...23456...102030...


Cyborg | DC

Nowadays, everyones juggling an offline and online persona. But only one hero is a literal marriage of technology and man. Half human, half machine, Victor Stone is Cyborg, a digital and physical tankand a true superhero for the modern age.

Although a star athlete, Vic Stone only yearned for his fathers approval. But Dad was too focused on his scientific career to notice until the day Vic became his greatest experiment. After Vic suffered a grave injury, his father saved him by replacing over half his body with cybernetic parts.

Now Cyborg is plugged into every computer on Earth, and no firewallor brick wallcan keep him out. While his cybernetic enhancements provide superhuman strength, speed, and endurance, that same technology destroys his chances to live as a professional athlete. Now flourishing in the digital realm, Vic is desperately alone in the physical worldand still longs for his fathers affection. Hungry to find purpose again, he fights alongside the Worlds Greatest Super Heroes.

More here:

Cyborg | DC

Cyborg (1989) – IMDb

Edit Storyline

Gibson Rickenbacker is a hired fighter living in a plague-ravaged apocalyptic America where a plague has infested most of the United States and the rest of the world. In New York City, Gibson encounters a woman named Pearl Prophet. Pearl reveals to Gibson that she is a cyborg who is carrying vital-information for a group of scientists in Atlanta who are working on a cure to the plague and Pearl hires Gibson to escort her back to Atlanta. But Pearl is kidnapped by “Pirates” a murderous gang led by Fender Tremolo, who wants the cure for themselves and they decide to take Pearl to Atlanta themselves. Gibson, joined by a young woman named Nady Simmons, goes in pursuit of Fender and his gang, as Gibson sets out to rescue Pearl, stop Fender and his gang from reaching Atlanta and defeat Fender who slaughtered Gibson’s family. Written byDaniel Williamson

Taglines:He’s the First Hero of the 21st Century…And He’s Our Only Hope.

Budget:$500,000 (estimated)

Opening Weekend USA: $3,179,811,9 April 1989, Wide Release

Gross USA: $10,166,459

Runtime: 86 min

Aspect Ratio: 1.85 : 1

Read this article:

Cyborg (1989) – IMDb

Cyborg | Teen Titans Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

It’s not in the circuitry, is it? It’s not the machine that resists you; it’s me, my spirit! That’s the part you can’t break! I don’t need you to make me a man! I already am one! Cyborg to an overwhelmed Brother BloodCyborgVoiceKhary Payton (English), Ken Uo (Japanese), Daniel Lob (French), Tobias Kluckert (German), Roberto Draghetti (Italian), Kim So-hyung (Korean), Zoltn Dzsa (Hungarian), Onur Glcolu (Turkish)Real name

Victor “Vic” Stone

Elinore Stone (mother, deceased)Silas Stone (father)Tucker Stone (grandfather)Maude Stone (grandmother)

Eating Food,Electronic Gadgets,Fourth of July,Listening to Music,Playing Practical Jokes,Science Fiction Movies,Sports Videogames,Watching TV, Hanging Out With Beast Boy

Brother BloodAnyone who abuses his technology,Being half machine,Gizmo,Losing battles,Not being strong enough,Not Having the remote for the TV,Tofu,Beast Boy losing things,Being ignored by Beast Boy, Starfire’s singing and cooking

A body made up of entirely robotic systems granting him superhuman strength, resilience to damage, capability to fix many appliances, unsurpassed knowledge of technology and robotics, a cannon built into his arm that can shoot sonic blasts, and numeral other gadgets built into his body

Sonic Cannons built into his arms and numerous other gadgets installed throughout his body

Cyborg (sometimes “Cy”) is the half-cybernetic half-man, chief technological expert and one of the five founding members of the Teen Titans.

Cyborg was a promising strong teenage athlete named Victor Stone before an accident that killed his mother and injured him so severely that his father replaced the damaged body parts with cybernetics to keep his son alive. But since these mechanical parts were not inconspicuous, he was shunned by his home environment and his friends, which frustrated him greatly.

One night, Cyborg took to the streets wearing a hoodie to cover his cybernetic parts, where he ran into the new arrivals Robin and Beast Boy fighting a rather violent alien girl, who was actually a fugitive from a prisoner transport. Soon joined by the mystery girl Raven, the youngsters teamed up to defeat the girl’s alien captors and formed a permanent team to combat villainy. Cyborg constructed the Titans Tower and its systems from a Gordanian landing ship, and the team moved into its new headquarters. From that point on Cyborg served as the team’s chief technician, constructing their primary vehicles such as the T-Car and T-Ship.

Cyborg wearing a hoodie to hide his cybernetics.

In the series’ third season, Cyborg used the alias of Stone and a pair of holographic rings to infiltrate the H.I.V.E. Academy, which was at that time administered and mind-controlled by Brother Blood.

The Titans exposed and foiled his scheme to utilize a new superweapon called the Ion Amplifier, but in the process Cyborg unknowingly had the construction plans for his cybernetics copied by Blood, who used them to build new superweapons. Outraged, Cyborg declared a personal vendetta on Blood and confronted him personally when he attempted to employ a gigantic sonic cannon from an undersea base. However, Blood’s martial arts skills got the better of him, and he won only with Bumblebee’s assistance, who was at that time infiltrating the H.I.V.E. with the help of Aqualad. In order to hunt down Blood and other supervillains more efficiently, Cyborg helped Bumblebee and Aqualad establish and outfit an Eastern branch of the Titans, with Speedy and Ms y Menos joining the ranks. Soon they were attacked by Blood and an army of Cyborg-modeled robots, but apparently managed to repel them all. Met with a proposal to remain and become the leader of the Titans East, Cyborg decided to stay with his new team.

Cyborg as his original “human” self

At one point, Cyborg attempted to upgrade himself by installing a super-processor chip called Maximum-7 (or Max-7) into his cybernetic brain. Initially it did work for his benefit, boosting his physical and mental processing speed well beyond his former capacities. But when the Titans first engaged Billy Numerous and were unable to catch him, a frustrated and obsessive Cyborg began shutting down his human personality in order to increase the Max-7’s efficiency, which had the detrimental effect of making him more and more a robot, and eventually this conflict between human and cybernetic nature led to a short-circuit which nearly killed him. The other Titans managed to remove the chip before this could happen, and now restored to his true self, Cyborg devised a successful plan which brought down Numerous for good.

In the comic series based on the TV show, Cyborg meets a young teaching volunteer by the name of Sarah Simms. Despite several rocky times they have since formed a very close romance.

Cyborg eating meat

Cyborg is a very outgoing, cool, and fun-loving character who likes to enjoy life, especially since he found friends who consider him a person, not a freak. He is upbeat, smart, funny, and cheerful, but serious and heroic when he needs to be. He likes to enjoy playing video games, tinkering with technological gizmos and eating. He also tends to be stubborn at times and has had some serious arguments with Robin in the past, but he does make a capable second-in-command in Robin’s absence. He also frequently bickers with Beast Boy, mostly about the latter’s culinary taste and habit of misplacing all manners of personal items, though the two entertain a close friendship.

Cyborg often plays the protective big brother role of the team, getting quite serious when they are upset and does whatever he can to make them feel better. He is never hesitant to put Beast Boy in his place when he thinks the younger Titan is being inconsiderate of Raven’s or Starfire’s feelings. Likewise, Raven and Starfire also do the same for him, evident in Car Trouble and Deception.

Much like the other Titans, Cyborg does not take betrayal lightly. He hates losing battles, especially to seemingly insignificant opponents. Their first defeat from Terra made him extremely angry with himself, because he had a chance to take a shot but didn’t. He has been known to display emotions of anger (which he often takes out on his friends), frustration, and becoming depressed.

Cyborg’s replacement robot dressed up

One facet of personal vulnerability is Cyborg’s great personal pride in his inventions and constructions. For this reason, he tends to foster an immense dislike for anyone abusing his technology for selfish reasons, especially Gizmo and Brother Blood, and to be overprotective of his most personal projects, like the T-Car.[1][2][3][4]

He also possesses a tremendous appetite, and he will consume any edibles within his reach when hungry. His favorite food is barbecue and he also especially enjoys other meat, milkshakes, pizza, and waffles. The only food he would not voluntarily touch is Starfire’s cooking and tofu (especially since Beast Boy goes to great lengths to try and make him eat it) although he once mistakenly ate the alien meat substitute.

As revealed in Troq, he has a personal dislike for bigots as shown when he became disgusted with Val-Yor when he found out what he had really be calling Starfire.

Beast Boy is Cyborg’s best friend. Cyborg is never hesitant to put Beast Boy in his place, especially if he feels that the younger hero is being rude or inconsiderate. This is particularly true in interactions with Raven, where he tries his best to include her, but is still considerate of Raven’s feelings and preference for peace and quiet. Yet, he is just as often seen at his friend’s side causing mischief with him. Despite Cyborg’s love of meat, and Beast Boy’s love of tofu, the two remain close friends. Cyborg and Beast Boy have a lot in common, including a fondness for breakfast food, playing video games, watching movies, and playing practical jokes on each other. Throughout the series, Cyborg is shown to have a tough love relationship with Beast Boy. The two are close, but Cyborg feels the need to keep Beast Boy in line and maybe instill a little more consideration and maturity in him.

However, he can be surprised when Beast Boy adopts a more serious persona as shown when he took note of the latter’s behavior when reuniting with the Doom Patrol. He was even more surprised Beast Boy went with them to defeat their old enemies. This likely showed him Beast Boy merely puts up an act, as he had no problem with Beast Boy’s leadership when fighting the Brotherhood of Evil.

Despite this Cyborg can sometime show his immature side with Beast Boy as they also enjoy playing their favorite game they made up “Stankball”.

Cyborg and Raven fixing the T-Car

Raven and Cyborg have a fairly stable and healthy relationship. They had very few episodes dedicated to mostly the two of them, but this is likely because the two of them have always been fairly close and comfortable around each other. Cyborg, despite being the Titan most similar to Beast Boy, is more mature than he is and is more considerate of Raven’s preferences. Raven, for her part, reciprocates this, as she is more patient with Cyborg than she is with Beast Boy.

Cyborg often looks out for Raven, making sure that Beast Boy does not go over the top to annoy her or hurt her feelings. In Nevermore, Cyborg was especially serious with Beast Boy, reminding him that he shouldn’t be messing with her following the prior night’s events, and made sure he went to apologize. Even though he tried to get Raven to play Stank Ball with him and Beast Boy, she clearly stated she doesn’t want to play, which made Beast Boy angry. He called her creepy, with Raven still listening, and Cyborg told him to leave her be, knowing she wanted to be alone.

In the Teen Titans Go! comics, on Christmas, Cyborg bought Raven an antique bookcase he knew she wanted, causing Raven to become uncharacteristically elated and showing an appreciation for her tastes and hobbies.

When they first met, Raven felt as if she did not fit in, but Cyborg reassures her that she fits in just fine. Even though they fight occasionally, they maintain a healthy friendship.

Despite sometimes being a bit inconsiderate of Cyborg’s feelings, Raven never intends to hurt him emotionally. This is evident in Car Trouble, where she initially dismissed Cyborg’s dismay over his stolen T-Car by telling him “Calm down, it’s just a car.” which made Cyborg rather angry. However she ultimately realizes her fault, and goes to comfort him and help him get his car back. Although he was forced to destroy it, Raven goes as far as to help him rebuild it, further proving their close friendship.

When Cyborg is the only one left with Raven in Fear Itself, he likely knew she was afraid, and tried to reassure her that they’ll get through the ordeal. Cyborg being the last Titan to disappear that night may further hint at his big brother role to Raven, being protective of her when she wanted to save Starfire when there was no possible way to.

Cyborg is shown to often be more understanding of Raven than the other Titans, as he respects her desires to be alone but still tries to include her when he can. Raven, in turn, seems to accept Cyborg as he is without question and accepts his enthusiasm for his hobbies, even if she does not share it.

Cyborg makes Raven smile more than anyone else in the series. Her biggest smiles, at least, two episodes centering around Cyborg’s troubles.

Cyborg and Robin fighting

It is revealed that Cyborg is Robin’s second-in-command.

“I didn’t know you before,so to me – you are normal.”

Starfire and Cyborg are incredibly close. Their relationship is much like an older brother and younger sister, and Cyborg is really protective over her. They hardly ever get angry at each other, however, in Final Exam, Cyborg does lose his temper and hurt Starfire. Despite this, the two have remained extremely close throughout the series.

Cyborg had helped Starfire greatly in How Long is Forever? when she was pushed forward in time. Even after so many years, Cyborg cared deeply for Starfire’s well-being. In the series, Cyborg seems to act like the big brother to Starfire, and Starfire looks up to him.

The two often like to lift weights together, and despite countless times having witnessed Starfire’s impressive strength, is still shocked when she is able to lift heavier weights than he is with relative ease. They are the strongest in the team physically, as their physical prowess far outmatches Robin’s, Raven’s, and even Beast Boy’s.

Cyborg and Starfire have a practically mirrored personality, both being cheerful yet considerate of others’ feelings, and they seemed to get along well from the very beginning.

In the episode, Troq, Cyborg was the first one to learn the meaning of the word Val Yor had been calling Starfire, (Troq, which is a slur for literally “nothing”). Because he initially misinterpreted Starfire’s explanation that it meant nothing, he went to call her that, which hurt her deeply. But after learning that it literally meant nothing, Cyborg went to comfort her. Being half-robot, Cyborg knows exactly what it is like to be mistreated just for how you look, and completely empathized with her. He then told Robin, who was equally outraged.

