×

Usamos cookies para ayudar a mejorar LingQ. Al visitar este sitio, aceptas nuestras politicas de cookie.


image

1984 by George Orwell, Part two, Chapter 9 (2)

Part two, Chapter 9 (2)

With the absorption of Europe by Russia and of the British Empire by the United States, two of the three existing powers, Eurasia and Oceania, were already effectively in being. The third, Eastasia, only emerged as a distinct unit after another decade of confused fighting. The frontiers between the three super-states are in some places arbitrary, and in others they fluctuate according to the fortunes of war, but in general they follow geographical lines. Eurasia comprises the whole of the northern part of the European and Asiatic land-mass, from Portugal to the Bering Strait. Oceania comprises the Americas, the Atlantic islands including the British Isles, Australasia, and the southern portion of Africa. Eastasia, smaller than the others and with a less definite western frontier, comprises China and the countries to the south of it, the Japanese islands and a large but fluctuating portion of Manchuria, Mongolia, and Tibet.

In one combination or another, these three super-states are permanently at war, and have been so for the past twenty-five years.

War, however, is no longer the desperate, annihilating struggle that it was in the early decades of the twentieth century. It is a warfare of limited aims between combatants who are unable to destroy one another, have no material cause for fighting and are not divided by any genuine ideological difference. This is not to say that either the conduct of war, or the prevailing attitude towards it, has become less bloodthirsty or more chivalrous. On the contrary, war hysteria is continuous and universal in all countries, and such acts as raping, looting, the slaughter of children, the reduction of whole populations to slavery, and reprisals against prisoners which extend even to boiling and burying alive, are looked upon as normal, and, when they are committed by one's own side and not by the enemy, meritorious. But in a physical sense war involves very small numbers of people, mostly highly-trained specialists, and causes comparatively few casualties. The fighting, when there is any, takes place on the vague frontiers whose whereabouts the average man can only guess at, or round the Floating Fortresses which guard strategic spots on the sea lanes. In the centres of civilization war means no more than a continuous shortage of consumption goods, and the occasional crash of a rocket bomb which may cause a few scores of deaths. War has in fact changed its character. More exactly, the reasons for which war is waged have changed in their order of importance. Motives which were already present to some small extent in the great wars of the early twentieth century have now become dominant and are consciously recognized and acted upon.

To understand the nature of the present war — for in spite of the regrouping which occurs every few years, it is always the same war — one must realize in the first place that it is impossible for it to be decisive. None of the three super-states could be definitively conquered even by the other two in combination. They are too evenly matched, and their natural defences are too formidable. Eurasia is protected by its vast land spaces, Oceania by the width of the Atlantic and the Pacific, Eastasia by the fecundity and industriousness of its inhabitants. Secondly, there is no longer, in a material sense, anything to fight about. With the establishment of self-contained economies, in which production and consumption are geared to one another, the scramble for markets which was a main cause of previous wars has come to an end, while the competition for raw materials is no longer a matter of life and death. In any case each of the three super-states is so vast that it can obtain almost all the materials that it needs within its own boundaries. In so far as the war has a direct economic purpose, it is a war for labour power. Between the frontiers of the super-states, and not permanently in the possession of any of them, there lies a rough quadrilateral with its corners at Tangier, Brazzaville, Darwin, and Hong Kong, containing within it about a fifth of the population of the earth. It is for the possession of these thickly-populated regions, and of the northern ice-cap, that the three powers are constantly struggling. In practice no one power ever controls the whole of the disputed area. Portions of it are constantly changing hands, and it is the chance of seizing this or that fragment by a sudden stroke of treachery that dictates the endless changes of alignment.

