Some complain that “Orwellian” has become the most overused phrase in current political discourse, but I beg to disagree. Although George Orwell succumbed to tuberculosis — and perhaps political despair — at the age of 46, some 75 years ago, his characterizations of our political condition have never been more apposite — and more chilling. In a world in which violent fascists cloak themselves in the name Antifa, one can readily picture the pigs in Animal Farm, indistinguishable in the end from human tyrants. In a world in which the murders and rapes of October 7 are celebrated on American university campuses, or when young New York voters reject the memory of 9/11 to elect as mayor a radical Islamist, we see inversions of truth and decency that Orwell predicted throughout his mature work, most notably in 1984. (RELATED: Comrade With a Condo: The Mamdani Myth Exposed) “War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.” “War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.” Not far removed, then, from “women’s reproductive health” or “gender-affirming care,” to take only a handful from among dozens of contemporary leftist deceits. It’s not hard to imagine what Orwell would have made of Mamdani, AOC, and the so-called “Democratic” Socialists of America, and easier still to picture the contempt he would have had for the Schumers and Sanders and Newsoms. One suspects that Orwell might not have much cared for Trump, but he would have clearly seen through the humbuggery of the Democrats. (RELATED: The Mamdani Model: More Socialist Mayors to Come) None of Orwell’s insights, however, are as relevant to our present political moment as his construct, in 1984, of the “Two Minutes Hate.” In the novel’s dystopian universe, the citizens of Oceania are subjected on a daily basis to terrifying images of the countries enemies, transmitted into every home, office, and public place through “telescreens,” devices that combine the function of televisions with that of electronic surveillance devices, a disturbing anticipation of today’s various technologies (the extent to which our various monitors have become monitoring devices must be a subject for another essay). Central to this image bombardment is the figure of Goldstein, understood by all to be the traitorous figure behind every assault on every citizen’s well-being. In Goldstein, Orwell evokes not only the antisemitism of Hitler and the Nazis, but also that of Stalin’s regime in Soviet Russia. Still, the figures portrayed in the “Two-Minute Hate” go far beyond anti-Jewish tropes, embracing, from one day to the next, everything likely to stir fear and anger among the “everyman” audience. As Orwell describes it, the hate becomes irresistible, all-consuming, beyond immunity. As Orwell described it, “The horrible thing about the ‘Two-Minute Hate’ was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds, any pretense was unnecessary.” The hatred burned throughout the day, and then was stoked anew in the next day’s session, reinforced by “Hate Week,” when the whole nation took time off to participate in an unrelenting orgy of hatred directed at the regime’s enemies. The parallels with our present moment are insistent and, frankly, terrifying. The progressive regime that reached its apotheosis during the Obama years brought every international power center together: government, big business, the educational system, journalism, and the entertainment media. From Silicon Valley to Disney World, from Harvard to every HR department, in both the U.S. and the EU, the shared values of a globalist elite became dominant, and, worse, informed a drumbeat of cultural messaging reaching into every corner of society. Unsurprisingly, the messaging had its effect. You were either one of the “cool kids” or one of the deplorables. And while “cool kids” certainly encompassed huge swathes of the younger generations, it also captured an older crowd, most recently evident in the white-haired, blue-rinsed ranks of the “No-Kings” demonstrators. (RELATED: The Ridiculous No Kings Protest) As is always the case, hate must have a target, a face, and a name, something that Orwell understood with the character of Goldstein. And since 2016, that target has been Donald Trump. In the run-up to the 2016 election, the establishment tended to treat Trump with amused contempt, unwilling, indeed unable, to take him seriously. Then came election night, and the first glimmerings of an unimaginable catastrophe, reflected beautifully in the horror-struck faces of James Carville and legions of Democrat pundits as the election returns poured in. Momentarily stunned, the establishment soon reacted with vengeance, attempting to bury Trump under a cascade of calumnies. With the Biden