Cyborg also makes note of Starfire’s close relationship with Robin, and in Stranded, he even teased Robin, calling Starfire his girlfriend. And when Starfire and Robin had their first real kiss in the final movie-episode of the series, Trouble in Tokyo, Cyborg voiced his approval, saying, “Well, it’s about time.”

Cyborg with cannons

This ability has its own cons though. His entire power cell and the whole power of Titans’ Tower is only just enough to make one blast. This is why he only uses it in desperation, and it is much like an ultimate form, much like Beast Boy’s Werebeast form and Raven’s white form.

Main article: Cyborg/Gallery

See the rest here:

Cyborg | Teen Titans Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

Libertarianism – Wikipedia

“Libertarians” redirects here. For political parties that may go by this name, see Libertarian Party.

Libertarianism (from Latin: libertas, meaning “freedom”) is a collection of political philosophies and movements that uphold liberty as a core principle.[1] Libertarians seek to maximize political freedom and autonomy, emphasizing freedom of choice, voluntary association, and individual judgment.[2][3][4] Libertarians share a skepticism of authority and state power, but they diverge on the scope of their opposition to existing political and economic systems. Various schools of libertarian thought offer a range of views regarding the legitimate functions of state and private power, often calling for the restriction or dissolution of coercive social institutions.[5]

Left-libertarian ideologies seek to abolish capitalism and private ownership of the means of production, or else to restrict their purview or effects, in favor of common or cooperative ownership and management, viewing private property as a barrier to freedom and liberty.[6][7][8][9] In contrast, modern right-libertarian ideologies, such as minarchism and anarcho-capitalism, instead advocate laissez-faire capitalism and strong private property rights,[10] such as in land, infrastructure, and natural resources.

The first recorded use of the term “libertarian” was in 1789, when William Belsham wrote about libertarianism in the context of metaphysics.[11]

“Libertarian” came to mean an advocate or defender of liberty, especially in the political and social spheres, as early as 1796, when the London Packet printed on 12 February: “Lately marched out of the Prison at Bristol, 450 of the French Libertarians”.[12] The word was again used in a political sense in 1802 in a short piece critiquing a poem by “the author of Gebir” and has since been used with this meaning.[13][14][15]

The use of the word “libertarian” to describe a new set of political positions has been traced to the French cognate, libertaire, coined in a letter French libertarian communist Joseph Djacque wrote to mutualist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in 1857.[16][17][18] Djacque also used the term for his anarchist publication Le Libertaire: Journal du Mouvement Social, which was printed from 9 June 1858 to 4 February 1861 in New York City.[19][20] In the mid-1890s, Sbastien Faure began publishing a new Le Libertaire while France’s Third Republic enacted the lois sclrates (“villainous laws”), which banned anarchist publications in France. Libertarianism has frequently been used as a synonym for anarchism since this time.[21][22][23]

The term “libertarianism” was first used in the United States as a synonym for classic liberalism in May 1955 by writer Dean Russell, a colleague of Leonard Read and a classic liberal himself. He justified the choice of the word as follows: “Many of us call ourselves ‘liberals.’ And it is true that the word ‘liberal’ once described persons who respected the individual and feared the use of mass compulsions. But the leftists have now corrupted that once-proud term to identify themselves and their program of more government ownership of property and more controls over persons. As a result, those of us who believe in freedom must explain that when we call ourselves liberals, we mean liberals in the uncorrupted classical sense. At best, this is awkward and subject to misunderstanding. Here is a suggestion: Let those of us who love liberty trade-mark and reserve for our own use the good and honorable word ‘libertarian'”.[24]

Subsequently, a growing number of Americans with classical liberal beliefs in the United States began to describe themselves as “libertarian”. The person most responsible for popularizing the term “libertarian” was Murray Rothbard,[25] who started publishing libertarian works in the 1960s.

Libertarianism in the United States has been described as conservative on economic issues and liberal on personal freedom[26] (for common meanings of conservative and liberal in the United States) and it is also often associated with a foreign policy of non-interventionism.[27][28]

Although the word “libertarian” has been used to refer to socialists internationally, its meaning in the United States has deviated from its political origins.[29][30]

There is contention about whether left and right libertarianism “represent distinct ideologies as opposed to variations on a theme”.[31] All libertarians begin with a conception of personal autonomy from which they argue in favor of civil liberties and a reduction or elimination of the state.

Left-libertarianism encompasses those libertarian beliefs that claim the Earth’s natural resources belong to everyone in an egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively. Contemporary left-libertarians such as Hillel Steiner, Peter Vallentyne, Philippe Van Parijs, Michael Otsuka and David Ellerman believe the appropriation of land must leave “enough and as good” for others or be taxed by society to compensate for the exclusionary effects of private property. Libertarian socialists (social and individualist anarchists, libertarian Marxists, council communists, Luxemburgists and DeLeonists) promote usufruct and socialist economic theories, including communism, collectivism, syndicalism and mutualism. They criticize the state for being the defender of private property and believe capitalism entails wage slavery.

Right-libertarianism[32] developed in the United States in the mid-20th century and is the most popular conception of libertarianism in that region.[33] It is commonly referred to as a continuation or radicalization of classical liberalism.[34][35] Right-libertarians, while often sharing left-libertarians’ advocacy for social freedom, also value the social institutions that enforce conditions of capitalism, while rejecting institutions that function in opposition to these on the grounds that such interventions represent unnecessary coercion of individuals and abrogation of their economic freedom.[36] Anarcho-capitalists[37][38] seek complete elimination of the state in favor of privately funded security services while minarchists defend “night-watchman states”, which maintain only those functions of government necessary to maintain conditions of capitalism and personal security.

Anarchism envisages freedom as a form of autonomy,[39] which Paul Goodman describes as “the ability to initiate a task and do it one’s own way, without orders from authorities who do not know the actual problem and the available means”.[40] All anarchists oppose political and legal authority, but collectivist strains also oppose the economic authority of private property.[41] These social anarchists emphasize mutual aid, whereas individualist anarchists extoll individual sovereignty.[42]

Some right-libertarians consider the non-aggression principle (NAP) to be a core part of their beliefs.[43][44]

Libertarians have been advocates and activists of civil liberties, including free love and free thought.[45][46] Advocates of free love viewed sexual freedom as a clear, direct expression of individual sovereignty and they particularly stressed women’s rights as most sexual laws discriminated against women: for example, marriage laws and anti-birth control measures.[47]

Free love appeared alongside anarcha-feminism and advocacy of LGBT rights. Anarcha-feminism developed as a synthesis of radical feminism and anarchism and views patriarchy as a fundamental manifestation of compulsory government. It was inspired by the late-19th-century writings of early feminist anarchists such as Lucy Parsons, Emma Goldman, Voltairine de Cleyre and Virginia Bolten. Anarcha-feminists, like other radical feminists, criticise and advocate the abolition of traditional conceptions of family, education and gender roles. Free Society (18951897 as The Firebrand, 18971904 as Free Society) was an anarchist newspaper in the United States that staunchly advocated free love and women’s rights, while criticizing “comstockery”, the censorship of sexual information.[48] In recent times, anarchism has also voiced opinions and taken action around certain sex-related subjects such as pornography,[49] BDSM[50] and the sex industry.[50]

Free thought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds opinions should be formed on the basis of science, logic and reason in contrast with authority, tradition or other dogmas.[51][52] In the United States, free thought was an anti-Christian, anti-clerical movement whose purpose was to make the individual politically and spiritually free to decide on religious matters. A number of contributors to Liberty were prominent figures in both free thought and anarchism. In 1901, Catalan anarchist and free-thinker Francesc Ferrer i Gurdia established “modern” or progressive schools in Barcelona in defiance of an educational system controlled by the Catholic Church.[53] Fiercely anti-clerical, Ferrer believed in “freedom in education”, i.e. education free from the authority of the church and state.[54] The schools’ stated goal was to “educate the working class in a rational, secular and non-coercive setting”. Later in the 20th century, Austrian Freudo-Marxist Wilhelm Reich became a consistent propagandist for sexual freedom going as far as opening free sex-counselling clinics in Vienna for working-class patients[55] as well as coining the phrase “sexual revolution” in one of his books from the 1940s.[56] During the early 1970s, the English anarchist and pacifist Alex Comfort achieved international celebrity for writing the sex manuals The Joy of Sex and More Joy of Sex.

Most left-libertarians are anarchists and believe the state inherently violates personal autonomy: “As Robert Paul Wolff has argued, since ‘the state is authority, the right to rule’, anarchism which rejects the State is the only political doctrine consistent with autonomy in which the individual alone is the judge of his moral constraints”.[41] Social anarchists believe the state defends private property, which they view as intrinsically harmful, while market-oriented left-libertarians argue that so-called free markets actually consist of economic privileges granted by the state. These latter libertarians advocate instead for freed markets, which are freed from these privileges.[57]

There is a debate amongst right-libertarians as to whether or not the state is legitimate: while anarcho-capitalists advocate its abolition, minarchists support minimal states, often referred to as night-watchman states. Libertarians take a skeptical view of government authority.[58][unreliable source?] Minarchists maintain that the state is necessary for the protection of individuals from aggression, theft, breach of contract and fraud. They believe the only legitimate governmental institutions are the military, police and courts, though some expand this list to include fire departments, prisons and the executive and legislative branches.[59] They justify the state on the grounds that it is the logical consequence of adhering to the non-aggression principle and argue that anarchism is immoral because it implies that the non-aggression principle is optional, that the enforcement of laws under anarchism is open to competition.[citation needed] Another common justification is that private defense agencies and court firms would tend to represent the interests of those who pay them enough.[60]

Anarcho-capitalists argue that the state violates the non-aggression principle (NAP) by its nature because governments use force against those who have not stolen or vandalized private property, assaulted anyone or committed fraud.[61][62] Linda & Morris Tannehill argue that no coercive monopoly of force can arise on a truly free market and that a government’s citizenry can not desert them in favor of a competent protection and defense agency.[63]

Left-libertarians believe that neither claiming nor mixing one’s labor with natural resources is enough to generate full private property rights[64][65] and maintain that natural resources ought to be held in an egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively.[66]

Right-libertarians maintain that unowned natural resources “may be appropriated by the first person who discovers them, mixes his labor with them, or merely claims themwithout the consent of others, and with little or no payment to them”. They believe that natural resources are originally unowned and therefore private parties may appropriate them at will without the consent of, or owing to, others.[67]

Left-libertarians (social and individualist anarchists, libertarian Marxists and left-wing market anarchists) argue in favor of socialist theories such as communism, syndicalism and mutualism (anarchist economics). Daniel Gurin writes that “anarchism is really a synonym for socialism. The anarchist is primarily a socialist whose aim is to abolish the exploitation of man by man. Anarchism is only one of the streams of socialist thought, that stream whose main components are concern for liberty and haste to abolish the State”.[68]

Right-libertarians are economic liberals of either the Austrian School or Chicago school and support laissez-faire capitalism.[69]

Wage labour has long been compared by socialists and anarcho-syndicalists to slavery.[70][71][72][73] As a result, the term “wage slavery” is often utilised as a pejorative for wage labor.[74] Advocates of slavery looked upon the “comparative evils of Slave Society and of Free Society, of slavery to human Masters and slavery to Capital”[75] and proceeded to argue that wage slavery was actually worse than chattel slavery.[76] Slavery apologists like George Fitzhugh contended that workers only accepted wage labour with the passage of time, as they became “familiarized and inattentive to the infected social atmosphere they continually inhale[d]”.[75]

According to Noam Chomsky, analysis of the psychological implications of wage slavery goes back to the Enlightenment era. In his 1791 book On the Limits of State Action, classical liberal thinker Wilhelm von Humboldt explained how “whatever does not spring from a man’s free choice, or is only the result of instruction and guidance, does not enter into his very nature; he does not perform it with truly human energies, but merely with mechanical exactness” and so when the labourer works under external control “we may admire what he does, but we despise what he is”.[77] For Marxists, labour-as-commodity, which is how they regard wage labour,[78] provides an absolutely fundamental point of attack against capitalism.[79] “It can be persuasively argued”, noted philosopher John Nelson, “that the conception of the worker’s labour as a commodity confirms Marx’s stigmatization of the wage system of private capitalism as ‘wage-slavery;’ that is, as an instrument of the capitalist’s for reducing the worker’s condition to that of a slave, if not below it”.[80] That this objection is fundamental follows immediately from Marx’s conclusion that wage labour is the very foundation of capitalism: “Without a class dependent on wages, the moment individuals confront each other as free persons, there can be no production of surplus value; without the production of surplus-value there can be no capitalist production, and hence no capital and no capitalist!”.[81]

Left-libertarianism (or left-wing libertarianism) names several related, but distinct approaches to political and social theory which stresses both individual freedom and social equality. In its classical usage, left-libertarianism is a synonym for anti-authoritarian varieties of left-wing politics, i.e. libertarian socialism, which includes anarchism and libertarian Marxism, among others.[82][83] Left-libertarianism can also refer to political positions associated with academic philosophers Hillel Steiner, Philippe Van Parijs and Peter Vallentyne that combine self-ownership with an egalitarian approach to natural resouces.[84]

While maintaining full respect for personal property, left-libertarians are skeptical of or fully against private property, arguing that neither claiming nor mixing one’s labor with natural resources is enough to generate full private property rights[85][86] and maintain that natural resources (land, oil, gold and vegetation) should be held in an egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively. Those left-libertarians who support private property do so under the condition that recompense is offered to the local community.[86] Many left-libertarian schools of thought are communist, advocating the eventual replacement of money with labor vouchers or decentralized planning.