All of the disputed territories contain valuable minerals, and some of them yield important vegetable products such as rubber which in colder climates it is necessary to synthesize by comparatively expensive methods. But above all they contain a bottomless reserve of cheap labour. Whichever power controls equatorial Africa, or the countries of the Middle East, or Southern India, or the Indonesian Archipelago, disposes also of the bodies of scores or hundreds of millions of ill-paid and hard-working coolies. The inhabitants of these areas, reduced more or less openly to the status of slaves, pass continually from conqueror to conqueror, and are expended like so much coal or oil in the race to turn out more armaments, to capture more territory, to control more labour power, to turn out more armaments, to capture more territory, and so on indefinitely. It should be noted that the fighting never really moves beyond the edges of the disputed areas. The frontiers of Eurasia flow back and forth between the basin of the Congo and the northern shore of the Mediterranean; the islands of the Indian Ocean and the Pacific are constantly being captured and recaptured by Oceania or by Eastasia; in Mongolia the dividing line between Eurasia and Eastasia is never stable; round the Pole all three powers lay claim to enormous territories which in fact are largely uninhabited and unexplored: but the balance of power always remains roughly even, and the territory which forms the heartland of each super-state always remains inviolate. Moreover, the labour of the exploited peoples round the Equator is not really necessary to the world's economy. They add nothing to the wealth of the world, since whatever they produce is used for purposes of war, and the object of waging a war is always to be in a better position in which to wage another war. By their labour the slave populations allow the tempo of continuous warfare to be speeded up. But if they did not exist, the structure of world society, and the process by which it maintains itself, would not be essentially different.

The primary aim of modern warfare (in accordance with the principles of DOUBLETHINK, this aim is simultaneously recognized and not recognized by the directing brains of the Inner Party) is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living. Ever since the end of the nineteenth century, the problem of what to do with the surplus of consumption goods has been latent in industrial society. At present, when few human beings even have enough to eat, this problem is obviously not urgent, and it might not have become so, even if no artificial processes of destruction had been at work. The world of today is a bare, hungry, dilapidated place compared with the world that existed before 1q1¢, and still more so if compared with the imaginary future to which the people of that period looked forward. In the early twentieth century, the vision of a future society unbelievably rich, leisured, orderly, and efficient — a glittering antiseptic world of glass and steel and snow-white concrete — was part of the consciousness of nearly every literate person. Science and technology were developing at a prodigious speed, and it seemed natural to assume that they would go on developing. This failed to happen, partly because of the impoverishment caused by a long series of wars and revolutions, partly because scientific and technical progress depended on the empirical habit of thought, which could not survive in a strictly regimented society. As a whole the world is more primitive today than it was fifty years ago. Certain backward areas have advanced, and various devices, always in some way connected with warfare and police espionage, have been developed, but experiment and invention have largely stopped, and the ravages of the atomic war of the nineteen-fifties have never been fully repaired. Nevertheless the dangers inherent in the machine are still there. From the moment when the machine first made its appearance it was clear to all thinking people that the need for human drudgery, and therefore to a great extent for human inequality, had disappeared. If the machine were used deliberately for that end, hunger, overwork, dirt, illiteracy, and disease could be eliminated within a few generations. And in fact, without being used for any such purpose, but by a sort of automatic process — by producing wealth which it was sometimes impossible not to distribute — the machine did raise the living standards of the average human being very greatly over a period of about fifty years at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries.

But it was also clear that an all-round increase in wealth threatened the destruction — indeed, in some sense was the destruction — of a hierarchical society. In a world in which everyone worked short hours, had enough to eat, lived in a house with a bathroom and a refrigerator, and possessed a motor-car or even an aeroplane, the most obvious and perhaps the most important form of inequality would already have disappeared. If it once became general, wealth would confer no distinction. It was possible, no doubt, to imagine a society in which WEALTH, in the sense of personal possessions and luxuries, should be evenly distributed, while POWER remained in the hands of a small privileged caste. But in practice such a society could not long remain stable. For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance. To return to the agricultural past, as some thinkers about the beginning of the twentieth century dreamed of doing, was not a practicable solution. It conflicted with the tendency towards mechanization which had become quasi-instinctive throughout almost the whole world, and moreover, any country which remained industrially backward was helpless in a military sense and was bound to be dominated, directly or indirectly, by its more advanced rivals.

Nor was it a satisfactory solution to keep the masses in poverty by restricting the output of goods. This happened to a great extent during the final phase of capitalism, roughly between 1920 and 1940. The economy of many countries was allowed to stagnate, land went out of cultivation, capital equipment was not added to, great blocks of the population were prevented from working and kept half alive by State charity. But this, too, entailed military weakness, and since the privations it inflicted were obviously unnecessary, it made opposition inevitable. The problem was how to keep the wheels of industry turning without increasing the real wealth of the world. Goods must be produced, but they must not be distributed. And in practice the only way of achieving this was by continuous warfare.

