In Support of a Brave New World Society

Yes, you read the title correctly. I am going to be making the case for our civilization to be structured in a similar fashion to the one described in Aldous Huxley’s famous dystopian (is it utopian in this case?) novel, Brave New World. However, I would like to preface that I am almost entirely playing devil’s advocate with this post. In reality, no, I am not an insane megalomaniac who wants to genetically breed people to be naturally submissive and mindless. With that out of the way, you may be wondering why I would even attempt to defend such a clear abomination of a culture. We can almost all universally condemn the sociopolitical structure of the world described in the novel for obvious reasons. But are they so obvious? In my experience, many people hold positions that seem to be rooted in what would be described as “common sense” and see anything else as simply absurd. As a basic example, we could go with the value of human life. But why do we hold such positions so axiomatically? With my defense of the indefensible, I hope to spark some thought about the values that have been generationally ingrained into our minds and the cultural context that causes us to hold them as sacrosanct. No offense to any other posters, but to me the discussions seem a bit bland and repetitive, and I thought an unorthodox perspective would potentially generate some productive discourse on the topic. 

To begin with, the very beginning of the book introduces us to the phrase, “Community, Identity, Stability.” I will focus on the last part, stability. Often in contemporary neoliberal politics, governmental control is presented as a liberty-stability dichotomy. In reality, as most other things, it is a gradient scale. The two do not even necessarily have to be opposed to one another, but for argument’s sake let us assume an absolute rule: the less freedom, the more stability, and vice versa. Should stability supersede freedom? The value of freedom is usually outlined as the capacity for the individual to pursue education, success, or any other desire that would lead to happiness in the manner of which they choose, free of government intervention. However, our individualistic Western culture obfuscates an objective analysis. Achieving happiness solely through one’s own efforts is a value probably shared by most Americans, yet Eastern nations such as China or Japan value community (the first portion of the aforementioned phrase) far more and view the fulfillment of your predefined role as the path to a satisfying existence. Family ties are critical, as native religions prioritize the veneration of ancestors and contribution to the collective social dynamic. So, as we take a look let’s try to disconnect ourselves from our societal programming and take freedom down from its pedestal for the moment.

The integration of Brave New World’s policies upon today’s population would undoubtedly be disastrous. But as we see in the first pages of the novel, the population is fundamentally, biologically disparate from our own. They are bred from birth to enjoy the tasks they are assigned. There is no subjective culture dictating what achieving happiness is to them, but rather a necessary facet of their physical existence. Freedom is of no value to them, because it literally cannot be; they do not have the capacity to utilize it or experience its benefits. Stability is subsequent by design, with people being mere tools of flesh to construct a society devoid of conflict. And again, the description of this system would be shocking and abhorrent to most due to the blatant objectification of human life. Children are conditioned to be apathetic even to the concept of death, a part of the overarching effort to eliminate meaningful personal relationships and push hedonistic egoism to its limit. Yet the benefits of this organization are undeniable. None of the engineered humans are in need of food, shelter, medicine, or even entertainment. From an empirical standpoint, they live perfect lives. One might argue that the human condition requires something beyond a materialist existence, a degree of personal control. This segues perfectly into my addressal of the liberty counter-argument.

We can see in the novel that there are only a select few that experience any discomfort or unhappiness to a notable degree. These are Bernard, Helmholtz, John, Linda, the other reservation Indians, and those exposed to them (Lenina and the Director). One might point to them as evidence that not all in this society are happy. However, there is one shared trait they all possess: they are all the results of societal anomalies. Bernard and Helmholtz feel discontent due to mistakes in their decanting, causing them to be ostracized because of their differences. Had this not occurred, they would be typical Alphas and never hold “anti-social” sentiments. John and Linda’s lives, and by extension the Director’s, are ruined because of a contraceptive error leading to Linda’s pregnancy and being forced to live among the Indians. The Indians themselves also live in relative squalor. John’s negative experiences are exacerbated by the fact that he is an outsider within the Indian community due to his genetics, and an outsider in the modern community due to his upbringing and lack of conditioning. Lenina falls in love (the 21st century strand) with John, and is distressed because he is not like every other man she has encountered and treats an intimate relationship as a serious matter demanding commitment, rather than a casual endeavor meant only for fleeting pleasure.

Each of these can be separated into two categories: those that are “uncivilized” or have contact with them, and those that arise as a result of a systemic error. The latter cannot be the basis of a critique for the society as it runs directly counter to its goal. Unintentional and unforeseeable mistakes are bound to generate in any system. The government would of course seek to maximally eliminate them. The former (the presence of still uncivilized peoples) is a topic of contention. It must be noted that were it not for the error that led to Linda’s pregnancy, Linda would remain a normal Beta, the Savage would never have been introduced to the rest of the world (or born at all, for that matter), and the uncivilized would remain isolated. Therefore John and Linda’s plights can be categorized into the second group. The existence of the reservations themselves is the only attack on the civil structure that one might pursue, one which I must concede is justified. We do not see any experiments conducted on the Indians for the benefit of the collective. They are in essence a tourist attraction, completely unnecessary with the presence of uncountable other forms of entertainment, such as the scent-organs and the “feelies.” Their continuation only raises the net unhappiness of the world. This issue is easily remedied. Simply integrate them into the modern world, and wait for them to die out. Then, of course barring any further decanting or pregnancy errors, the society has no flaws in its design. The only ones who are unhappy are those mistakenly granted liberty.

One might see my negation of the errors as a cheap cop-out for a problem with the system. To that I do have a response, or rather, Mustapha Mond does. Those that oppose the system are not killed or jailed. In fact, their individuality is rewarded. They are sent to the place where they may meet, as Mr. Mond puts it, “every one, in a word, who’s any one” (Huxley 227), the islands of the world where societal dissidents are sent. There Helmholtz, Bernard, and John (although he rejected this offer and, as we see, did not meet the best of ends as a result) have the potential of uninhibited intellectual development in the presence of other like-minded individuals. The organization of Brave New World’s society allows for the majority of successfully decanted and conditioned people to live their lives in the self-indulgent manner of which they please, but also for the rare exceptions to have their own community that fosters the pursuit of academics and art. Every possibility is addressed, every need met, and every person given that which they desire. I am abundantly curious as to what you all think on this matter.

-Tyler Brunson