The Betrayal of Dissent: Beyond Orwell, Hitchens and the New American Centu [Paperback]

Scott Lucas (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: March 16, 2004

Since his death in 1950, George Orwell has been canonised as England's foremost political writer, and the standard-bearer of honesty and decency for the honourable 'Left'. In this controversial polemic, Scott Lucas argues that the exaltation of Orwell, far from upholding dissent against the State, has sought to quash such opposition. Indeed, Orwell has become the icon of those who, in the pose of the contrarian, try to silence public opposition to US and U K foreign policy in the 'War on Terror'.Lucas's lively and readable critique of public intellectuals including Christopher Hitchens, Michael Walzer, David Aaronovitch, and Johann Hari – who have all invoked Orwellian honesty and decency to shut down dissent – will appeal to anyone disillusioned with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Lucas contends that these leading journalists and commentators have used Orwell to justify their own political transition from radicals to upholders of the establishment. All of them play influential roles in supporting the UK and US governments' charge that opponents of war -- and those who question the motives behind American foreign policy and its implementation -- should be condemned as 'appeasers of mass murder'.This controversial book shows how Orwell has been used since 9/11 to justify, in the guise of independent thought, the suppression of dissent. We must rescue ourselves from Orwell and from those who take on his guise so, as Lucas puts it, our ‘silencing is… vital to a "manufacture of consent" for the wars which are supposedly being fought in our name and for our good’.

Editorial Reviews

Review

"Scott Lucas' laborious study of my stuff shows that he has read me even in the most obscure outlets." -- Christopher Hitchens

"The first writer to engage at length with the extraordinary split on the left created by the Iraq war." -- Peter Wilby, Editor, New Statesman

"This should be a fine and important book." -- Noam Chomsky

Scott Lucas' laborious study of my stuff shows that he has read me even in the most obscure outlets. -- Christopher Hitchens

This should be a fine and important book. -- Noam Chomsky

About the Author

Scott Lucas is a regular contributor to the New Statesman. He is Professor of American and Canadian Studies at the University of Birmingham and author of numerous books on US and British foreign policy, intelligence services, culture and ideology. He is the author of Orwell: LIfe and Times (2003).

Product Details

• Paperback: 324 pages
• Publisher: Pluto Press (March 16, 2004)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0745321976
• ISBN-13: 978-0745321974
• Product Dimensions: 8.2 x 4.8 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 12.3 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (6 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,347,656 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

14 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Brilliant study of war and treachery, May 27, 2004

By 

William Podmore (London United Kingdom) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Betrayal of Dissent: Beyond Orwell, Hitchens and the New American Centu (Paperback)

This gripping and passionately written book shows how reactionaries use George Orwell to cover their warmongering and to smother their opponents. Conservatives and social democrats alike wrap themselves in Orwell's mantle to attack democracy and sovereignty.

Orwell all his life adopted the Etonian pose (like Boris Johnson today), "I'm really a frightfully decent chap, so you must excuse my attitudes to women, Jews, the working class, socialists, communists ... "

In his extensive research, Lucas has found some remarkable material. General Anthony Zinni, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said, "Access to energy drives all U. S. policy in the region." When Rupert Murdoch asked Blair in March 2003 what the Sun could do to help him, Blair said, "Step up the attacks on the French."

The broadcaster Michael Savage said, "We need racist stereotypes right now of our enemy in order to encourage our warriors to kill the enemy." Lucas reminds us that the Guardian reported as early as 27 December 2002 that the CIA was using torture at the Bagram air base, and, on 7 March 2003, that US forces had beaten Afghan prisoners to death.

Christopher "I'd vote for Bush" Hitchens said that the war "will be greeted by the majority of the Iraqi people as an emancipation." On the occupation, a State Department official observed, "the bottom line is we control the purse strings, the appointments, and anything else of political value."

Lucas quotes Edward Said, "Demonisation of the Other is not a sufficient basis for any kind of decent politics, certainly not now when the roots of terror in injustice can be addressed, and the terrorists isolated, deterred, or put out of business." That one sentence contains more sense about how to fight Al Qa'ida than all the Bush and Blair lexicon of lies. We must right injustices, especially the Israeli denial of sovereignty to the Palestinian people (against the disgusting lie that attacking Iraq could bring peace between Israel and Palestine); and we must isolate, deter or kill Al Qa'ida's leaders.

We need to do both. We can fight for justice, without supporting terror, and we can oppose terror, without supporting the US empire - to deny this is to accept Bush's own logic.

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars SMILING FACES SOMETIMES "The Undisputed Truth", June 10, 2010

By 

W. BUTLER "lost in las vegas" (NEVADA USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Betrayal of Dissent: Beyond Orwell, Hitchens and the New American Centu (Paperback)

The previous 1-star reviewer got it exactly right. Who does Scott Lucas think he is?

To find an American has muscled-in on the "Orwell biography business" is an irony that would not surprise George himself. It appears Scott Lucas makes a comfortable living cherry-picking received information about a man he cannot possibly relate to - as Orwell never had 2 farthings to rub together until the last 3 years of his life.

Having been away for rather a long time I can't imagine why the English have allowed him to adopt the role of "Orwell seer". Did Birmingham University hire him on the mistaken belief "What knows he of England who only England knows"?

Having lived 45 years in England and 30 in the USA I can categorically state only those born in England can appreciate and understand what the words "George Orwell" now represent.

If Mr. Lucas cannot comprehend George Orwell was THE GREATEST PROPHET OF THE 20th CENTURY then he joins the huge band of small-minded Orwell detractors who'll sink into obscurity as Orwell's stature only continues to grow.

Another axiom, that's sustained me ever since I encountered "Big Brother" in the English Civil Service comes to mind. "Talent immediately recognizes genius but mediocrity recognizes nothing higher than itself".

I wish to assure American readers who note I'm blessed to enjoy living in Las Vegas nothing I've said is intended to be anti-American - only pro-Orwell.

4 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A very timely and needed study, July 10, 2004

By 

Pen Name? "fluxus" - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   

This review is from: The Betrayal of Dissent: Beyond Orwell, Hitchens and the New American Centu (Paperback)

The phenomenon of posturing as "the reasonable left" in many academic and journalistic circles of late by such characters as Hitchens and Walzer has been very troubling and has bred further confusion and straw-man positions for those who attempt to do honest work and critique to confront. At this time, the debates ranging over topics like the current wars, the presidential election and even the content and effect of Michael Moore's recent film have spurred some pointless tangents deflecting needed effort and attention from much more important debates. Lucas' book is a solid criticism of the damage wrought by such self-aggrandizing attacks as the ones Hitchens, Walzer and others have popularized. Of course, others on the left from Mickey Z to Eric Alterman have been guilty of similar diatribes, and numerous others have been caught up in such games defensively.
Beyond this, the work on Orwell is very interesting and saddening to a degree. Even the fan of Orwell should take the book seriously, for it does not discredit many of the core tenets readers have taken away from Orwell's work, which often remain solid, but in fact furthers the work which many hold Orwell in high esteem for, but which he himself seems to have shied away from.