The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent.

Part two, Chapter 9 (2)

With the absorption of Europe by Russia and of the British Empire by the United States, two of the three existing powers, Eurasia and Oceania, were already effectively in being. Con la absorción de Europa por Rusia y del Imperio Británico por Estados Unidos, dos de las tres potencias existentes, Eurasia y Oceanía, ya estaban efectivamente en existencia. Met de absorptie van Europa door Rusland en van het Britse rijk door de Verenigde Staten, waren twee van de drie bestaande machten, Eurazië en Oceanië, al effectief tot stand gekomen. The third, Eastasia, only emerged as a distinct unit after another decade of confused fighting. De derde, Eastasia, kwam pas naar voren als een aparte eenheid na nog een decennium van verwarde gevechten. The frontiers between the three super-states are in some places arbitrary, and in others they fluctuate according to the fortunes of war, but in general they follow geographical lines. De grenzen tussen de drie superstaten zijn op sommige plaatsen willekeurig, en in andere fluctueren ze volgens het lot van de oorlog, maar over het algemeen volgen ze geografische lijnen. Eurasia comprises the whole of the northern part of the European and Asiatic land-mass, from Portugal to the Bering Strait. Eurasia comprende la totalidad de la parte norte de la masa terrestre europea y asiática, desde Portugal hasta el estrecho de Bering. Oceania comprises the Americas, the Atlantic islands including the British Isles, Australasia, and the southern portion of Africa. Eastasia, smaller than the others and with a less definite western frontier, comprises China and the countries to the south of it, the Japanese islands and a large but fluctuating portion of Manchuria, Mongolia, and Tibet.

In one combination or another, these three super-states are permanently at war, and have been so for the past twenty-five years.

War, however, is no longer the desperate, annihilating struggle that it was in the early decades of the twentieth century. La guerra, sin embargo, ya no es la lucha desesperada y aniquiladora que fue en las primeras décadas del siglo XX. Oorlog is echter niet langer de wanhopige, vernietigende strijd die het was in de eerste decennia van de twintigste eeuw. It is a warfare of limited aims between combatants who are unable to destroy one another, have no material cause for fighting and are not divided by any genuine ideological difference. Es una guerra de objetivos limitados entre combatientes que no pueden destruirse unos a otros, no tienen una causa material para luchar y no están divididos por ninguna diferencia ideológica genuina. Het is een oorlogvoering met beperkte doelen tussen strijders die elkaar niet kunnen vernietigen, geen materiële reden hebben om te vechten en niet verdeeld zijn door enig echt ideologisch verschil. This is not to say that either the conduct of war, or the prevailing attitude towards it, has become less bloodthirsty or more chivalrous. Esto no quiere decir que la conducta de la guerra o la actitud predominante hacia ella se haya vuelto menos sanguinaria o más caballeresca. Це не означає, що ведення війни чи переважаюче ставлення до неї стали менш кровожерливими чи більш лицарськими. On the contrary, war hysteria is continuous and universal in all countries, and such acts as raping, looting, the slaughter of children, the reduction of whole populations to slavery, and reprisals against prisoners which extend even to boiling and burying alive, are looked upon as normal, and, when they are committed by one's own side and not by the enemy, meritorious. Por el contrario, la histeria de guerra es continua y universal en todos los países, y se buscan actos como la violación, el saqueo, la matanza de niños, la reducción de poblaciones enteras a la esclavitud y las represalias contra los prisioneros que se extienden incluso a hervir y enterrar vivos. sobre como normal, y, cuando son cometidos por el propio bando y no por el enemigo, meritorios. Integendeel, oorlogshysterie is continu en universeel in alle landen, en daden als verkrachting, plundering, het afslachten van kinderen, het terugbrengen van hele bevolkingsgroepen tot slavernij en represailles tegen gevangenen die zich zelfs uitstrekken tot koken en levend begraven, worden beschouwd als als normaal, en, wanneer ze worden gepleegd door de eigen kant en niet door de vijand, verdienstelijk. But in a physical sense war involves very small numbers of people, mostly highly-trained specialists, and causes comparatively few casualties. Pero en un sentido físico, la guerra involucra a un número muy pequeño de personas, en su mayoría especialistas altamente capacitados, y causa comparativamente pocas bajas. Maar in fysieke zin omvat oorlog zeer kleine aantallen mensen, meestal hoogopgeleide specialisten, en veroorzaakt relatief weinig slachtoffers. Але у фізичному сенсі у війні бере участь дуже невелика кількість людей, переважно висококваліфікованих спеціалістів, і вона завдає порівняно мало втрат. The fighting, when there is any, takes place on the vague frontiers whose whereabouts the average man can only guess at, or round the Floating Fortresses which guard strategic spots on the sea lanes. Los combates, cuando los hay, tienen lugar en las fronteras vagas cuyo paradero el hombre medio sólo puede adivinar, o alrededor de las Fortalezas Flotantes que guardan puntos estratégicos en las rutas marítimas. Бойові дії, якщо вони ведуться, відбуваються на невизначених кордонах, про місцезнаходження яких пересічна людина може лише здогадуватися, або навколо Плавучих фортець, які охороняють стратегічні точки на морських шляхах. In the centres of civilization war means no more than a continuous shortage of consumption goods, and the occasional crash of a rocket bomb which may cause a few scores of deaths. War has in fact changed its character. More exactly, the reasons for which war is waged have changed in their order of importance. Más exactamente, las razones por las que se libra la guerra han cambiado en su orden de importancia. Om precies te zijn, de redenen waarom oorlog wordt gevoerd zijn veranderd in volgorde van belangrijkheid. Motives which were already present to some small extent in the great wars of the early twentieth century have now become dominant and are consciously recognized and acted upon. Los motivos que ya estaban presentes en cierta medida en las grandes guerras de principios del siglo XX ahora se han vuelto dominantes y se reconocen conscientemente y se actúa sobre ellos. Мотиви, які певною мірою вже були присутні у великих війнах початку двадцятого століття, тепер стали домінуючими, їх свідомо визнають і вживають.

