sacrosanct womb (for large sums of money, of course). Depicted as a brave soldier in the war against “the fetishization of motherhood and children,” Dr. Parker’s dedication to his craft is heralded across all major media outlets enabling Newspeak to tell you that true Christians help women by eliminating their children. The culmination of successful Inner Party brainwashing was seen at a recent event where Dr. Parker was joined by actress Martha Plimpton, who bragged about her “best” abortion to wild cheers and applause [21-23].

Much of society, who have subsumed their own natural gut instinct to abhor the death of innocents and submitted their thinking to Hivemind propaganda, have become ambassadors of their own destruction.  The Outer Party has progressed to unapologetically celebrating death, much to the approval of the Inner Party. The “devil” has become the pro-lifer who believes in a right to life rather than the physician who vowed to “First, Do No Harm,” while financially profiting from killing. Pro-lifers are portrayed as woman-haters and are cowed into silence by the Thought Police as the narrative is effectively controlled by Doublespeak. Will society awake from its stupor and protest that “2 plus 2 does NOT equal 5”? Will physicians have the courage to say that death is not “healthy” and that “justice” is not dependent upon the sacrifice of the unborn? Will pro-lifers reject passivity and revolt against Big Abortion, exposing the truth that abortion on demand is protecting and promoting the selfishness of humans as sexual machines [24]? Or will we submit to the Orwellian dictator and reach the final stage of Stockholm Syndrome like Winston, the protagonist in 1984, who was tortured to the point of acquiescing to that which sought to destroy him:

“He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark mustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the side of this nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.” [25]

Works Cited:

1.   Orwell, G. Nineteen Eighty-Four. 1949. Harcourt Brace and Company. Orlando, FL.

2.   Hoffer, E. The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements. 1951. Harper and Brothers. New York, NY.

3.   Marx, K. and Engels, F. The Communist Manifesto. 1848. The Workers’ Educational Association. London, UK.

4.   Latson, J. “What Margaret Sanger Really Said About Eugenics and Race.” Time. (2016 Oct 14). Accessed on October 8, 2017 from http://time.com/4081760/margaret-sanger-history-eugenics/

5.   Gandy, I. “How False Narratives of Margaret Sanger are Used to Shame Black Women.” Rewire. (2015, Aug 20). Accessed on October 8, 2017 from https://rewire.news/article/2015/08/20/false-narratives-margaret-sanger-used-shame-black-women/

6.   Mainwaring, D. “How About We Tear Down the Statue of Planned Parenthood’s Racist Founder?” LifeSiteNews. (2017, Aug 18). Accessed on October 8, 2017 from https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/as-statues-come-down-smithsonian-refuses-to-remove-bust-of-black-eugenicist

7.   Vance, K. “Secretary Clinton Stands By her Praise of Eugenicist Margaret Sanger.” Weekly Standard. (2009, Apr 15). Accessed on October 8, 2017 from http://www.weeklystandard.com/sec.-clinton-stands-by-her-praise-of-eugenicist-margaret-sanger/article/28444

8.   Sanger, S. Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography. 1938. 2nd edition. (pgs. 366-367). W. W. Norton & Company. New York, NY.

9.   King, A. “An Analysis of the PPH MLK Brochure.” Priests For Life. Accessed on October 8, 2017 from https://www.priestsforlife.org/king-planned-parenthood-1-8.pdf

10.   Sanger, M. “The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.” Birth Control Review. 1921. (pg. 5). Accessed on October 8, 2017 from https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/webedition/app/documents/show.php?sangerDoc=238946.xml

11.   Edwin, B. War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race. 2012. Expanded Edition. (pg. 279-318). Dialog Press, Washington D.C.

12.   Ehrlich, P. The Population Bomb. 1971. Balantine Books. New York, NY.

13.   Johnson, A.” EXPOSED: The Billionaire Donor Who Wants His Planned Parenthood Donations Kept Very, Very Secret.” LifeSiteNews. (2015 Sept 28). Accessed on October 8, 2017 from https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/planned-parenthood-sued-me-to-stop-me-from-releasing-the-information-in-thi

14.   Giubilini, A. and Minerva, F. “After-Birth Abortion: Why Should the Baby Live?” (2012). Journal of Medical Ethics. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2011-100411

15.   Bilefsky, D. and Schuetze, C. F. “Dutch Law Would Allow Assisted Suicide for Healthy Older People.” New York Times. (2016 Oct 13). Accessed on October 8, 2017 from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/world/europe/dutch-law-would-allow-euthanasia-for-healthy-elderly-people.html

16.   Singer, P. Animal Liberation. 1975. Harper Collins. New York, NY.

17.   Singer, P. Practical Ethics. 1979. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK.

18.   Furedi, A. The Moral Case for Abortion. 2016. Palgrave Macmillan. London, UK.

19.   Friedman, E. “Angie Jackson Live-Tweets Her Abortion on Twitter.” (2010, Feb 25). NBC News. Accessed on October 11, 2017 from http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/angie-jackson-live-tweets-abortion/story?id=9937689

20.   Newton, J. “Woman’s ‘Pregnancy Announcement’ Goes Viral After She Threatens to Get an Abortion Unless She Gets 4K Retweets.” (2017 Aug 28). The Sun. Accessed on October 11, 2017 from https://www.thesun.co.uk/living/4340470/womans-pregnancy-annoucement-abortion-4000-retweets/

21.   Parker, W. Life’s Work: A Moral Argument for Choice. 2017. Atria Publishing. New York, NY.

22.   Khazan, O. “Providing Abortions in the Deep South.” (2017 Sept 21). The Atlantic. Accessed on October 11, 2017 from https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/09/willie-parker-abortions-deep-south/539862/

23.   Desantis, R. “Martha Plimpton Said She Had Her ‘Best’ Abortion in Seattle.” (2017 Sept 6). Daily News. Accessed on October 11, 2017 from http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/

24.   Weikart, R. The Death of Humanity and the Case for Life. (2016). Regnery Faith. Washington D.C.

25.   Ibid. Orwell.