On the other hand, left-wing market anarchism, which includes Pierre-Joseph Proudhon’s mutualism and Samuel Edward Konkin III’s agorism, appeals to left-wing concerns such as egalitarianism, gender and sexuality, class, immigration and environmentalism within the paradigm of a socialist free market.[82]

Right-libertarianism (or right-wing libertarianism) refers to libertarian political philosophies that advocate negative rights, natural law and a major reversal of the modern welfare state.[87] Right-libertarians strongly support private property rights and defend market distribution of natural resources and private property.[88] This position is contrasted with that of some versions of left-libertarianism, which maintain that natural resources belong to everyone in an egalitarian manner, either unowned or owned collectively.[89] Right-libertarianism includes anarcho-capitalism and laissez-faire, minarchist liberalism.[note 1]

Elements of libertarianism can be traced as far back as the ancient Chinese philosopher Lao-Tzu and the higher-law concepts of the Greeks and the Israelites.[90][91] In 17th-century England, libertarian ideas began to take modern form in the writings of the Levellers and John Locke. In the middle of that century, opponents of royal power began to be called Whigs, or sometimes simply “opposition” or “country” (as opposed to Court) writers.[92]

During the 18th century, classical liberal ideas flourished in Europe and North America.[93][94] Libertarians of various schools were influenced by classical liberal ideas.[95] For libertarian philosopher Roderick T. Long, both libertarian socialists and libertarian capitalists “share a commonor at least an overlapping intellectual ancestry… both claim the seventeenth century English Levellers and the eighteenth century French encyclopedists among their ideological forebears; and (also)… usually share an admiration for Thomas Jefferson[96][97][98] and Thomas Paine”.[99]

John Locke greatly influenced both libertarianism and the modern world in his writings published before and after the English Revolution of 1688, especially A Letter Concerning Toleration (1667), Two Treatises of Government (1689) and An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690). In the text of 1689, he established the basis of liberal political theory: that people’s rights existed before government; that the purpose of government is to protect personal and property rights; that people may dissolve governments that do not do so; and that representative government is the best form to protect rights.[100] The United States Declaration of Independence was inspired by Locke in its statement: “[T]o secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it”.[101] Nevertheless scholar Ellen Meiksins Wood says that “there are doctrines of individualism that are opposed to Lockean individualism… and non-Lockean individualism may encompass socialism”.[102]

According to Murray Rothbard, the libertarian creed emerged from the classical liberal challenges to an “absolute central State and a king ruling by divine right on top of an older, restrictive web of feudal land monopolies and urban guild controls and restrictions”, the mercantilism of a bureaucratic warfaring state allied with privileged merchants. The object of classical liberals was individual liberty in the economy, in personal freedoms and civil liberty, separation of state and religion, and peace as an alternative to imperial aggrandizement. He cites Locke’s contemporaries, the Levellers, who held similar views. Also influential were the English “Cato’s Letters” during the early 1700s, reprinted eagerly by American colonists who already were free of European aristocracy and feudal land monopolies.[101]

In January of 1776, only two years after coming to America from England, Thomas Paine published his pamphlet Common Sense calling for independence for the colonies.[103] Paine promoted classical liberal ideas in clear, concise language that allowed the general public to understand the debates among the political elites.[104] Common Sense was immensely popular in disseminating these ideas,[105] selling hundreds of thousands of copies.[106] Paine later would write the Rights of Man and The Age of Reason and participate in the French Revolution.[103] Paine’s theory of property showed a “libertarian concern” with the redistribution of resources.[107]

In 1793, William Godwin wrote a libertarian philosophical treatise, Enquiry Concerning Political Justice and its Influence on Morals and Happiness, which criticized ideas of human rights and of society by contract based on vague promises. He took classical liberalism to its logical anarchic conclusion by rejecting all political institutions, law, government and apparatus of coercion as well as all political protest and insurrection. Instead of institutionalized justice, Godwin proposed that people influence one another to moral goodness through informal reasoned persuasion, including in the associations they joined as this would facilitate happiness.[108][109]

Modern anarchism sprang from the secular or religious thought of the Enlightenment, particularly Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s arguments for the moral centrality of freedom.[110]

As part of the political turmoil of the 1790s in the wake of the French Revolution, William Godwin developed the first expression of modern anarchist thought.[111][112] According to Peter Kropotkin, Godwin was “the first to formulate the political and economical conceptions of anarchism, even though he did not give that name to the ideas developed in his work”,[113] while Godwin attached his anarchist ideas to an early Edmund Burke.[114]

Godwin is generally regarded as the founder of the school of thought known as philosophical anarchism. He argued in Political Justice (1793)[112][115] that government has an inherently malevolent influence on society and that it perpetuates dependency and ignorance. He thought that the spread of the use of reason to the masses would eventually cause government to wither away as an unnecessary force. Although he did not accord the state with moral legitimacy, he was against the use of revolutionary tactics for removing the government from power. Rather, Godwin advocated for its replacement through a process of peaceful evolution.[112][116]

His aversion to the imposition of a rules-based society led him to denounce, as a manifestation of the people’s “mental enslavement”, the foundations of law, property rights and even the institution of marriage. Godwin considered the basic foundations of society as constraining the natural development of individuals to use their powers of reasoning to arrive at a mutually beneficial method of social organization. In each case, government and its institutions are shown to constrain the development of our capacity to live wholly in accordance with the full and free exercise of private judgment.

In France, various anarchist currents were present during the Revolutionary period, with some revolutionaries using the term anarchiste in a positive light as early as September 1793.[117] The enrags opposed revolutionary government as a contradiction in terms. Denouncing the Jacobin dictatorship, Jean Varlet wrote in 1794 that “government and revolution are incompatible, unless the people wishes to set its constituted authorities in permanent insurrection against itself”.[118] In his “Manifesto of the Equals”, Sylvain Marchal looked forward to the disappearance, once and for all, of “the revolting distinction between rich and poor, of great and small, of masters and valets, of governors and governed”.[118]

Libertarian socialism, libertarian communism and libertarian Marxism are all phrases which activists with a variety of perspectives have applied to their views.[119] Anarchist communist philosopher Joseph Djacque was the first person to describe himself as a libertarian.[120] Unlike mutualist anarchist philosopher Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, he argued that “it is not the product of his or her labor that the worker has a right to, but to the satisfaction of his or her needs, whatever may be their nature”.[121][122] According to anarchist historian Max Nettlau, the first use of the term “libertarian communism” was in November 1880, when a French anarchist congress employed it to more clearly identify its doctrines.[123] The French anarchist journalist Sbastien Faure started the weekly paper Le Libertaire (The Libertarian) in 1895.[124]

Individualist anarchism refers to several traditions of thought within the anarchist movement that emphasize the individual and their will over any kinds of external determinants such as groups, society, traditions, and ideological systems.[125][126] An influential form of individualist anarchism called egoism[127] or egoist anarchism was expounded by one of the earliest and best-known proponents of individualist anarchism, the German Max Stirner.[128] Stirner’s The Ego and Its Own, published in 1844, is a founding text of the philosophy.[128] According to Stirner, the only limitation on the rights of the individual is their power to obtain what they desire,[129] without regard for God, state or morality.[130] Stirner advocated self-assertion and foresaw unions of egoists, non-systematic associations continually renewed by all parties’ support through an act of will,[131] which Stirner proposed as a form of organisation in place of the state.[132] Egoist anarchists argue that egoism will foster genuine and spontaneous union between individuals.[133] Egoism has inspired many interpretations of Stirner’s philosophy. It was re-discovered and promoted by German philosophical anarchist and LGBT activist John Henry Mackay. Josiah Warren is widely regarded as the first American anarchist,[134] and the four-page weekly paper he edited during 1833, The Peaceful Revolutionist, was the first anarchist periodical published.[135] For American anarchist historian Eunice Minette Schuster, “[i]t is apparent… that Proudhonian Anarchism was to be found in the United States at least as early as 1848 and that it was not conscious of its affinity to the Individualist Anarchism of Josiah Warren and Stephen Pearl Andrews… William B. Greene presented this Proudhonian Mutualism in its purest and most systematic form.”.[136] Later, Benjamin Tucker fused Stirner’s egoism with the economics of Warren and Proudhon in his eclectic influential publication Liberty. From these early influences, individualist anarchism in different countries attracted a small yet diverse following of bohemian artists and intellectuals,[137] free love and birth control advocates (anarchism and issues related to love and sex),[138][139] individualist naturists nudists (anarcho-naturism),[140][141][142] free thought and anti-clerical activists[143][144] as well as young anarchist outlaws in what became known as illegalism and individual reclamation[145][146] (European individualist anarchism and individualist anarchism in France). These authors and activists included Emile Armand, Han Ryner, Henri Zisly, Renzo Novatore, Miguel Gimenez Igualada, Adolf Brand and Lev Chernyi.

In 1873, the follower and translator of Proudhon, the Catalan Francesc Pi i Margall, became President of Spain with a program which wanted “to establish a decentralized, or “cantonalist,” political system on Proudhonian lines”,[147] who according to Rudolf Rocker had “political ideas…much in common with those of Richard Price, Joseph Priestly [sic], Thomas Paine, Jefferson, and other representatives of the Anglo-American liberalism of the first period. He wanted to limit the power of the state to a minimum and gradually replace it by a Socialist economic order”.[148] On the other hand, Fermn Salvochea was a mayor of the city of Cdiz and a president of the province of Cdiz. He was one of the main propagators of anarchist thought in that area in the late 19th century and is considered to be “perhaps the most beloved figure in the Spanish Anarchist movement of the 19th century”.[149][150] Ideologically, he was influenced by Bradlaugh, Owen and Paine, whose works he had studied during his stay in England and Kropotkin, whom he read later.[149] The revolutionary wave of 19171923 saw the active participation of anarchists in Russia and Europe. Russian anarchists participated alongside the Bolsheviks in both the February and October 1917 revolutions. However, Bolsheviks in central Russia quickly began to imprison or drive underground the libertarian anarchists. Many fled to the Ukraine.[151] There, in the Ukrainian Free Territory they fought in the Russian Civil War against the White movement, monarchists and other opponents of revolution and then against Bolsheviks as part of the Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine led by Nestor Makhno, who established an anarchist society in the region for a number of months. Expelled American anarchists Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman protested Bolshevik policy before they left Russia.[152]

The victory of the Bolsheviks damaged anarchist movements internationally as workers and activists joined Communist parties. In France and the United States, for example, members of the major syndicalist movements of the CGT and IWW joined the Communist International.[153] In Paris, the Dielo Truda group of Russian anarchist exiles, which included Nestor Makhno, issued a 1926 manifesto, the Organizational Platform of the General Union of Anarchists (Draft), calling for new anarchist organizing structures.[154][155]

The Bavarian Soviet Republic of 19181919 had libertarian socialist characteristics.[156][157] In Italy, from 1918 to 1921 the anarcho-syndicalist trade union Unione Sindacale Italiana grew to 800,000 members.[158]

In the 1920s and 1930s, with the rise of fascism in Europe, anarchists began to fight fascists in Italy,[159] in France during the February 1934 riots[160] and in Spain where the CNT (Confederacin Nacional del Trabajo) boycott of elections led to a right-wing victory and its later participation in voting in 1936 helped bring the popular front back to power. This led to a ruling class attempted coup and the Spanish Civil War (19361939).[161] Gruppo Comunista Anarchico di Firenze held that the during early twentieth century, the terms libertarian communism and anarchist communism became synonymous within the international anarchist movement as a result of the close connection they had in Spain (anarchism in Spain) (with libertarian communism becoming the prevalent term).[162]

Murray Bookchin wrote that the Spanish libertarian movement of the mid-1930s was unique because its workers’ control and collectiveswhich came out of a three-generation “massive libertarian movement”divided the republican camp and challenged the Marxists. “Urban anarchists” created libertarian communist forms of organization which evolved into the CNT, a syndicalist union providing the infrastructure for a libertarian society. Also formed were local bodies to administer social and economic life on a decentralized libertarian basis. Much of the infrastructure was destroyed during the 1930s Spanish Civil War against authoritarian and fascist forces.[163] The Iberian Federation of Libertarian Youth[164] (FIJL, Spanish: Federacin Ibrica de Juventudes Libertarias), sometimes abbreviated as Libertarian Youth (Juventudes Libertarias), was a libertarian socialist[165] organisation created in 1932 in Madrid.[166] In February 1937, the FIJL organised a plenum of regional organisations (second congress of FIJL). In October 1938, from the 16th through the 30th in Barcelona the FIJL participated in a national plenum of the libertarian movement, also attended by members of the CNT and the Iberian Anarchist Federation (FAI).[167] The FIJL exists until today. When the republican forces lost the Spanish Civil War, the city of Madrid was turned over to the francoist forces in 1939 by the last non-francoist mayor of the city, the anarchist Melchor Rodrguez Garca.[168] During autumn of 1931, the “Manifesto of the 30” was published by militants of the anarchist trade union CNT and among those who signed it there was the CNT General Secretary (19221923) Joan Peiro, Angel Pestaa CNT (General Secretary in 1929) and Juan Lopez Sanchez. They were called treintismo and they were calling for “libertarian possibilism” which advocated achieving libertarian socialist ends with participation inside structures of contemporary parliamentary democracy.[169] In 1932, they establish the Syndicalist Party which participates in the 1936 spanish general elections and proceed to be a part of the leftist coalition of parties known as the Popular Front obtaining 2 congressmen (Pestaa and Benito Pabon). In 1938, Horacio Prieto, general secretary of the CNT, proposes that the Iberian Anarchist Federation transforms itself into a “Libertarian Socialist Party” and that it participates in the national elections.[170]

The Manifesto of Libertarian Communism was written in 1953 by Georges Fontenis for the Federation Communiste Libertaire of France. It is one of the key texts of the anarchist-communist current known as platformism.[171] In 1968, in Carrara, Italy the International of Anarchist Federations was founded during an international anarchist conference to advance libertarian solidarity. It wanted to form “a strong and organised workers movement, agreeing with the libertarian ideas”.[172][173] In the United States, the Libertarian League was founded in New York City in 1954 as a left-libertarian political organisation building on the Libertarian Book Club.[174][175] Members included Sam Dolgoff,[176] Russell Blackwell, Dave Van Ronk, Enrico Arrigoni[177] and Murray Bookchin.