To understand the nature of the present war — for in spite of the regrouping which occurs every few years, it is always the same war — one must realize in the first place that it is impossible for it to be decisive. Para comprender la naturaleza de la guerra actual, pues a pesar de los reagrupamientos que ocurren cada pocos años, es siempre la misma guerra, hay que darse cuenta en primer lugar de que es imposible que sea decisiva. Om de aard van de huidige oorlog te begrijpen - want ondanks de hergroepering die om de paar jaar plaatsvindt, is het altijd dezelfde oorlog - moet men in de eerste plaats beseffen dat het onmogelijk is om beslissend te zijn. Щоб зрозуміти природу нинішньої війни — бо, незважаючи на перегрупування, яке відбувається кожні кілька років, це завжди та сама війна, — треба передусім усвідомити, що вона не може бути вирішальною. None of the three super-states could be definitively conquered even by the other two in combination. They are too evenly matched, and their natural defences are too formidable. Están demasiado igualados y sus defensas naturales son demasiado formidables. Вони надто рівні, а їхній природний захист надто потужний. Eurasia is protected by its vast land spaces, Oceania by the width of the Atlantic and the Pacific, Eastasia by the fecundity and industriousness of its inhabitants. Eurasia está protegida por sus vastos espacios terrestres, Oceanía por la anchura del Atlántico y el Pacífico, Eastasia por la fecundidad y laboriosidad de sus habitantes. Secondly, there is no longer, in a material sense, anything to fight about. En segundo lugar, ya no hay, en un sentido material, nada por lo que luchar. With the establishment of self-contained economies, in which production and consumption are geared to one another, the scramble for markets which was a main cause of previous wars has come to an end, while the competition for raw materials is no longer a matter of life and death. Con el establecimiento de economías autónomas, en las que la producción y el consumo están orientados entre sí, la lucha por los mercados, que fue una de las principales causas de guerras anteriores, ha terminado, mientras que la competencia por las materias primas ya no es una cuestión de vida y muerte. In any case each of the three super-states is so vast that it can obtain almost all the materials that it needs within its own boundaries. In so far as the war has a direct economic purpose, it is a war for labour power. En la medida en que la guerra tiene un propósito económico directo, es una guerra por la fuerza de trabajo. Оскільки війна має пряму економічну мету, вона є війною за робочу силу. Between the frontiers of the super-states, and not permanently in the possession of any of them, there lies a rough quadrilateral with its corners at Tangier, Brazzaville, Darwin, and Hong Kong, containing within it about a fifth of the population of the earth. Entre las fronteras de los superestados, y no permanentemente en posesión de ninguno de ellos, se encuentra un cuadrilátero aproximado con sus esquinas en Tánger, Brazzaville, Darwin y Hong Kong, que contiene en su interior alrededor de una quinta parte de la población del país. tierra. It is for the possession of these thickly-populated regions, and of the northern ice-cap, that the three powers are constantly struggling. Es por la posesión de estas regiones densamente pobladas y de la capa de hielo del norte por lo que las tres potencias luchan constantemente. In practice no one power ever controls the whole of the disputed area. En la práctica, ningún poder controla nunca toda la zona en disputa. Portions of it are constantly changing hands, and it is the chance of seizing this or that fragment by a sudden stroke of treachery that dictates the endless changes of alignment. Algunas partes cambian constantemente de manos, y es la posibilidad de apoderarse de tal o cual fragmento mediante un repentino golpe de traición lo que dicta los interminables cambios de alineación. Його частини постійно міняються з рук в руки, і саме шанс захопити той чи інший фрагмент раптовим зрадницьким ударом диктує нескінченні зміни розташування.

