In Neil Postman's essay, he argues that Huxley's vision of the future in Brave New World is more applicable and relevant today than Orwell's in 1984. He starts out his essay by stating that Orwell's novel suggested that the world, in 1984, would be controlled in a totalitarian state. Now, as we can see, "the roots of liberal democracy had held". The reader realizes, after reading up to this point, that Orwell's vision already shows a misconception. Because of this, it can almost be seen as flawed. Another reason why Huxley's vision is more realistic is because in today's society, there are corporations and agencies against totalitarianism. Huxley's vision consists of people allowing themselves to be ruled and replaced by technology. There is no agencies or corporations against this. In fact, we are living in a time where cars can now drive themselves to locations. Mankind doesn't seem to mind at all.
             Huxley fears that the mankind will be faced with so much knowledge, people will grow indifferent. Although some can argue with mankind's indifference to knowledge, they cannot argue with the fact that humans are uncovering more and more knowledge, and in some cases, too much for their own good. Since the reader asserts his first statement, he or she is more likely to believe the authors second statement. Postman also argues that in 1984, people were controlled by inflicting pain, but in Brave New World, people are controlled by pleasure. It only seems logical that when people are controlled by pleasure, it is more likely to occur than when someone is controlled by pain. When one is controlled by pleasure, he will not object. He is submissive, whereas when a person is controlled by pain, the person would be resistant. Postman ends his essay with a simple, agreeable statement that with Orwell, what people hate will ruin them, but with Huxley, what people love will ruin them.
             ...