In Australia, the Sydney Push was a predominantly left-wing intellectual subculture in Sydney from the late 1940s to the early 1970s which became associated with the label “Sydney libertarianism”. Well known associates of the Push include Jim Baker, John Flaus, Harry Hooton, Margaret Fink, Sasha Soldatow,[178] Lex Banning, Eva Cox, Richard Appleton, Paddy McGuinness, David Makinson, Germaine Greer, Clive James, Robert Hughes, Frank Moorhouse and Lillian Roxon. Amongst the key intellectual figures in Push debates were philosophers David J. Ivison, George Molnar, Roelof Smilde, Darcy Waters and Jim Baker, as recorded in Baker’s memoir Sydney Libertarians and the Push, published in the libertarian Broadsheet in 1975.[179] An understanding of libertarian values and social theory can be obtained from their publications, a few of which are available online.[180][181]

In 1969, French platformist anarcho-communist Daniel Gurin published an essay in 1969 called “Libertarian Marxism?” in which he dealt with the debate between Karl Marx and Mikhail Bakunin at the First International and afterwards suggested that “[l]ibertarian marxism rejects determinism and fatalism, giving the greater place to individual will, intuition, imagination, reflex speeds, and to the deep instincts of the masses, which are more far-seeing in hours of crisis than the reasonings of the ‘elites’; libertarian marxism thinks of the effects of surprise, provocation and boldness, refuses to be cluttered and paralysed by a heavy ‘scientific’ apparatus, doesn’t equivocate or bluff, and guards itself from adventurism as much as from fear of the unknown”.[182] Libertarian Marxist currents often draw from Marx and Engels’ later works, specifically the Grundrisse and The Civil War in France.[183] They emphasize the Marxist belief in the ability of the working class to forge its own destiny without the need for a revolutionary party or state.[184] Libertarian Marxism includes such currents as council communism, left communism, Socialisme ou Barbarie, Lettrism/Situationism and operaismo/autonomism and New Left.[185][unreliable source?] In the United States, from 1970 to 1981 there existed the publication Root & Branch[186] which had as a subtitle “A Libertarian Marxist Journal”.[187] In 1974, the Libertarian Communism journal was started in the United Kingdom by a group inside the Socialist Party of Great Britain.[188] In 1986, the anarcho-syndicalist Sam Dolgoff started and led the publication Libertarian Labor Review in the United States[189] which decided to rename itself as Anarcho-Syndicalist Review in order to avoid confusion with right-libertarian views.[190]

The indigenous anarchist tradition in the United States was largely individualist.[191] In 1825, Josiah Warren became aware of the social system of utopian socialist Robert Owen and began to talk with others in Cincinnati about founding a communist colony.[192] When this group failed to come to an agreement about the form and goals of their proposed community, Warren “sold his factory after only two years of operation, packed up his young family, and took his place as one of 900 or so Owenites who had decided to become part of the founding population of New Harmony, Indiana”.[193] Warren termed the phrase “cost the limit of price”[194] and “proposed a system to pay people with certificates indicating how many hours of work they did. They could exchange the notes at local time stores for goods that took the same amount of time to produce”.[195] He put his theories to the test by establishing an experimental labor-for-labor store called the Cincinnati Time Store where trade was facilitated by labor notes. The store proved successful and operated for three years, after which it was closed so that Warren could pursue establishing colonies based on mutualism, including Utopia and Modern Times. “After New Harmony failed, Warren shifted his ideological loyalties from socialism to anarchism (which was no great leap, given that Owen’s socialism had been predicated on Godwin’s anarchism)”.[196] Warren is widely regarded as the first American anarchist[195] and the four-page weekly paper The Peaceful Revolutionist he edited during 1833 was the first anarchist periodical published,[135] an enterprise for which he built his own printing press, cast his own type and made his own printing plates.[135]

Catalan historian Xavier Diez reports that the intentional communal experiments pioneered by Warren were influential in European individualist anarchists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries such as mile Armand and the intentional communities started by them.[197] Warren said that Stephen Pearl Andrews, individualist anarchist and close associate, wrote the most lucid and complete exposition of Warren’s own theories in The Science of Society, published in 1852.[198] Andrews was formerly associated with the Fourierist movement, but converted to radical individualism after becoming acquainted with the work of Warren. Like Warren, he held the principle of “individual sovereignty” as being of paramount importance. Contemporary American anarchist Hakim Bey reports:

Steven Pearl Andrews… was not a fourierist, but he lived through the brief craze for phalansteries in America and adopted a lot of fourierist principles and practices… a maker of worlds out of words. He syncretized abolitionism in the United States, free love, spiritual universalism, Warren, and Fourier into a grand utopian scheme he called the Universal Pantarchy… He was instrumental in founding several ‘intentional communities,’ including the ‘Brownstone Utopia’ on 14th St. in New York, and ‘Modern Times’ in Brentwood, Long Island. The latter became as famous as the best-known fourierist communes (Brook Farm in Massachusetts & the North American Phalanx in New Jersey)in fact, Modern Times became downright notorious (for ‘Free Love’) and finally foundered under a wave of scandalous publicity. Andrews (and Victoria Woodhull) were members of the infamous Section 12 of the 1st International, expelled by Marx for its anarchist, feminist, and spiritualist tendencies.[199]

For American anarchist historian Eunice Minette Schuster, “[it is apparent… that Proudhonian Anarchism was to be found in the United States at least as early as 1848 and that it was not conscious of its affinity to the Individualist Anarchism of Josiah Warren and Stephen Pearl Andrews. William B. Greene presented this Proudhonian Mutualism in its purest and most systematic form”.[200] William Batchelder Greene was a 19th-century mutualist individualist anarchist, Unitarian minister, soldier and promoter of free banking in the United States. Greene is best known for the works Mutual Banking, which proposed an interest-free banking system; and Transcendentalism, a critique of the New England philosophical school. After 1850, he became active in labor reform.[200] “He was elected vice-president of the New England Labor Reform League, the majority of the members holding to Proudhon’s scheme of mutual banking, and in 1869 president of the Massachusetts Labor Union”.[200] Greene then published Socialistic, Mutualistic, and Financial Fragments (1875).[200] He saw mutualism as the synthesis of “liberty and order”.[200] His “associationism… is checked by individualism… ‘Mind your own business,’ ‘Judge not that ye be not judged.’ Over matters which are purely personal, as for example, moral conduct, the individual is sovereign, as well as over that which he himself produces. For this reason he demands ‘mutuality’ in marriagethe equal right of a woman to her own personal freedom and property”.[200]

Poet, naturalist and transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau was an important early influence in individualist anarchist thought in the United States and Europe. He is best known for his book Walden, a reflection upon simple living in natural surroundings; and his essay Civil Disobedience (Resistance to Civil Government), an argument for individual resistance to civil government in moral opposition to an unjust state. In Walden, Thoreau advocates simple living and self-sufficiency among natural surroundings in resistance to the advancement of industrial civilization.[201] Civil Disobedience, first published in 1849, argues that people should not permit governments to overrule or atrophy their consciences and that people have a duty to avoid allowing such acquiescence to enable the government to make them the agents of injustice. These works influenced green anarchism, anarcho-primitivism and anarcho-pacifism,[202] as well as figures including Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Martin Buber and Leo Tolstoy.[202] “Many have seen in Thoreau one of the precursors of ecologism and anarcho-primitivism represented today in John Zerzan. For George Woodcock this attitude can be also motivated by certain idea of resistance to progress and of rejection of the growing materialism which is the nature of American society in the mid-19th century”.[201] Zerzan included Thoreau’s “Excursions” in his edited compilation of anti-civilization writings, Against Civilization: Readings and Reflections.[203] Individualist anarchists such as Thoreau[204][205] do not speak of economics, but simply the right of disunion from the state and foresee the gradual elimination of the state through social evolution. Agorist author J. Neil Schulman cites Thoreau as a primary inspiration.[206]

Many economists since Adam Smith have argued thatunlike other taxesa land value tax would not cause economic inefficiency.[207] It would be a progressive tax[208]primarily paid by the wealthyand increase wages, reduce economic inequality, remove incentives to misuse real estate and reduce the vulnerability that economies face from credit and property bubbles.[209][210] Early proponents of this view include Thomas Paine, Herbert Spencer, and Hugo Grotius,[84] but the concept was widely popularized by the economist and social reformer Henry George.[211] George believed that people ought to own the fruits of their labor and the value of the improvements they make, thus he was opposed to income taxes, sales taxes, taxes on improvements and all other taxes on production, labor, trade or commerce. George was among the staunchest defenders of free markets and his book Protection or Free Trade was read into the U.S. Congressional Record.[212] Yet he did support direct management of natural monopolies as a last resort, such as right-of-way monopolies necessary for railroads. George advocated for elimination of intellectual property arrangements in favor of government sponsored prizes for inventors.[213][not in citation given] Early followers of George’s philosophy called themselves single taxers because they believed that the only legitimate, broad-based tax was land rent. The term Georgism was coined later, though some modern proponents prefer the term geoism instead,[214] leaving the meaning of “geo” (Earth in Greek) deliberately ambiguous. The terms “Earth Sharing”,[215] “geonomics”[216] and “geolibertarianism”[217] are used by some Georgists to represent a difference of emphasis, or real differences about how land rent should be spent, but all agree that land rent should be recovered from its private owners.

Individualist anarchism found in the United States an important space for discussion and development within the group known as the “Boston anarchists”.[218] Even among the 19th-century American individualists there was no monolithic doctrine and they disagreed amongst each other on various issues including intellectual property rights and possession versus property in land.[219][220][221] Some Boston anarchists, including Benjamin Tucker, identified as socialists, which in the 19th century was often used in the sense of a commitment to improving conditions of the working class (i.e. “the labor problem”).[222] Lysander Spooner, besides his individualist anarchist activism, was also an anti-slavery activist and member of the First International.[223] Tucker argued that the elimination of what he called “the four monopolies”the land monopoly, the money and banking monopoly, the monopoly powers conferred by patents and the quasi-monopolistic effects of tariffswould undermine the power of the wealthy and big business, making possible widespread property ownership and higher incomes for ordinary people, while minimizing the power of would-be bosses and achieving socialist goals without state action. Tucker’s anarchist periodical, Liberty, was published from August 1881 to April 1908. The publication, emblazoned with Proudhon’s quote that liberty is “Not the Daughter But the Mother of Order” was instrumental in developing and formalizing the individualist anarchist philosophy through publishing essays and serving as a forum for debate. Contributors included Benjamin Tucker, Lysander Spooner, Auberon Herbert, Dyer Lum, Joshua K. Ingalls, John Henry Mackay, Victor Yarros, Wordsworth Donisthorpe, James L. Walker, J. William Lloyd, Florence Finch Kelly, Voltairine de Cleyre, Steven T. Byington, John Beverley Robinson, Jo Labadie, Lillian Harman and Henry Appleton.[224] Later, Tucker and others abandoned their traditional support of natural rights and converted to an egoism modeled upon the philosophy of Max Stirner.[220] A number of natural rights proponents stopped contributing in protest and “[t]hereafter, Liberty championed egoism, although its general content did not change significantly”.[225] Several publications “were undoubtedly influenced by Liberty’s presentation of egoism. They included: I published by C.L. Swartz, edited by W.E. Gordak and J.W. Lloyd (all associates of Liberty); The Ego and The Egoist, both of which were edited by Edward H. Fulton. Among the egoist papers that Tucker followed were the German Der Eigene, edited by Adolf Brand, and The Eagle and The Serpent, issued from London. The latter, the most prominent English-language egoist journal, was published from 1898 to 1900 with the subtitle ‘A Journal of Egoistic Philosophy and Sociology'”.[225]