All of the disputed territories contain valuable minerals, and some of them yield important vegetable products such as rubber which in colder climates it is necessary to synthesize by comparatively expensive methods. Todos los territorios en disputa contienen minerales valiosos, y algunos de ellos producen importantes productos vegetales como el caucho, que en climas más fríos es necesario sintetizar mediante métodos comparativamente costosos. But above all they contain a bottomless reserve of cheap labour. Pero sobre todo contienen una reserva inagotable de mano de obra barata. Whichever power controls equatorial Africa, or the countries of the Middle East, or Southern India, or the Indonesian Archipelago, disposes also of the bodies of scores or hundreds of millions of ill-paid and hard-working coolies. Cualquiera que sea el poder que controle el África ecuatorial, o los países del Medio Oriente, o el sur de la India, o el archipiélago indonesio, dispone también de los cuerpos de decenas o cientos de millones de culis mal pagados y trabajadores. Яка б держава не контролювала екваторіальну Африку, чи країни Близького Сходу, чи Південну Індію, чи Індонезійський архіпелаг, вона також розпоряджається тілами десятків чи сотень мільйонів погано оплачуваних і працьовитих кулі. The inhabitants of these areas, reduced more or less openly to the status of slaves, pass continually from conqueror to conqueror, and are expended like so much coal or oil in the race to turn out more armaments, to capture more territory, to control more labour power, to turn out more armaments, to capture more territory, and so on indefinitely. Los habitantes de estas zonas, reducidos más o menos abiertamente a la condición de esclavos, pasan continuamente de conquistador en conquistador, y se gastan como carbón o petróleo en la carrera por producir más armamento, por capturar más territorio, por controlar más. fuerza de trabajo, producir más armamento, capturar más territorio, y así indefinidamente. It should be noted that the fighting never really moves beyond the edges of the disputed areas. The frontiers of Eurasia flow back and forth between the basin of the Congo and the northern shore of the Mediterranean; the islands of the Indian Ocean and the Pacific are constantly being captured and recaptured by Oceania or by Eastasia; in Mongolia the dividing line between Eurasia and Eastasia is never stable; round the Pole all three powers lay claim to enormous territories which in fact are largely uninhabited and unexplored: but the balance of power always remains roughly even, and the territory which forms the heartland of each super-state always remains inviolate. Las fronteras de Eurasia fluyen de un lado a otro entre la cuenca del Congo y la costa norte del Mediterráneo; las islas del Océano Índico y el Pacífico están siendo capturadas y recapturadas constantemente por Oceanía o por Eastasia; en Mongolia, la línea divisoria entre Eurasia y Eastasia nunca es estable; Alrededor del Polo, las tres potencias reclaman territorios enormes que, de hecho, están en gran parte deshabitados e inexplorados: pero el equilibrio de poder siempre permanece aproximadamente uniforme, y el territorio que forma el corazón de cada superestado permanece siempre inviolable. Moreover, the labour of the exploited peoples round the Equator is not really necessary to the world's economy. Además, el trabajo de los pueblos explotados alrededor del Ecuador no es realmente necesario para la economía mundial. Крім того, праця експлуатованих народів навколо екватора насправді не потрібна світовій економіці. They add nothing to the wealth of the world, since whatever they produce is used for purposes of war, and the object of waging a war is always to be in a better position in which to wage another war. Вони нічого не додають до світового багатства, оскільки все, що вони виробляють, використовується для цілей війни, а метою ведення війни завжди є бути в кращому становищі для ведення іншої війни. By their labour the slave populations allow the tempo of continuous warfare to be speeded up. Con su trabajo, las poblaciones esclavas permiten que se acelere el ritmo de la guerra continua. But if they did not exist, the structure of world society, and the process by which it maintains itself, would not be essentially different. Pero si no existieran, la estructura de la sociedad mundial y el proceso mediante el cual se mantiene, no serían esencialmente diferentes. Але якби їх не існувало, то структура світового суспільства та процес, за допомогою якого воно підтримується, не були б суттєво іншими.

