The Power of Hate

George Orwell, "Nineteen Eighty-Four"

Note: Images are from the 1984 film version; page references are to the Signet Classic edition.

Hate, one of the strongest human emotions, is a powerful societal force that has been effectively manipulated throughout history by evil leaders to increase their own power.  Hate, which breeds divisiveness, polarization, and an egregiously toxic “us vs. them” attitude, is what led to the rise of such totalitarian leaders as Lenin, Hitler, and Mao Zedong.  While Lenin’s followers despised the “bourgeoisie” class of capitalists and Mao similarly blamed capitalism for all the world’s problems, Hitler claimed that the Jews were responsible for all that was wrong in society. Once these infamous leaders were successful in convincing their followers that allegiance to a corrupt regime would ensure prosperity and protection from their supposed adversaries,  ultimate power was within their grasp as they created such real-world dystopias as Marxist Russia, Nazi Germany, and Communist China.  As if historical precedents are not enough to convince society today that the emergence of widespread baseless hatred is a warning against potential tyranny, dystopian literature also offers clear indications that the gratuitous stirring up of hatred is a fear-mongering tactic intended only to increase the power of tyrants.

The insidious power of hate is most clearly reflected in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four which portrays the regime of Oceania as being in a constant state of war with either Eastasia or Eurasia.  It really doesn’t matter which “superstate” is portrayed as the enemy as long as there is an adversary that can be hated regardless of whether Oceania is actually at war with either one of these supposed enemies.  Julia, the female protagonist in the novel, suggests that the so-called war, scenes from which are constantly displayed on television screens, might actually be a false narrative created by the “Inner Party” (Oceania’s corrupt leaders) to stir up powerful feelings of hatred among the people.  Julia believes that “the war was not happening. The rocket bombs which fell daily on London were probably fired by the Government of Oceania itself, ‘just to keep people frightened’” (153).  Adding validity to this “false flag” belief is a forbidden book supposedly written by Emmanuel Goldstein, the contrived nemesis of Big Brother, in which he reveals that the goal of the Party is for society to be in “a continuous frenzy of hatred of foreign enemies” (211).

Goldstein’s book also points out that this “frenzy of hatred” would be fomented by the condemnation of “internal traitors” (211).  Goldstein himself becomes “the primal traitor, the earliest defiler of the Party's purity” (12) as the Inner Party has the brilliant idea to use a human face as an object of hate to emotionally stir up the people even more strongly.  There is no particular reason to hate this man who was actually “advocating freedom of speech, freedom of the Press, freedom of assembly, freedom of thought” (12).   Nevertheless, he becomes the embodiment of all that society should despise as he is constantly portrayed by the media as the “Enemy of the People…the renegade and backslider who once…had been one of the leading figures of the Party, almost on a level with Big Brother himself, and then had engaged in counterrevolutionary activities” (11-12).

This toxic and powerful emotion of hate is ritualized on a daily basis in Nineteen Eighty-Four during the “Two Minutes Hate” and further celebrated with an annual festival called “Hate Week.”  As the specific target of hate designated by the Inner Party to further its false narrative, the constant on-screen image of Goldstein effectively stirs up the negative emotions of the crowds of Outer Party members, motivating them to swear allegiance even more strongly to Oceania’s figurehead Big Brother. Their baseless hatred is a divisive force that ultimately increases the power of their current regime.

During the daily “Two Minutes Hate” ritual that takes place in the “Ministry of Truth” and throughout the state of Oceania, Goldstein is shown onscreen “delivering his usual venomous attack upon the doctrines of the Party,” but the narrator goes on to explain that this is “an attack so exaggerated and perverse that a child should have been able to see through it, and yet just plausible enough to fill one with an alarmed feeling that other people, less level-headed than oneself, might be taken in by it.”  Thus, the reader is given the first indication that this media portrayal of Goldstein may be inaccurate.  The brainwashing tactics of the Inner Party are, nevertheless, highly effective as the narrator goes on to observe that “the sight or even the thought of Goldstein produced fear and anger automatically” (13). 

The psychological control of the people that is accomplished through this ritual is obvious as Orwell writes, “The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was…that it was impossible to avoid joining in.” He goes on to describe the terrifying effects of this psychological manipulation: “A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge-hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one’s will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic. And yet the rage that one felt was an abstract, undirected emotion” (14).

As history has shown us, such visceral feelings circulating through unhinged mobs can be harnessed by totalitarian regimes to achieve their desired objectives.  This situation is reflected in Orwell’s novel as his protagonist, Winston Smith, despite his own hatred of Big Brother, succumbs during the daily Two Minutes Hate to “self-hypnosis, a deliberate drowning of consciousness” (16) during which he “could not help sharing in the general delirium” (17). While in his normal emotional state he considered that Goldstein might actually be the “sole guardian of truth and sanity in a world of lies” (14), during this strange workday break ritual, “he was at one with the people about him, and all that was said of Goldstein seemed to him to be true. At those moments his secret loathing of Big Brother changed into adoration, and Big Brother seemed to tower up, an invincible, fearless protector” while Goldstein “seemed like some sinister enchanter, capable by the mere power of his voice of wrecking the structure of civilization” (15). Neither is Julia, who sometimes questioned the Inner Party’s narrative, immune to the effects of the Two Minutes Hate.  In fact, she shouts more loudly than anyone even though she “had only the dimmest idea of who Goldstein was and what doctrines he was supposed to represent” (153).

In addition to this powerful daily ritual, an annual Hate Week lies at the center of the Party’s agenda.  Preparation for Hate Week includes the innocuous planning of “Processions, meetings, military parades, lectures, waxworks, displays, film shows, telescreen programmes” that makes this sound like any political event, but the narrator also observes more insidious preparatory activities including “effigies built…rumours circulated, photographs faked” (148) in order to ridicule and discredit Goldstein.

Towards the end of the novel, as Winston is being tortured by Inner Party member O’Brien, he is asked what his true feelings are for Big Brother.  Winston declares, “I hate him” to which O’Brien responds, “Then the time has come for you to take the last step. You must love Big Brother. It is not enough to obey him: you must love him” (282).  In this dystopian society, allegiance masquerades as love, and the only way for Big Brother to attain more of this finite resource is to increase the amount of hatred directed towards his opponent Emanual Goldstein

Hate is one of the most powerful human emotions and, as such, often defies logic.  In fact, it can sometimes be very difficult for those who hate someone to clearly explain the reasons for their antipathy.  This is especially true when it comes to a demonized political figure.  This lack of logic should therefore serve as a red flag revealing the manipulative psychological methods of corrupt leaders who value power over truth.  To avoid the totalitarian sort of state that Orwell warns us about, we should be most wary when hatred towards an oppositional political figure seems to have no logical basis. Is it fomented by vague bad feelings and references to egregious past actions on the part of the hated political figure that have not been proven to have actually happened?  If so, the most likely source of this hatred is the sort of brainwashing techniques utilized not only by the fictitious dystopian leaders portrayed in Nineteen Eighty-Four but also by numerous historical figures including Lenin, Hitler, and Mao Zedong.   In order to avoid repeating the horrible mistakes of the past, we must learn from these historical and literary precedents and recognize that our current leaders are likely using the same tactics.