By around the start of the 20th century, the heyday of individualist anarchism had passed.[226] H. L. Mencken and Albert Jay Nock were the first prominent figures in the United States to describe themselves as libertarians;[227] they believed Franklin D. Roosevelt had co-opted the word “liberal” for his New Deal policies which they opposed and used “libertarian” to signify their allegiance to individualism.[citation needed] In 1914, Nock joined the staff of The Nation magazine, which at the time was supportive of liberal capitalism. A lifelong admirer of Henry George, Nock went on to become co-editor of The Freeman from 1920 to 1924, a publication initially conceived as a vehicle for the single tax movement, financed by the wealthy wife of the magazine’s other editor, Francis Neilson.[228] Critic H.L. Mencken wrote that “[h]is editorials during the three brief years of the Freeman set a mark that no other man of his trade has ever quite managed to reach. They were well-informed and sometimes even learned, but there was never the slightest trace of pedantry in them”.[229]

Executive Vice President of the Cato Institute, David Boaz, writes: “In 1943, at one of the lowest points for liberty and humanity in history, three remarkable women published books that could be said to have given birth to the modern libertarian movement”.[230] Isabel Paterson’s The God of the Machine, Rose Wilder Lane’s The Discovery of Freedom and Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead each promoted individualism and capitalism. None of the three used the term libertarianism to describe their beliefs and Rand specifically rejected the label, criticizing the burgeoning American libertarian movement as the “hippies of the right”.[231] Rand’s own philosophy, Objectivism, is notedly similar to libertarianism and she accused libertarians of plagiarizing her ideas.[231] Rand stated:

All kinds of people today call themselves “libertarians,” especially something calling itself the New Right, which consists of hippies who are anarchists instead of leftist collectivists; but anarchists are collectivists. Capitalism is the one system that requires absolute objective law, yet libertarians combine capitalism and anarchism. That’s worse than anything the New Left has proposed. It’s a mockery of philosophy and ideology. They sling slogans and try to ride on two bandwagons. They want to be hippies, but don’t want to preach collectivism because those jobs are already taken. But anarchism is a logical outgrowth of the anti-intellectual side of collectivism. I could deal with a Marxist with a greater chance of reaching some kind of understanding, and with much greater respect. Anarchists are the scum of the intellectual world of the Left, which has given them up. So the Right picks up another leftist discard. That’s the libertarian movement.[232]

In 1946, Leonard E. Read founded the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), an American nonprofit educational organization which promotes the principles of laissez-faire economics, private property, and limited government.[233] According to Gary North, former FEE director of seminars and a current Ludwig von Mises Institute scholar, FEE is the “granddaddy of all libertarian organizations”.[234] The initial officers of FEE were Leonard E. Read as President, Austrian School economist Henry Hazlitt as Vice-President and Chairman David Goodrich of B. F. Goodrich. Other trustees on the FEE board have included wealthy industrialist Jasper Crane of DuPont, H. W. Luhnow of William Volker & Co. and Robert Welch, founder of the John Birch Society.[236][237]

Austrian school economist Murray Rothbard was initially an enthusiastic partisan of the Old Right, particularly because of its general opposition to war and imperialism,[238] but long embraced a reading of American history that emphasized the role of elite privilege in shaping legal and political institutions. He was part of Ayn Rand’s circle for a brief period, but later harshly criticized Objectivism.[239] He praised Rand’s Atlas Shrugged and wrote that she “introduced me to the whole field of natural rights and natural law philosophy”, prompting him to learn “the glorious natural rights tradition”.[240](pp121, 132134) He soon broke with Rand over various differences, including his defense of anarchism. Rothbard was influenced by the work of the 19th-century American individualist anarchists[241] and sought to meld their advocacy of free markets and private defense with the principles of Austrian economics.[242] This new philosophy he called anarcho-capitalism.

Karl Hess, a speechwriter for Barry Goldwater and primary author of the Republican Party’s 1960 and 1964 platforms, became disillusioned with traditional politics following the 1964 presidential campaign in which Goldwater lost to Lyndon B. Johnson. He parted with the Republicans altogether after being rejected for employment with the party, and began work as a heavy-duty welder. Hess began reading American anarchists largely due to the recommendations of his friend Murray Rothbard and said that upon reading the works of communist anarchist Emma Goldman, he discovered that anarchists believed everything he had hoped the Republican Party would represent. For Hess, Goldman was the source for the best and most essential theories of Ayn Rand without any of the “crazy solipsism that Rand was so fond of”.[243] Hess and Rothbard founded the journal Left and Right: A Journal of Libertarian Thought, which was published from 1965 to 1968, with George Resch and Leonard P. Liggio. In 1969, they edited The Libertarian Forum 1969, which Hess left in 1971. Hess eventually put his focus on the small scale, stating that “Society is: people together making culture”. He deemed two of his cardinal social principles to be “opposition to central political authority” and “concern for people as individuals”. His rejection of standard American party politics was reflected in a lecture he gave during which he said: “The Democrats or liberals think that everybody is stupid and therefore they need somebody… to tell them how to behave themselves. The Republicans think everybody is lazy”.[244]

The Vietnam War split the uneasy alliance between growing numbers of American libertarians and conservatives who believed in limiting liberty to uphold moral virtues. Libertarians opposed to the war joined the draft resistance and peace movements, as well as organizations such as Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). In 1969 and 1970, Hess joined with others, including Murray Rothbard, Robert LeFevre, Dana Rohrabacher, Samuel Edward Konkin III and former SDS leader Carl Oglesby to speak at two “left-right” conferences which brought together activists from both the Old Right and the New Left in what was emerging as a nascent libertarian movement.[245] As part of his effort to unite right and left-libertarianism, Hess would join the SDS as well as the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), of which he explained: “We used to have a labor movement in this country, until I.W.W. leaders were killed or imprisoned. You could tell labor unions had become captive when business and government began to praise them. They’re destroying the militant black leaders the same way now. If the slaughter continues, before long liberals will be asking, ‘What happened to the blacks? Why aren’t they militant anymore?'”.[246] Rothbard ultimately broke with the left, allying himself instead with the burgeoning paleoconservative movement.[247] He criticized the tendency of these left-libertarians to appeal to “‘free spirits,’ to people who don’t want to push other people around, and who don’t want to be pushed around themselves” in contrast to “the bulk of Americans,” who “might well be tight-assed conformists, who want to stamp out drugs in their vicinity, kick out people with strange dress habits, etc”.[248] This left-libertarian tradition has been carried to the present day by Samuel Edward Konkin III’s agorists, contemporary mutualists such as Kevin Carson and Roderick T. Long and other left-wing market anarchists.[249]

In 1971, a small group of Americans led by David Nolan formed the Libertarian Party,[250] which has run a presidential candidate every election year since 1972. Other libertarian organizations, such as the Center for Libertarian Studies and the Cato Institute, were also formed in the 1970s.[251] Philosopher John Hospers, a one-time member of Rand’s inner circle, proposed a non-initiation of force principle to unite both groups, but this statement later became a required “pledge” for candidates of the Libertarian Party and Hospers became its first presidential candidate in 1972.[citation needed] In the 1980s, Hess joined the Libertarian Party and served as editor of its newspaper from 1986 to 1990.

Modern libertarianism gained significant recognition in academia with the publication of Harvard University professor Robert Nozick’s Anarchy, State, and Utopia in 1974, for which he received a National Book Award in 1975.[252] In response to John Rawls’s A Theory of Justice, Nozick’s book supported a nightwatchman state on the grounds that it was an inevitable phenomenon which could arise without violating individual rights.[253]

In the early 1970s, Rothbard wrote that “[o]ne gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, ‘our side,’ had captured a crucial word from the enemy… ‘Libertarians’… had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over”.[254] Since the resurgence of neoliberalism in the 1970s, this modern American libertarianism has spread beyond North America via think tanks and political parties.[255][256]

A surge of popular interest in libertarian socialism occurred in western nations during the 1960s and 1970s.[257] Anarchism was influential in the Counterculture of the 1960s[258][259][260] and anarchists actively participated in the late sixties students and workers revolts.[261] In 1968, the International of Anarchist Federations was founded in Carrara, Italy during an international anarchist conference held there in 1968 by the three existing European federations of France, the Italian and the Iberian Anarchist Federation as well as the Bulgarian federation in French exile.[173][262] The uprisings of May 1968 also led to a small resurgence of interest in left communist ideas. Various small left communist groups emerged around the world, predominantly in the leading capitalist countries. A series of conferences of the communist left began in 1976, with the aim of promoting international and cross-tendency discussion, but these petered out in the 1980s without having increased the profile of the movement or its unity of ideas.[263] Left communist groups existing today include the International Communist Party, International Communist Current and the Internationalist Communist Tendency. The housing and employment crisis in most of Western Europe led to the formation of communes and squatter movements like that of Barcelona, Spain. In Denmark, squatters occupied a disused military base and declared the Freetown Christiania, an autonomous haven in central Copenhagen.

Around the turn of the 21st century, libertarian socialism grew in popularity and influence as part of the anti-war, anti-capitalist and anti-globalisation movements.[264] Anarchists became known for their involvement in protests against the meetings of the World Trade Organization (WTO), Group of Eight and the World Economic Forum. Some anarchist factions at these protests engaged in rioting, property destruction and violent confrontations with police. These actions were precipitated by ad hoc, leaderless, anonymous cadres known as black blocs and other organisational tactics pioneered in this time include security culture, affinity groups and the use of decentralised technologies such as the internet.[264] A significant event of this period was the confrontations at WTO conference in Seattle in 1999.[264] For English anarchist scholar Simon Critchley, “contemporary anarchism can be seen as a powerful critique of the pseudo-libertarianism of contemporary neo-liberalism…One might say that contemporary anarchism is about responsibility, whether sexual, ecological or socio-economic; it flows from an experience of conscience about the manifold ways in which the West ravages the rest; it is an ethical outrage at the yawning inequality, impoverishment and disenfranchisment that is so palpable locally and globally”.[265] This might also have been motivated by “the collapse of ‘really existing socialism’ and the capitulation to neo-liberalism of Western social democracy”.[266]

Libertarian socialists in the early 21st century have been involved in the alter-globalization movement, squatter movement; social centers; infoshops; anti-poverty groups such as Ontario Coalition Against Poverty and Food Not Bombs; tenants’ unions; housing cooperatives; intentional communities generally and egalitarian communities; anti-sexist organizing; grassroots media initiatives; digital media and computer activism; experiments in participatory economics; anti-racist and anti-fascist groups like Anti-Racist Action and Anti-Fascist Action; activist groups protecting the rights of immigrants and promoting the free movement of people, such as the No Border network; worker co-operatives, countercultural and artist groups; and the peace movement.

In the United States, polls (circa 2006) find that the views and voting habits of between 10 and 20 percent (and increasing) of voting age Americans may be classified as “fiscally conservative and socially liberal, or libertarian”.[267][268] This is based on pollsters and researchers defining libertarian views as fiscally conservative and socially liberal (based on the common United States meanings of the terms) and against government intervention in economic affairs and for expansion of personal freedoms.[267] Through 20 polls on this topic spanning 13 years, Gallup found that voters who are libertarian on the political spectrum ranged from 1723% of the United States electorate.[269] However, a 2014 Pew Poll found that 23% of Americans who identify as libertarians have no idea what the word means.[270]

2009 saw the rise of the Tea Party movement, an American political movement known for advocating a reduction in the United States national debt and federal budget deficit by reducing government spending and taxes, which had a significant libertarian component[271] despite having contrasts with libertarian values and views in some areas, such as nationalism, free trade, social issues and immigration.[272] A 2011 Reason-Rupe poll found that among those who self-identified as Tea Party supporters, 41 percent leaned libertarian and 59 percent socially conservative.[273] The movement, named after the Boston Tea Party, also contains conservative[274] and populist elements[275] and has sponsored multiple protests and supported various political candidates since 2009. Tea Party activities have declined since 2010 with the number of chapters across the country slipping from about 1,000 to 600.[276][277] Mostly, Tea Party organizations are said to have shifted away from national demonstrations to local issues.[276] Following the selection of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney’s 2012 vice presidential running mate, The New York Times declared that Tea Party lawmakers are no longer a fringe of the conservative coalition, but now “indisputably at the core of the modern Republican Party”.[278]

In 2012, anti-war presidential candidates (Libertarian Republican Ron Paul and Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson) raised millions of dollars and garnered millions of votes despite opposition to their obtaining ballot access by Democrats and Republicans.[279] The 2012 Libertarian National Convention, which saw Gary Johnson and James P. Gray nominated as the 2012 presidential ticket for the Libertarian Party, resulted in the most successful result for a third-party presidential candidacy since 2000 and the best in the Libertarian Party’s history by vote number. Johnson received 1% of the popular vote, amounting to more than 1.2 million votes.[280][281] Johnson has expressed a desire to win at least 5 percent of the vote so that the Libertarian Party candidates could get equal ballot access and federal funding, thus subsequently ending the two-party system.[282][283][284]

Since the 1950s, many American libertarian organizations have adopted a free market stance, as well as supporting civil liberties and non-interventionist foreign policies. These include the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Francisco Marroqun University, the Foundation for Economic Education, Center for Libertarian Studies, the Cato Institute and Liberty International. The activist Free State Project, formed in 2001, works to bring 20,000 libertarians to New Hampshire to influence state policy.[285] Active student organizations include Students for Liberty and Young Americans for Liberty.