The primary aim of modern warfare (in accordance with the principles    of    DOUBLETHINK,    this    aim    is    simultaneously recognized and not recognized by the directing brains of the Inner Party) is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living. El objetivo principal de la guerra moderna (de acuerdo con los principios de DOUBLETHINK, este objetivo es reconocido y no reconocido simultáneamente por los cerebros dirigentes del Partido Interior) es agotar los productos de la máquina sin elevar el nivel general de vida. Ever since the end of the nineteenth century, the problem of what to do with the surplus of consumption goods has been latent in industrial society. Desde finales del siglo XIX, el problema de qué hacer con el excedente de bienes de consumo ha estado latente en la sociedad industrial. At present, when few human beings even have enough to eat, this problem is obviously not urgent, and it might not have become so, even if no artificial processes of destruction had been at work. En la actualidad, cuando pocos seres humanos tienen siquiera lo suficiente para comer, este problema obviamente no es urgente, y podría no haberlo sido, incluso si no se hubieran producido procesos artificiales de destrucción. The world of today is a bare, hungry, dilapidated place compared with the world that existed before 1q1¢, and still more so if compared with the imaginary future to which the people of that period looked forward. Сучасний світ — це голе, голодне, напівзруйноване місце порівняно зі світом, який існував до 1q1¢, і ще більше порівняно з уявним майбутнім, на яке сподівалися люди того періоду. In the early twentieth century, the vision of a future society unbelievably rich, leisured, orderly, and efficient — a glittering antiseptic world of glass and steel and snow-white concrete — was part of the consciousness of  nearly  every  literate  person. A principios del siglo XX, la visión de una sociedad futura increíblemente rica, ociosa, ordenada y eficiente —un mundo brillante y antiséptico de vidrio, acero y hormigón blanco como la nieve— formaba parte de la conciencia de casi todas las personas alfabetizadas. In het begin van de twintigste eeuw maakte de visie van een toekomstige samenleving die ongelooflijk rijk, ontspannen, ordelijk en efficiënt was - een glinsterende antiseptische wereld van glas en staal en sneeuwwit beton - deel uit van het bewustzijn van bijna elke geletterde persoon. На початку двадцятого століття бачення майбутнього суспільства, неймовірно багатого, невимушеного, упорядкованого й ефективного — блискучого антисептичного світу зі скла, сталі та білосніжного бетону — було частиною свідомості майже кожної грамотної людини. Science  and technology  were developing at a prodigious speed, and it seemed natural to assume that they would go on developing. La ciencia y la tecnología se estaban desarrollando a una velocidad prodigiosa y parecía natural suponer que seguirían desarrollándose. This failed to happen, partly because of the impoverishment caused by a long series of wars and revolutions, partly because scientific and technical progress depended on the empirical habit of thought, which could not survive in a strictly regimented society. Esto no sucedió, en parte por el empobrecimiento causado por una larga serie de guerras y revoluciones, en parte porque el progreso científico y técnico dependía del hábito empírico del pensamiento, que no podía sobrevivir en una sociedad estrictamente reglamentada. Цього не сталося частково через зубожіння, викликане довгою серією війн і революцій, частково тому, що науково-технічний прогрес залежав від емпіричного мислення, яке не могло вижити в суворо регламентованому суспільстві. As a whole the world is more primitive today than it was fifty years ago. Certain backward areas have advanced, and various devices, always in some way connected with warfare and police espionage, have been developed, but experiment and invention have largely stopped, and the ravages of the atomic war of the nineteen-fifties have never been fully repaired. Ciertas zonas atrasadas han avanzado y se han desarrollado varios dispositivos, siempre de alguna manera relacionados con la guerra y el espionaje policial, pero la experimentación y la invención se han detenido en gran medida, y los estragos de la guerra atómica de los años cincuenta nunca se han reparado por completo. . Деякі відсталі сфери просунулися вперед, і були розроблені різноманітні пристрої, завжди певним чином пов’язані з військовими діями та поліцейським шпигунством, але експерименти та винаходи здебільшого припинилися, а руйнівні наслідки атомної війни 1950-х років так і не були повністю виправлені. . Nevertheless the dangers inherent in the machine are still there. Тим не менш, небезпека, притаманна машині, все ще існує. From the moment when the machine first made its appearance it was clear to all thinking people that the need for human drudgery, and therefore to a great extent for human inequality, had disappeared. Desde el momento en que la máquina apareció por primera vez, quedó claro para todas las personas pensantes que la necesidad de la monotonía humana y, por lo tanto, en gran medida de la desigualdad humana, había desaparecido. З моменту, коли машина вперше з’явилася, усім мислячим людям стало зрозуміло, що потреба в людській важкій праці, а отже, значною мірою в людській нерівності, зникла. If the machine were used deliberately for that end, hunger, overwork, dirt, illiteracy, and disease could be eliminated within a few generations. Якби машину використовували з цією метою навмисно, то голод, надмірна праця, бруд, неписьменність і хвороби можна було б усунути протягом кількох поколінь. And in fact, without being used for any such purpose, but by a sort of automatic process — by producing wealth which it was sometimes impossible not to distribute — the machine did raise the living standards of the average human being very greatly over a period of about fifty years at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries. Y, de hecho, sin ser utilizada para tal fin, sino mediante una especie de proceso automático, al producir riqueza que a veces era imposible no distribuir, la máquina elevó enormemente el nivel de vida del ser humano medio durante un período de tiempo. unos cincuenta años a finales del siglo XIX y principios del XX.