victory in 2020, the powers that be breathed a sigh of relief, although the habit of Trump hatred never died. But Trump’s comeback in 2024 caused nothing less than a complete meltdown, a level of virulence rarely, if ever, seen in American politics. In Virginia, in spite of the occasional nod toward policy differences, the Democrats campaigned almost exclusively against Trump rather than the actual Republicans on the ballot. I live in Virginia and followed our recent state elections closely. In Virginia, in spite of the occasional nod toward policy differences, the Democrats campaigned almost exclusively against Trump rather than the actual Republicans on the ballot. Our small town in northern Virginia is almost equally divided between Republican and Democrat, with a slight edge to the former, but the signs — literally, the yard signs — told a story of Trump derangement. In one front yard, two adjacent signs stood out. One, a long-standing “hate has no home here” message, the other a campaign sign for the egregious Jay Jones, candidate for the chief law enforcement position in the state, and revealed in a series of e-mails to be capable of the vilest murderous fantasies. But as the yard signs suggested, and as the exit polling made clear, hatred for Trump brought Democrat success. One could spend hours and thousands of words exploring all the ways that the “progressive” establishment hates Donald Trump, but, more importantly, and regardless of any particular issues, the fact is that these people have a deep emotional need to hate Donald Trump. For years now, they‘ve been subjected by the media to the “Two Minutes Hate,” so much so that their hatred has become an unslakable thirst. Be it fantasies about the contents of the Epstein files, assumptions that the new White House ballroom trashes a national treasure, wants war with Venezuela, and has been bought by Qatari potentates, the craving for calumny expands by the day, fulfilling a need more pathological than rational. We’ve moved beyond policy differences, moved beyond even the ordinary “my team versus your team” flow of traditional politics. The daily dose of Trump hatred, whether fed by The View or any of a hundred other outlets, has become a kind of existential entertainment, providing emotional sustenance to what one suspects are some very empty lives. And it’s no wonder that, at the outermost extremes of this hatred, potential assassins lurk. The one thing that’s lacking is the final element in Orwell’s dark vision. At the conclusion of every “Two Minutes Hate,” as hatred for Goldstein climbed to its daily orgiastic peak, the hateful images dissolved into the benevolent smiling face of the all-knowing and all-loving “Big Brother.” Our current usage mistakes Orwell’s intent when it focuses on the fear-inducing “Big Brother is watching you.” At the end of every “Two Minutes Hate,” at the end of “Hate Week,” and at the end of protagonist Winston Smith’s journey through the narrative of 1984, the climax is not hatred for Goldstein, but rather a passionate declaration of love for “Big Brother.” The whole meaning of Democrat Party politics at this point can be summarized in its all-purpose and all-consuming hatred for Trump — and in its thus far fruitless search for someone capable of becoming “Big Brother,” even “Big Sister.” Hatred, after all, needs catharsis, and a personalized hatred can only be transformed through a personalized passionate admiration. The scary part of the next several years is that once the empty suits or dresses have been discarded, the Newsoms or the AOCs, someone will emerge who can win hearts as well as votes. Republicans can find candidates to successfully oppose the typical Democrat politician, but we should fear the emergence of a candidate who inspires passion. READ MORE from James H. McGee: Defending Nigeria’s Christians from Islamist Genocide Simple Decency Is on the Ballot in Virginia Remembering the True Victims of Injustice: Iryna, Logan, the Oltons James H. McGee retired in 2018 after nearly four decades as a national security and counter-terrorism professional, working primarily in the nuclear security field. Since retiring, he’s begun a second career as a thriller writer. He’s just published his new novel, The Zebras from Minsk, the sequel to his well-received 2022 thriller, Letter of Reprisal. The Zebras from Minsk find the Reprisal Team fighting against an alliance of Chinese and Russian-backed terrorists, brutal child traffickers, and a corrupt anti-American billionaire, racing against time to take down a conspiracy that ranges from the hills of West Virginia to the forests of Belarus. You can find The Zebras from Minsk (and Letter of Reprisal) on Amazon in Kindle and paperback editions.