A number of countries have libertarian parties that run candidates for political office. In the United States, the Libertarian Party was formed in 1972 and is the third largest[286][287] American political party, with over 370,000 registered voters in the 35 states that allow registration as a Libertarian[288] and has hundreds of party candidates elected or appointed to public office.[289]

Current international anarchist federations which sometimes identify themselves as libertarian include the International of Anarchist Federations, the International Workers’ Association, and International Libertarian Solidarity. The largest organised anarchist movement today is in Spain, in the form of the Confederacin General del Trabajo (CGT) and the CNT. CGT membership was estimated to be around 100,000 for 2003.[290] Other active syndicalist movements include the Central Organisation of the Workers of Sweden and the Swedish Anarcho-syndicalist Youth Federation in Sweden; the Unione Sindacale Italiana in Italy; Workers Solidarity Alliance in the United States; and Solidarity Federation in the United Kingdom. The revolutionary industrial unionist Industrial Workers of the World claiming 2,000 paying members as well as the International Workers Association, an anarcho-syndicalist successor to the First International, also remain active. In the United States, there exists the Common Struggle Libertarian Communist Federation.

Criticism of libertarianism includes ethical, economic, environmental, pragmatic, and philosophical concerns.[291] It has also been argued that laissez-faire capitalism does not necessarily produce the best or most efficient outcome,[292] nor does its policy of deregulation prevent the abuse of natural resources. Furthermore, libertarianism has been criticized as utopian due to the lack of any such societies today.

Critics such as Corey Robin describe right-libertarianism as fundamentally a reactionary conservative ideology, united with more traditional conservative thought and goals by a desire to enforce hierarchical power and social relations:[293]

Conservatism, then, is not a commitment to limited government and libertyor a wariness of change, a belief in evolutionary reform, or a politics of virtue. These may be the byproducts of conservatism, one or more of its historically specific and ever-changing modes of expression. But they are not its animating purpose. Neither is conservatism a makeshift fusion of capitalists, Christians, and warriors, for that fusion is impelled by a more elemental forcethe opposition to the liberation of men and women from the fetters of their superiors, particularly in the private sphere. Such a view might seem miles away from the libertarian defense of the free market, with its celebration of the atomistic and autonomous individual. But it is not. When the libertarian looks out upon society, he does not see isolated individuals; he sees private, often hierarchical, groups, where a father governs his family and an owner his employees.

John Donahue argues that if political power were radically shifted to local authorities, parochial local interests would predominate at the expense of the whole and that this would exacerbate current problems with collective action.[294]

Michael Lind has observed that of the 195 countries in the world today, none have fully actualized a libertarian society:

If libertarianism was a good idea, wouldn’t at least one country have tried it? Wouldn’t there be at least one country, out of nearly two hundred, with minimal government, free trade, open borders, decriminalized drugs, no welfare state and no public education system?[295]

Lind has also criticised libertarianism, particularly the right-wing and free market variant of the ideology, as being incompatible with democracy and apologetic towards autocracy.[296]

More:

Libertarianism – Wikipedia

6 Reasons Why I Gave Up On Libertarianism Return Of Kings

These days, libertarianism tends to be quite discredited. It is now associated with the goofy candidature of Gary Johnson, having a rather narrow range of issueslegalize weed! less taxes!, cucking ones way to politics through sweeping all the embarrassing problems under the carpet, then surrendering to liberal virtue-signaling and endorsing anti-white diversity.

Now, everyone on the Alt-Right, manosphere und so wieser is laughing at those whose adhesion to a bunch of abstract premises leads to endorse globalist capital, and now that Trump officially heads the State, wed be better off if some private companies were nationalized than let to shadowy overlords.

To Americans, libertarianism has been a constant background presence. Its main icons, be them Ayn Rand, Murray Rothbard or Friedrich Hayek, were always read and discussed here and there, and never fell into oblivion although they barely had media attention. The academic and political standing of libertarianism may be marginal, it has always been granted small platforms and resurrected from time to time in the public landscape, one of the most conspicuous examples of it being the Tea Party demonstrations.

To a frog like yours trulyKek being now praised by thousands of well-meaning memers, I can embrace the frog moniker gladlylibertarianism does not have the same standing at all. In French universities, libertarian thinkers are barely discussed, even in classes that are supposed to tackle economics: for one hour spent talking about Hayek, Keynes easily enjoys ten, and the same goes on when comparing the attention given to, respectively, Adam Smith and Karl Marx.

On a wider perspective, a lot of the contemporary French identity is built on Jacobinism, i.e. on crushing underfoot organic regional sociability in the name of a bureaucratized and Masonic republic. The artificial construction of France is exactly the kind of endeavour libertarianism loathes. No matter why the public choices school, for example, is barely studied here: pompous leftist teachers and mediocre fonctionnaires are too busy gushing about themselves, sometimes hiding the emptiness of their life behind a ridiculous epic narrative that turns social achievements into heroic feats, to give a fair hearing to pertinent criticism.

When I found out about libertarianism, I was already sick of the dominant fifty shades of leftism political culture. The gloomy mediocrity of small bureaucrats, including most school teachers, combined with their petty political righteousness, always repelled me. Thus, the discovery oflaissez-faire advocates felt like stumbling on an entirely new scene of thoughtand my initial feeling was vindicated when I found about the naturalism often associated with it, something refreshing and intuitively more satisfying than the mainstream culture-obsessed, biology-denying view.

Libertarianism looked like it could solve everything. More entrepreneurship, more rights to those who actually create wealth and live through the good values of personal responsibility and work ethic, less parasitesbe they bureaucrats or immigrants, no more repressive speech laws. Coincidentally, a new translation of Ayn Rands Atlas Shrugged was published at this time: I devoured it, loving the sense of life, the heroism, the epic, the generally great and achieving ethos contained in it. Arent John Galt and Hank Rearden more appealing than any corrupt politician or beta bureaucrat that pretends to be altruistic while backstabbing his own colleagues and parasitizing the country?

Now, although I still support small-scale entrepreneurship wholeheartedly, I would never defend naked libertarianism, and here is why.

Part of the Rothschild family, where nepotism and consanguinity keep the money in

Unity makes strength, and trust is much easier to cultivate in a small group where everyone truly belongs than in an anonymous great society. Some ethnic groups, especially whites, tend to be instinctively individualistic, with a lot of people favouring personal liberty over belonging, while others, especially Jews, tend to favor extended family business and nepotism.

On a short-term basis, mobile individuals can do better than those who are bound to many social obligations. On the long run, however, extended families manage to create an environment of trust and concentrate capital. And whereas individuals may start cheating each other or scattering their wealth away, thanks to having no proper economic network, families and tribes will be able to invest heavily in some of their members and keep their wealth inside. This has been true for Jewish families, wherever their members work as moneylenders or diamond dealers, for Asians investing in new restaurants or any other business project of their own, and for North Africans taking over pubs and small shops in France.

The latter example is especially telling. White bartenders, butchers, grocers and the like have been chased off French suburbs by daily North African and black violence. No one helped them, everyone being afraid of getting harassed as well and busy with their own business. (Yep, just like what happened and still happens in Rotheram.) As a result, these isolated, unprotected shop-owners sold their outlet for a cheap price and fled. North Africans always covered each others violence and replied in groups against any hurdle, whereas whites lowered their heads and hoped not to be next on the list.

Atlas Shrugged was wrong. Loners get wrecked by groups. Packs of hyenas corner and eat the lone dog.

Libertarianism is not good for individuals on the long runit turns them into asocial weaklings, soon to be legally enslaved by global companies or beaten by groups, be they made of nepotistic family members or thugs.

How the middle classes end up after jobs have been sent overseas and wages lowered

People often believe, thanks to Leftist media and cuckservative posturing, that libertarians are big bosses. This is mostly, if not entirely, false. Most libertarians are middle class guys who want more opportunities, less taxation, and believe that libertarianism will help them to turn into successful entrepreneurs. They may be right in very specific circumstances: during the 2000s, small companies overturned the market of electronics, thus benefiting both to their independent founders and to society as a whole; but ultimately, they got bought by giants like Apple and Google, who are much better off when backed by a corrupt State than on a truly free market.

Libertarianism is a fake alternative, just as impossible to realize as communism: far from putting everyone at its place, it lets ample room to mafias, monopolies, unemployment caused by mechanization and global competition. If one wants the middle classes to survive, one must protect the employment and relative independence of its membersbankers and billionaires be damned.

Spontaneous order helped by a weak government. I hope they at least smoke weed.

A good feature of libertarianism is that it usually goes along with a positive stance on biology and human nature, in contrast with the everything is cultural and ought to be deconstructed left. However, this stance often leads to an exaggerated optimism about human nature. In a society of laissez-faire, the libertarians say, people flourish and the order appears spontaneously.

Well, this is plainly false. As all of the great religions say, after what Christians call the Fall, man is a sinner. If you let children flourish without moral standards and role models, they become spoiled, entitled, manipulative, emotionally fragile and deprived of self-control. If you let women flourish without suspicion, you let free rein to their propensities to hypergamy, hysteria, self-entitlement and everything we can witness in them today. If you let men do as they please, you let them become greedy, envious, and turning into bullies. As a Muslim proverb says, people must be flogged to enter into paradiseand as Aristotle put forth, virtues are trained dispositions, no matter the magnitude of innate talents and propensities.

Michelle The Man Obama and Lying Crooked at a Democrat meeting

When the laissez-faire rules, some will succeed on the market more than others, due to differences in investment, work, and natural abilities. Some will succeed enough to be able to buy someone elses business: this is the natural consequence of differences in wealth and of greed. When corrupt politicians enter the game, things become worse, as they will usually help some large business owners to shield their position against competitorsat the expense of most people, who then lose their independence and live off a wage.

At the end, what we get is a handful of very wealthy individuals who have managed to concentrate most capital and power levers into their hands and a big crowd of low-wage employees ready to cut each others throat for a small promotion, and females waiting in line to get notched by the one per cent while finding the other ninety-nine per cent boring.

Censorship by massive social pressure, monopoly over the institutions and crybullying is perfectly legal. What could go wrong?

On the surface, libertarianism looks good here, because it protects the individuals rights against left-hailing Statism and cuts off the welfare programs that have attracted dozens of millions of immigrants. Beneath, however, things are quite dire. Libertarianism enshrines the leftists right to free speech they abuse from, allows the pressure tactics used by radicals, and lets freethinking individuals getting singled out by SJWs as long as these do not resort to overt stealing or overt physical violence. As for the immigrants, libertarianism tends to oppose the very notion of non-private boundaries, thus letting the local cultures and identities defenseless against both greedy capitalists and subproletarian masses.

Supporting an ideology that allows the leftists to destroy society more or less legally equates to cucking, plain and simple. Desiring an ephemeral cohabitation with rabid ideological warriors is stupid. We should aim at a lasting victory, not at pretending to constrain them through useless means.

Am I the only one to find that Gary Johnson looks like a snail (Spongebob notwithstanding)?

In 2013, one of the rare French libertarians academic teachers, Jean-Louis Caccomo, was forced into a mental ward at the request of his university president. He then spent more than a year getting drugged. Mr. Caccomo had no real psychological problem: his confinement was part of a vicious strategy of pathologization and career-destruction that was already used by the Soviets. French libertarians could have wide denounced the abuse. Nonetheless, most of them freaked out, and almost no one dared to actually defend him publicly.

Why should rational egoists team up and risk their careers to defend one of themselves after all? They would rather posture at confidential social events, rail at organic solidarity and protectionism, or trolling the shit out of individuals of their own social milieu because Ive got the right to mock X, its my right to free speech! The few libertarian people I knew firsthand, the few events I have witnessed in that small milieu, were enough to give me serious doubts about libertarianism: how can a good political ideology breed such an unhealthy mindset?

Political ideologies are tools. They are not ends in themselves. All forms of government arent fit for any people or any era. Political actors must know at least the most important ones to get some inspiration, but ultimately, said actors win on the ground, not in philosophical debates.

Individualism, mindless consumerism, careerism, hedonism are part of the problem. Individual rights granted regardless of ones abilities, situation, and identity are a disaster. Time has come to overcome modernity, not stall in one of its false alternatives. The merchant caste must be regulated, though neither micromanaged or hampered by a parasitic bureaucracy nor denied its members right for small-scale independence. Individual rights must be conditional, boundaries must be restored, minority identities based on anti-white male resentment must be crushed so they cannot devour sociability from the inside again, and the pater familias must assert himself anew.

Long live the State and protectionism as long as they defend the backbone of society and healthy relationships between the sexes, and no quarter for those who think they have a right to wage grievance-mongering against us, no matter if they want to use the State or private companies. At the end, the socialism-libertarianism dichotomy is quite secondary.

Read Next: Sugar Baby Culture In The US Is Creating A Marketplace for Prostitution

More here:

6 Reasons Why I Gave Up On Libertarianism Return Of Kings

Can Libertarianism Be a Governing Philosophy?

The discussion we are about to have naturally divides itself into two aspects:

First: Could libertarianism, if implemented, sustain a state apparatus and not devolve into autocracy or anarchy? By that I mean the lawless versions of autocracy and anarchy, not stable monarchy or emergent rule of law without a state. Second: even if the answer were Yesor, Yes, if . . . we would still need to know whether enough citizens desired a libertarian order that it could feasibly be voluntarily chosen. That is, I am ruling out involuntary imposition by force of libertarianism as a governing philosophy.