But it was also clear that an all-round increase in wealth threatened the destruction — indeed, in some sense was the destruction — of a hierarchical society. Pero también estaba claro que un aumento generalizado de la riqueza amenazaba con la destrucción - de hecho, en cierto sentido era la destrucción - de una sociedad jerárquica. In a world in which everyone worked short hours, had enough to eat, lived in a house with a bathroom and a refrigerator, and possessed a motor-car or even an aeroplane, the most obvious and perhaps the most important form of inequality would already have disappeared. En un mundo en el que todo el mundo trabajaba pocas horas, tenía suficiente para comer, vivía en una casa con baño y nevera, y poseía un automóvil o incluso un avión, la forma de desigualdad más obvia y quizás la más importante ya habría existido. ha desaparecido. У світі, в якому всі працювали недовго, мали достатньо їжі, жили в будинку з ванною кімнатою та холодильником і мали автомобіль чи навіть літак, найочевидніша і, мабуть, найважливіша форма нерівності вже була б зникли. If it once became general, wealth would confer no distinction. Si alguna vez se generalizara, la riqueza no conferiría distinción. It was possible, no doubt, to imagine a society in which WEALTH, in the sense of personal possessions and luxuries, should be evenly distributed, while POWER remained in the hands of a small privileged caste. Безсумнівно, можна було уявити суспільство, в якому БАГАТСТВО, у сенсі особистого майна та предметів розкоші, має бути рівномірно розподілено, тоді як ВЛАДА залишалася в руках невеликої привілейованої касти. But in practice such a society could not long remain stable. Pero en la práctica, una sociedad así no podría permanecer estable por mucho tiempo. Але на практиці таке суспільство не могло довго залишатися стабільним. For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. Porque si todos disfrutaran del ocio y la seguridad por igual, la gran masa de seres humanos que normalmente están estupefactos por la pobreza se alfabetizaría y aprendería a pensar por sí mismos; y una vez hecho esto, tarde o temprano se darían cuenta de que la minoría privilegiada no tenía ninguna función y la barrerían. Бо якби відпочинок і безпека насолоджувалися всім однаково, величезна маса людей, які зазвичай приголомшені бідністю, стала б грамотною і навчилася б мислити самостійно; і коли вони це зроблять, вони рано чи пізно зрозуміють, що привілейована меншість не має ніякої функції, і вони її зметуть. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance. To return to the agricultural past, as some thinkers about the beginning of the twentieth century dreamed of doing, was not a practicable solution. Volver al pasado agrícola, como soñaron algunos pensadores de principios del siglo XX, no era una solución viable. It conflicted with the tendency towards mechanization which had become quasi-instinctive throughout almost the whole world, and moreover, any country which remained industrially backward was helpless in a military sense and was bound to be dominated, directly or indirectly, by its more advanced rivals. Chocaba con la tendencia a la mecanización que se había vuelto casi instintiva en casi todo el mundo y, además, cualquier país que permaneciera industrialmente atrasado estaba indefenso en un sentido militar y estaba destinado a ser dominado, directa o indirectamente, por sus rivales más avanzados . Het druiste in tegen de tendens tot mechanisering die in bijna de hele wereld quasi-instinctief was geworden, en bovendien was elk land dat industrieel achterbleef, in militaire zin hulpeloos en moest het, direct of indirect, worden gedomineerd door zijn meer geavanceerde rivalen . Це суперечило тенденції до механізації, яка стала квазіінстинктивною майже в усьому світі, і більше того, будь-яка країна, яка залишалася промислово відсталою, була безпорадною у військовому сенсі та була змушена домінувати, прямо чи опосередковано, своїми розвиненішими суперниками. .

