“One who controls the past also controls the present, and therefore, the future.” Is this true, or not so true? What role do memory and history play in building our future? Can history ever be TRULY objective, after all? by Smith, Cary (CCPS)

2025-10-09 15:03:12 UTC

Memory and history both build the foundation of society by helping humans learn, or at least try to learn as a society from the past and use what we know to try and better the future by coming up with innovations to solve known problems. History can't be objective because history is always biased, and explained by different perspectives.

2025-10-09 15:03:25 UTC

"the government doesn't talk about the Japanese interment camps as often as the talk about other horrific events because they are embarrassed by it." - Mannat I agree with this statement as many times I would learn things in my history class and go to talk about it with my mom and she had no clue the government did that.

2025-10-09 15:04:40 UTC

I Like how elaine suggested that the people who write our history and where we gather our information about history dictate and hold the power of the sequence of what were constantly being told about history

2025-10-09 15:04:56 UTC

I think that the statement does apply and is true to our world because the people who controlled the past were able to sweep other things under the rug, and make people generally forget about important subjects. Not remembering something may seem it less historically relevant in our minds, when this is rarely the case.

2025-10-09 15:05:30 UTC

"when the government controls peoples memories it controls what people will walk about in the future." - Tristian This is why it is very important for the older generation to continue to tell stories about events that happened long before the current generation. even it could be as simple as a parent telling their child an event from the years they were alive but to young to remember.

2025-10-09 15:05:50 UTC

Mannats first point about the Japanese internment camps is a great insight. I think Japanese camps are a great example of manipulating history. In the US, we are VERY briefly taught about this atrocity, and I think that makes us as citizens believe it was less important than it actually was and proves the idea that the people who controls the past controls the present and future.

2025-10-09 15:06:13 UTC

Mary's ideas of manipulation of truth through this also provides a good point. Someone who controls the past can use that to shape people's thoughts and ideas in the present and future, and this is especially true in 1984. Winston was actually a part of this process, most notably when he re-wrote an entire war to make it seem like they were fighting a different enemy this entire time.

2025-10-09 15:08:01 UTC

I think this is true because when you look at the past, Europeans say they won the revolutionary war but in all reality we know the United States won but since they can control what their people see and look at they can say they won. In an instance we in the US do this as well as we tend to bend history to our own liking. It's basically whoevers point of view you want to view the story from.

2025-10-09 15:08:05 UTC

This is true because our knowledge and opinions are formed on the knowledge and opinions of those who came before us. History is maintained through firsthand experience, as well as documentation, which both hold biases. The biased accounts of past historical events will definitely influence the way people in the future perceive these events, and therefore result in different opinions that those of that time held. It is impossible for history to be truly objective when this is the way history is kept.

2025-10-09 15:08:20 UTC

I like how Mannat just brought up point of view

2025-10-09 15:08:30 UTC

Roman makes a good point saying how memories can change the future and how we remember the past. Manipulating memories is one reason why history can not be truly objective. No matter where you hear it, the explanation of things will vary.

2025-10-09 15:08:52 UTC

Reality exist in the human mind and nowhere else. The book backtracks how the high power essentially creates there reality.

2025-10-09 15:09:08 UTC

"Retellings of memories and history cannot be truly objective"

I agree with this idea and believe the closest way we can reach an objective history is collecting different perspectives of a certain event.

However, if those in power wish to push a certain agenda they can suppress perspectives or entire moments of history to fit their vision and manipulate the people.

2025-10-09 15:09:23 UTC

This statement is very true, often times the government or just people in generally will change things as small as their tone so they look less of the villain in the store. Peoples memories of the past play a huge role in history as they are the ones there to tell other what happened. Without those people there would be no recollection of them past

2025-10-09 15:09:31 UTC

This is definitely true. The phrase "The winners write history" accurately defines the current state of our world. Memory and history are important because they create a framework for ideals and values that people will operate under in the world. For example, people nowadays mostly hold hatred or pity for certain groups of people based on certain historical events because they weren't around during those times and they are forced to believe the history, manipulated or not, that's presented to them in the current times. This affects responses to certain ideas, information, or people, impacting the way the world's development will proceed.

2025-10-09 15:10:18 UTC

made a comparison between the churches and the parties. Conveying that these places where we get our beliefs from could have misleading information

2025-10-09 15:11:30 UTC

Roman mentions how churches used to stop new truths found from science used to be prevented from being spread. I find this interesting, especially when connecting it back to the novel 1984 because it shows how those in power are only ever able to stay in power if they maintain general control over opinion. The more dissent in opinion that happens within a society, the more people will be inclined to challenge those in authority, which Romans example displays very well.

2025-10-09 15:12:16 UTC

Mary's response to Romans question about reality being objective is true, because reality is what we make of it, but as a society we are more likely to be biased or similar than people from a different society or reality. We can't control one another but we can influence each other.

2025-10-09 15:12:40 UTC

I agree with reality being subjective, and with people believing what they want to believe. Everyone experiences life differently, and intake information in varying ways. What people perceive with their own eyes is usually what they would consider their realities. For example, a blind person would have no idea what life is like for someone who can see, and vice versa.

2025-10-09 15:13:24 UTC

"If they know what you are thinking they can also create your reality " I agree with this because the government tries to create a reality for people to believe by creating a society that is predictable .

214792_3 — 2025-10-09 15:13:25 UTC

Jeimmy spoke about how people don't just make up history, but it stays as it is exactly how it happened (or how we've been taught that it happened). It was also said that memory controls the future because humans cannot alter someone's memory to think something historically as it's been proven or shown to have happened. Tristan brought up Doublethink and how higher power such as a government can attempt to put false narratives into your head and Elaine built on that by stating how your reality is influenced by specific things but regardless, you will believe what you think your truth is in the long run so it's important for society to have differing opinions

2025-10-09 15:17:47 UTC

I disagree with the idea they said that countries cant lie too much about events when using propaganda. It's been done multiple times, especially with the repeated lie a certain country has been pushing that a certain middle eastern country possesses weapons of mass destruction, and using that to justify certain ideas and actions taken against them.

2025-10-09 15:18:26 UTC

Tristan in response to Mary's question about the possible justifiability of Big Brother's actions says how in the novel Big Brother's true motivation isn't known so you can't say whether or not it WAS justifiable. This I feels connects to our own world leaders, we as a society often have our speculations about who truly controls society and what motives they have, but it is impossible to actually say why they do what they do.

2025-10-09 15:22:37 UTC

I like what Roman said about "war being seen as fun" this changes the perspective of war leading to more war and seeking power.

2025-10-09 15:30:41 UTC

"...bringing together different ideas is how we progress as a society"

I think this is an excellent statement and really shows what an echo chamber Oceania is.

There was no change or progress made because everyone is fed the same story and the party is so quick to catch anyone willing to introduce an new idea

have an idea about how this may connect to Julia's department where no human is allowed to write but im out of time

2025-10-17 14:07:51 UTC

I agree with this statement because those who create the rules and ideas influence actions of others in the future. For example, the original creators of certain countries or industries are the ones who decide how things should be run and punishments for not following those rules, therefore controlling how their future citizens or workers act.

2025-10-19 18:46:30 UTC

Memory and history both can build the foundation of society