I will address both questions, but want to assert at the outset that the first is the more important and more fundamental one. If the answer to it is No, there is no point in moving on to the second question. If the answer is Yes, it may be possible to change peoples minds about accepting a libertarian order.

The Destinationalists

As I have argued elsewhere[1], there are two main paths to deriving libertarian principles, destinations and directions. The destinationist approach shares the method of most other ethical paradigms: the enunciation of timeless moral and ethical precepts that describe the ideal libertarian society.

What makes for a distinctly libertarian set of principles is two precepts:

The extreme forms of these principles, for destinationists, can be hard for outsiders to accept. One example is noted by Matt Zwolinski, who cites opinion data gathered from libertarians by Liberty magazine and presented in its periodic Liberty Poll. A survey question frequently included in the survey was:

Suppose that you are on a friends balcony on the 50th floor of a condominium complex. You trip, stumble and fall over the edge. You catch a flagpole on the next floor down. The owner opens his window and demands you stop trespassing.

Zwolinski writes that in 1988, 84 percent of respondents to the flagpole question

said they believed that in such circumstances they should enter the owners residence against the owners wishes. 2% (one respondent) said that they should let go and fall to their death, and 15% said they should hang on and wait for somebody to throw them a rope. In 1999, the numbers were 86%, 1%, and 13%. In 2008, they were 89.2%, 0.9%, and 9.9%.

The interesting thing is that, while the answers to the flagpole question were almost unchanged over time, with a slight upward drift in those who would aggress by trespassing, support for the non-aggression principle itself plummeted. Writes Zwolinski:

Respondents were asked to say whether they agreed or disagreed with [the non-aggression principle]. In 1988, a full 90% of respondents said that they agreed. By 1999, however, the percentage expressing agreement had dropped by almost half to 50%. And by 2008, it was down to 39.7%.

If we take support for the non-aggression principle as a Rorschach test, it does not appear that most people, maybe not even everyone who identifies as a libertarian, are fully convinced that the principle is an absolute categorical moral principle.

The Directionalists

Of course, it could be true that many who identify now as libertarians, and those who might be attracted to libertarianism in the future, are directionalists. A directional approach holds that any policy action that increases the liberty and welfare of individuals is an improvement, and should be supported by libertarians, even if the policy itself violates either the self-ownership principle or the non-aggression principle.

A useful example here might be school vouchers. Instead of being a monopoly provider of public school education, the state might specialize in funding but leave the provision of education at least partly to private sector actors. The destinationist would object (and correctly) that the policy still involves the initiation of violence in collecting taxes involuntarily imposed on at least individuals who would not pay without the threat of coercion. In contrast, the directionalist might support vouchers, since parents would at least be afforded more liberty in choosing schools for their children, and the system would be subject to more competition, thus holding providers responsible for the quality of education being delivered.

Here, then, is a slightly modified take on the central question: Would a hybrid version of libertarianism, one that advocated for the destination but accepted directional improvements, be a viable governing philosophy? Even with this amendment, allowing for directional improvements as part of the core governing philosophy, is libertarianismto use a trope of the momentsustainable? The reason this approach could be useful is that it correlates to one of the great divisions within the libertarian movement: the split between political anarchists, who believe that any coercive state apparatus is ultimately incompatible with liberty, and the minarchists, who believe that a limited government is desirable, even necessary, and that it is also possible.

Limiting Leviathan: Getting Power to Stay Where You Put It

For a state to be consistent with both the self-ownership principle and the non-aggression principle, there must be certain core rights to property, expression, and action that are inviolable. This inviolability extends even to situations where initiating force would greatly benefit most people, meaning that consequentialist considerations cannot outweigh the rights of individuals.

Where might such a state originate, and how could it be continually limited to only those functions for which it was originally justified? One common answer is a form of contractarianism. (Another is convention, which is beyond the scope in this essay. See Robert Sugden[2] and Gerard Gaus[3] for a review of some of the issues.) This is not to say that actual states are the results of explicitly contractual arrangements; rather, there is an as if element: rational citizens in a state of nature would have voluntarily consented to the limited coercion of a minarchist state, given the substantial and universal improvement in welfare that results from having a provider of public goods and a neutral enforcer of contracts. Without a state, claims the minarchist, these two functionspublic goods provision and contract enforcementare either impossible or so difficult as to make the move to create a coercive state universally welcome for all citizens.

Contractarianism is of course an enormous body of work in philosophy, ranging from Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau to David Gauthier and John Rawls. Our contractarians, the libertarian versions, start with James Buchanan and Jan Narveson. Buchanans contractarianism is stark: Rules start with us, and the justification for coercion is, but can only be, our consent to being coerced. It is not clear that Buchanan would accept the full justification of political authority by tacit contract, but Buchanan also claims that each group in society should start from where we are now, meaning that changes in the rules require something as close to unanimous consent as possible.[4]

Narvesons view is closer to the necessary evil claim for justifying government. We need a way to be secure from violence, and to be able to enter into binding agreements that are enforceable. He wrote in The Libertarian Idea (1988) that there is no alternative that can provide reasons to everyone for accepting it, no matter what their personal values or philosophy of life may be, and thus motivating this informal, yet society-wide institution. He goes on to say:

Without resort to obfuscating intuitions, of self-evident rights and the like, the contractarian view offers an intelligible account both of why it is rational to want a morality and of what, broadly speaking, the essentials of that morality must consist in: namely, those general rules that are universally advantageous to rational agents. We each need morality, first because we are vulnerable to the depredations of others, and second because we can all benefit from cooperation with others. So we need protection, in the form of the ability to rely on our fellows not to engage in activities harmful to us; and we need to be able to rely on those with whom we deal. We each need this regardless of what else we need or value.

The problem, or so the principled political anarchist would answer, is that Leviathan cannot be limited unless for some reason Leviathan wants to limit itself.

One of the most interesting proponent of this view is Anthony de Jasay, an independent philosopher of political economy. Jasay would not dispute the value of credible commitments for contracts. His quarrel comes when contractarians invoke a founding myth. When I think of the Social Contract (the capitals signify how important it is!), I am reminded of that scene from Monty Python where King Arthur is talking to the peasants:

King Arthur: I am your king.

Woman: Well, I didnt vote for you.

King Arthur: You dont vote for kings.

Woman: Well howd you become king then?

[holy music . . . ]

King Arthur: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king.

Dennis: [interrupting] Listen, strange women lyin in ponds distributin swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

According to Jasay, there are two distinct problems with contractarian justifications for the state. Each, separately and independently, is fatal for the project, in his view. Together they put paid to the notion that a libertarian could favor minarchism.

The first problem is the enforceable contracts justification. The second is the limiting Leviathan problem.

The usual statement of the first comes from Hobbes: Covenants, without the sword, are but words. That means that individuals cannot enter into binding agreements without some third party to enforce the agreement. Since entering into binding agreements is a central precondition for mutually beneficial exchange and broad-scale market cooperation, we need a powerful, neutral enforcer. So, we all agree on that; the enforcer collects the taxes that we all agreed on and, in exchange, enforces all our contracts for us. (See John Thrasher[5] for some caveats.)

Butwait. Jasay compares this to jumping over your own shadow. If contracts cannot be enforced save by coercion from a third party, how can the contract between citizens and the state be enforced? [I]t takes courage to affirm that rational people could unanimously wish to have a sovereign contract enforcer bound by no contract, wrote Jasay in his book Against Politics (1997). By courage he does not intend a compliment. Either those who make this claim are contradicting themselves (since we cant have contracts, well use a contract to solve the problem) or the argument is circular (cooperation requires enforceable contracts, but these require a norm of cooperation).

Jasay put the question this way in On Treating Like Cases Alike: Review of Politics by Principle Not Interest, his 1999 essay in the Independent Review:

If man can no more bind himself by contract than he can jump over his own shadow, how can he jump over his own shadow and bind himself in a social contract? He cannot be both incapable of collective action and capable of it when creating the coercive agency needed to enforce his commitment. One can, without resorting to a bootstrap theory, accept the idea of an exogenous coercive agent, a conqueror whose regime is better than anything the conquered people could organize for themselves. Consenting to such an accomplished fact, however, can hardly be represented as entering into a contract, complete with a contracts ethical implications of an act of free will. [Emphasis in original]

In sum, the former claimthat contracts cannot be enforcedcannot then be used to conjure enforceable contracts out of a shadow. The latter claimthat people will cooperate on their ownmeans that no state is necessary in the first place. The conclusion Jasay reaches is that states, if they exist, may well be able to compel people to obey. The usual argument goes like this:

The state exists and enjoys the monopoly of the use of force for some reason, probably a historical one, that we need not inquire into. What matters is that without the state, society could not function tolerably, if at all. Therefore all rational persons would choose to enter into a social contract to create it. Indeed, we should regard the state as if it were the result of our social contract, hence indisputably legitimate.[6]

Jasay concludes that this argument must be false. As Robert Nozick famously put it in Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974), tacit consent isnt worth the paper its not written on. We cannot confect a claim that states deserve our obedience based on consent. For consent is what true political authority requires: not that our compliance can be compelled, but that the state deserves our compliance. Ordered anarchy with no formal state is therefore a better solution, in Jasays view, because consent is either not real or is not enough.

Of course, this is simply an extension of a long tradition in libertarian thought, dating at least to Lysander Spooner. As Spooner said:

If the majority, however large, of the people of a country, enter into a contract of government, called a constitution, by which they agree to aid, abet or accomplish any kind of injustice, or to destroy or invade the natural rights of any person or persons whatsoever, whether such persons be parties to the compact or not, this contract of government is unlawful and voidand for the same reason that a treaty between two nations for a similar purpose, or a contract of the same nature between two individuals, is unlawful and void. Such a contract of government has no moral sanction. It confers no rightful authority upon those appointed to administer it. It confers no legal or moral rights, and imposes no legal or moral obligation upon the people who are parties to it. The only duties, which any one can owe to it, or to the government established under color of its authority, are disobedience, resistance, destruction.[7]

Now for the other problem highlighted by Jasay, that of limiting Leviathan. Let us assume the best of state officials: that they genuinely intend to do good. We might make the standard Public Choice assumption that officials want to use power to benefit themselves, but let us put that aside; instead, officials genuinely want to improve the lives of their citizens.

This means a minarchist state is not sustainable. Officials, thinking of the society as a collective rather than as individuals with inviolable rights, will immediately discover opportunities to raise taxes, and create new programs and new powers that benefit those in need. In fact, it is precisely the failure of the Public Choice assumptions of narrow self-interest that ensure this outcome. It might be possible in theory to design a principal-agent system of bureaucratic contract that constrains selfish officials. But if state power attracts those who are willing to sacrifice the lives or welfare of some for the greater good, then minarchy is quickly breached and Leviathan swells without the possibility of constraint.

I hasten to add that it need not be true, for Jasays claim to go through, that the concept of the greater good have any empirical content. It is enough that a few people believe, and can brandish the greater good like a truncheon, smashing rules and laws designed to stop the expansion of state power. No one who wants to do good will pass up a chance to do good, even if it means changing the rules. This process is much like that described by F.A. Hayek in Why the Worst Get on Top (see Chapter 10 of The Road to Serfdom) or Bertrand de Jouvenels Power (1945).

So, again, we reach a contradiction: Either 1) minarchy is not possible, because it is overwhelmed by the desire to do good, or minarchy is not legitimate because it is based on a mythical tacit consent; or 2) no state, minarchist or otherwise, is necessary because people can limit their actions on their own. Citizens might conclude that such self-imposed limits on their own actions are morally required, and that reputation and competition can limit the extent of depredation and reward cooperation in settings with repeated interaction. Jasay would argue, then, that constitutions and parchment barriers are either unnecessary (if people are self-governing) or ineffective (if they are not). Leviathan either cannot exist or else it is illimitable.

But Thats Not Enough

What I have argued so far is that destinationist libertarianism that is fully faithful to the self-ownership principle and the non-aggression principle could not be an effective governing philosophy. The only exception to this claim would be if libertarianism were universally believed, and people all agreed to govern themselves in the absence of a coercive state apparatus of any kind. Of course, one could object that even then something like a state would emerge, because of the economies of scale in the provision of defense, leading to a dominant protection network as described by Nozick. Whether that structure of service-delivery is necessarily a state is an interesting question, but not central to our current inquiry.

My own view is that libertarianism is, and in fact should be, a philosophy of governing that is robust and useful. But then I am a thoroughgoing directionalist. The state and its deputized coercive instruments have expanded the scope and intensity of their activities far beyond what people need to achieve cooperative goals, and beyond what they want in terms of immanent intrusions into our private lives.

Given the constant push and pull of politics, and the desire of groups to create and maintain rents for themselves, the task of leaning into the prevailing winds of statism will never be done. But it is a coherent and useful governing philosophy. When someone asks how big the state should be, there arent many people who think the answer is zero. But thats not on the table, anyway. My answer is smaller than it is now. Any policy change that grants greater autonomy (but also responsibility) to individual citizens, or that lessens government control over private action, is desirable; and libertarians are crucial for providing compelling intellectual justifications for why this is so.

In short, I dont advocate abandoning destinationist debates. The positing of an ideal is an important device for recruitment and discussion. But at this point we have been going in the wrong direction, for decades. It should be possible to find allies and fellow travelers. They may want to get off the train long before we arrive at the end of the line, but for many miles our paths toward smaller government follow the same track.