Nor was it a satisfactory solution to keep the masses in poverty by restricting the output of goods. Tampoco fue una solución satisfactoria mantener a las masas en la pobreza restringiendo la producción de bienes. Het was ook geen bevredigende oplossing om de massa in armoede te houden door de productie van goederen te beperken. Також не було задовільним рішенням тримати маси в злиднях шляхом обмеження виробництва товарів. This happened to a great extent during the final phase of capitalism, roughly between 1920 and 1940. Esto sucedió en gran medida durante la fase final del capitalismo, aproximadamente entre 1920 y 1940. Це сталося значною мірою під час останньої фази капіталізму, приблизно між 1920 і 1940 роками. The economy of many countries was allowed to stagnate, land went out of cultivation, capital equipment was not added to, great blocks of the population were prevented from working and kept half alive by State charity. Se permitió que la economía de muchos países se estancara, se dejó de cultivar la tierra, no se añadió equipo de capital, se impidió trabajar a grandes sectores de la población y se mantuvo a la mitad con vida gracias a la caridad estatal. Економіці багатьох країн було дозволено стагнувати, земля вийшла з обробітку, капітальне обладнання не було доповнено, великі частини населення були позбавлені можливості працювати та підтримувалися напівживими завдяки державній благодійності. But this, too, entailed military weakness, and since the privations it inflicted were obviously unnecessary, it made opposition inevitable. Pero esto también implicaba debilidad militar y, dado que las privaciones que infligía eran obviamente innecesarias, hacía inevitable la oposición. Але це також спричинило за собою військову слабкість, а оскільки позбавлення, які вона завдала, були очевидно непотрібними, це робило опозицію неминучою. The problem was how to keep the wheels of industry turning without increasing the real wealth of the world. Goods must be produced, but they must not be distributed. And in practice the only way of achieving this was by continuous warfare.

The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent. Oorlog is een manier om aan stukken te breken, of in de stratosfeer te storten, of in de diepten van de zee te zinken, materialen die anders zouden worden gebruikt om de massa te comfortabel te maken, en dus, op de lange termijn, te intelligent. Війна — це спосіб роздробити на шматки, або вилити в стратосферу, або занурити в морські глибини, матеріали, які інакше могли б бути використані, щоб зробити маси надто комфортними, а отже, зрештою, надто розумними.