[Joe[_9_]]

It had long been realized that the
only secure basis for oligarchy is collectivism. Wealth and privilege are
most easily defended when they are possessed jointly. The so-called
'abolition of private property' which took place in the middle years of the
century meant, in effect, the concentration of property in far fewer hands
than befo but with this difference, that the new owners were a group
instead of a mass of individuals. Individually, no member of the Party owns
anything, except petty personal belongings. Collectively, the Party owns
everything in Oceania, because it controls everything, and disposes of the
products as it thinks fit. In the years following the Revolution it was
able to step into this commanding position almost unopposed, because the
whole process was represented as an act of collectivization. It had always
been assumed that if the capitalist class were expropriated, Socialism must
follow: and unquestionably the capitalists had been expropriated.
Factories, mines, land, houses, transport -- everything had been taken away
from them: and since these things were no longer private property, it
followed that they must be public property. Ingsoc, which grew out of the
earlier Socialist movement and inherited its phraseology, has in fact
carried out the main item in the Socialist programme; with the result,
foreseen and intended beforehand, that economic inequality has been made
permanent.
But the problems of perpetuating a hierarchical society go