[1] Michael Munger, Basic Income Is Not an Obligation, but It Might Be a Legitimate Choice, Basic Income Studies 6:2 (December 2011), 1-13.

[2] Robert Sugden, Can a Humean Be a Contractarian? in Perspectives in Moral Science, edited by Michael Baurmann and Bernd Lahno, Frankfurt School Verlag (2009), 1123.

[3] Gerald Gaus, Why the Conventionalist Needs the Social Contract (and Vice Versa), Rationality, Markets and Morals, Frankfurt School Verlag, 4 (2013), 7187.

[4] For more on the foundation of Buchanans thought, see my forthcoming essay in the Review of Austrian Economics, Thirty Years After the Nobel: James Buchanans Political Philosophy.

[5] John Thrasher, Uniqueness and Symmetry in Bargaining Theories of Justice, Philosophical Studies 167 (2014), 683699.

[6] Anthony de Jasay, Pious Lies: The Justification of States and Welfare States, Economic Affairs 24:2 (2004), 63-64.

[7] Lysander Spooner, The Unconstitutionality of Slavery (Boston: Bela Marsh, 1860), pp. 9-10.

Follow this link:

Can Libertarianism Be a Governing Philosophy?

Cyborg (comics) – Wikipedia

Victor Stone is the son of Silas Stone and Elinore Stone, scientists who use him as a test subject for various intelligence enhancement projects. While these treatments are ultimately successful and Victor’s IQ subsequently grows to genius levels, he grows to resent his treatment. He strikes up a friendship with Ron Evers, a young miscreant who leads him into trouble with the law. This is the beginning of a struggle in which Victor strives for independence, engaging in pursuits of which his parents disapprove, such as athletics and abandoning his studies. Victor’s association with underage criminals leads him down a dark path in which he is often injured, but he still lives a “normal” life in which he is able to make his own decisions. He occasionally refuses to participate in Evers’ grandiose plans of racially motivated terrorism.

Victor joins the Teen Titans, initially for the benefit of a support group of kindred spirits and freaks, and has remained with that group ever since.[1] His teammates are like a group of juveniles who are adjusting to their own prosthetics for they idolize him because of his fancy parts and his exciting adventures. It also turns out that their beautiful teacher Sarah Simms, who has often assisted Cyborg and the Titans, admires him as well.

Another person who sees past the cybernetic shell is Dr. Sarah Charles, a S.T.A.R. Labs scientist who helps him to recuperate after having his cybernetic parts replaced. Cyborg and Dr. Charles date for some time and she, along with Changeling, keeps trying to reach him when he is seemingly mindless following the severe injuries he incurs during the “Titans Hunt” storyline.[citation needed]

Although Cyborg’s body was repaired by a team of Russian scientists after the missile crash he had been in, albeit with more mechanical parts than previously, his mind was not. Eventually, his mind was restored by an alien race of computer intelligences called the Technis, created from the sexual union of Swamp Thing and a machine-planet when Swamp Thing was travelling through space. Cyborg, however, had to remain with the Technis both to maintain his mind and because, in return for restoring him, he had to teach them about humanity. He took the name Cyberion, and gradually started becoming less human in outlook, connecting entirely to the Technis planet.

Eventually, Cyberion returned to Earth, establishing a Technis construct on the moon and a smaller base on Earth. With Vic’s consciousness dormant, but his desire for companionship controlling the actions of the Technis’ planet, it began kidnapping former Titans members, his conscious mind so suppressed that he was not only searching for deceased Titans, but even sent one probe looking for himself as Cyborg. He ended up plugging them into virtual reality scenarios, representing what he believed to be their “perfect worlds”; for example, Beast Boy was back with the Doom Patrol, Damage was spending time being congratulated by the Justice Society as a true hero, and Nightwing was confronted by a Batman who actually smiled and offered to talk about their relationship. Although the Titans were freed, there was a strong disagreement between them and the Justice League over what action to take; the League believed that there was nothing left of Victor to save, whereas the Titans were willing to try, culminating in a brief battle, where the Atom and Catwoman (who had followed the Justice League to investigate) sided with the League while the Flash fought with the Titans. While Vic was distracted trying to aid his friends, a Titans team consisting of Changeling and the original five Titans were sent by Raven to try making contact with Vic’s human side, while Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, the Martian Manhunter, Power Girl, Captain Marvel, and Mary Marvel moved the moon back to its proper place. Eventually, thanks primarily to Changeling’s encouragement, and Omen and Raven holding Vic together long enough to come up with a plan, Vic’s consciousness was restored, and “downloaded” into the Omegadrome, a morphing war-suit belonging to former Titan Minion. In the wake of this event, the Titans reformed and Vic was part of the new group.[1] However, he felt less human than ever before.

Shortly after this, Nightwing revealed he had cloned Vic’s body, and by flowing the Omegadrome through the clone, Vic regained his human form, but still had the abilities of the Omegadrome. He often used the Omegadrome to recreate his original look in battle. With his newfound humanity, Vic took a leave of absence, moving first to L.A. with Beast Boy and then to Central City. While in Central City, Vic was involved in one of the Thinker’s schemes, helping Wally hack the Thinker’s attempt to plug himself into the minds of Central City’s population so that Wally could outthink his opponent, though Vic lost the abilities of the Omegadrome in the process.

Vic mentored the new incarnation of the Teen Titans, consisting mainly of sidekicks, most of whom have taken over the identities of former members (i.e. Tim Drake, the third Robin, instead of Dick Grayson, the original Robin and Titans leader), as well as stalwarts such as Starfire, Raven, and Beast Boy, where they have fought enemies such as Deathstroke, Brother Blood, Doctor Light, The Titans Tomorrow, and a brainwashed Superboy and Indigo during a team up with the Outsiders in the Insiders storyline. In the end, Cyborg was the only one capable of standing up to Dr. Light, thanks to his solar shields, although he makes it clear that he only won the fight because the rest of the Titans had softened Light up first.

During the 20052006 storyline “Infinite Crisis”, Cyborg joined Donna’s New Cronus team that went to investigate a hole in the universe that was found during the Rann-Thanagar War. He left Beast Boy in charge of the Titans while he was gone. They arrived at the reset center of the universe and with the help of assorted heroes aided in the defeat of Alexander Luthor, who was attempting to recreate the multiverse and build a perfect Earth from it.

According to 52 Week 5, Cyborg was fused together with Firestorm after returning to Earth. This was caused by the energy ripples caused by Alexander Luthor Jr. which altered the Zeta Ray Beams the heroes were going to use to return home.

After being severely damaged during the events of “Infinite Crisis”, Cyborg was rebuilt over time in thanks to Tower caretakers Wendy and Marvin. He awoke a year later to find a wholly different Teen Titans being led by Robin, the only member from the team he formed prior to going into space. He is still a member of the team, but feels that Kid Devil and Ravager are hardly worthy Titans, and thus is attempting to find a way to reform “the real Titans”.

After the team along with the Doom Patrol defeated the Brotherhood of Evil, Cyborg asked Beast Boy to rejoin the Titans, but Gar refused, saying that his skills were needed with the Doom Patrol. After returning to Titans Tower, Cyborg began reviewing the security tapes during the last year, in which it appears that he was looked to by all the Titans of the past year for a shoulder to lean on, despite being in a coma-like state.

It appears that although Cyborg has returned to the team, the role of leader is now in the hands of Robin. He does however retain the position of statesman amongst the team and occasionally plays second-in-command.

In Justice League of America (vol. 2) #3, Batman, Wonder Woman, and Superman agree that Cyborg should be offered membership in the new Justice League. However, following a battle against Amazo, Green Lantern and Black Canary take over the formation of the JLA, and Cyborg is not amongst the roster.

In the Teen Titans East one-shot, Cyborg gathered together a new team of Titans. During a training exercise, the group was attacked by Trigon, and Cyborg was blasted by a giant energy beam. He was last seen in a crater, with only his head and torso remaining.

In the aftermath of Trigon’s assault in the Titans East one shot, Cyborg has been placed into a special hoverchair while he recuperates. Cyborg’s body is completely repaired in Titans #5. Soon after, the resurrected and unbalanced Jericho enters Cyborg’s body, using him to manipulate the defenses at Titans Tower to kill the Teen Titans. Jericho’s plans are foiled when Static, the newest Teen Titan, uses his electrical powers to overload the Tower’s systems, causing feedback that knocks Jericho out of Cyborg.[3] After recovering, Cyborg pretends to still have Jericho inside of him, in order to draw out Vigilante, who was currently targeting Jericho. The plot works too well when Vigilante appears and shoots Cyborg in the head.[4]

In an unspecified time during the Teen Titans comics, a man with enhancements similar to Cyborg’s attacks Dr. Sarah Charles on the day of her wedding to Deshaun, a young scientist. Cyborg rushes in for the save, discovering how Deshaun, connected to Project M, has sold the technology used to turn Stone into Cyborg to the military. He also finds that the enhanced man was Ron Evers, once Vic’s best friend now turned terrorist, who was seeking vengeance for the soldiers used as test subjects. After Cyborg manages to calm down his friend and discovers the truth: Mr. Orr, revealed as the mastermind behind Project M’s cyborg research, brings his Stone-derived best subjects: the current Equus, an armored form of the Wildebeest, and a cyberized man sporting enhancements even more powerful than Stone’s current ones called Cyborg 2.0.

Cyborg 2.0 turns out to be the Titans Tomorrow Cyborg 2.0, snatched from his proper timeline and cajoled by Orr into fighting his younger self for the possession of their shared technology and Orr’s permission to use it in the battlefield. Cyborg is soon forced to fight simultaneously against the Phantom Limbs, an elite force of soldiers crippled in the Middle East and restored by his tech, and the Cyborg Revenge Squad, a broader formation composed of the Fearsome Five, Magenta, Girder, the Thinker, and Cyborgirl. Although the Cyborg Revenge Squad soon gains the upper hand, with the help of his fellow Titans Cyborg is able to hold his own in combat, reverse engineer on the fly some of the future technology used by Cyborg 2.0, and enhance his own body enough to win against Mr. Orr. He later decides to get a new lease in life, forgiving Deshaun and Sarah Charles on their wedding day for abusing his technology, resuming dating Sarah Simms and having the Phantom Limbs fitted with new, non-military, prosthetics. It is however implied the Phantom Limbs, unwilling to see Stone’s offer as a sign of good will, are trying to get back their weaponized prosthetics and wait for a rematch.

During the events of Blackest Night, Cyborg joins with Starfire, Beast Boy, and several other heroes to form an emergency team to fight off the army of dead Titans who have been reanimated as Black Lanterns. He later joins in the final battle at Coast City.

Following the dissolution of the current JLA after Justice League: Cry for Justice, Cyborg is invited by Donna to join Kimiyo Hoshi’s new Justice League.[5] He befriends Red Tornado, and claims that he has come up with a plan to make him indestructible.[6]

After a battle with Doctor Impossible’s gang, Cyborg is forced to take a leave of absence from the team in order to not only help rebuild Red Tornado, but also help Roy Harper, who had his arm severed by Prometheus.[7] During this time, Victor leads Superboy and Kid Flash to the city of Dakota to rescue the Teen Titans, who had been defeated and captured by Holocaust.[8] The Titans emerge victorious from the battle after Kid Flash uses his powers to send Holocaust plummeting into the Earth’s inner core.[9]

Despite apparently being written off the team, writer James Robinson explained that Cyborg will continue to have a presence on the JLA, and will even be given a co-feature in the back of the book for Justice League of America #4850.[10] In the co-feature, Cyborg battles Red Tornado after he has been driven insane by the power of the Starheart. In the midst of the battle, a flashback reveals that Victor had rebuilt Red Tornado using self-replicating nanites similar to the ones that Prometheus infected Roy with after cutting off his arm, thus making the android indestructible.[11] Cyborg manages to free Red Tornado his power matrix.[12]

Cyborg briefly appears in Justice League: Generation Lost, where he is shown helping Wonder Woman and Starfire search for Maxwell Lord after his resurrection.[13]

Following an adventure in another dimension, Static is left powerless, and Miss Martian is rendered comatose. Cyborg stops the powerless Static from returning to Dakota, and instead tells him that he and a scientist named Rochelle Barnes will be taking him to Cadmus Labs to find a way to get his powers back and awaken Miss Martian. As Static packs up his belongings, Cyborg and Rochelle have a conversation which reveals that they are lying to Static, and have an ulterior motive for taking the two Titans to Cadmus.[14]

He later appears in the final two issues of The Return of Bruce Wayne, where he helps his former teammate Red Robin in his attempt to stop Bruce Wayne from inadvertently unleashing an apocalyptic explosion of Omega Energy.

Cyborg and Red Tornado later travel to the moon alongside Doctor Light, Animal Man, Congorilla, Zauriel, Tasmanian Devil and Bulleteer as part of an emergency group of heroes gathered to assist the Justice League in their battle against Eclipso. Shortly into the battle, Cyborg and the others are taken over by Eclipso and are turned against their JLA comrades.[15] The reserve JLA members are all freed after Eclipso is defeated.[16]

As of August 2011, Cyborg is featured as one of the main characters in a new Justice League ongoing series written by Geoff Johns and drawn by Jim Lee as part of DC’s The New 52 relaunch. Johns has said of Cyborg, “He represents all of us in a lot of ways. If we have a cellphone and we’re texting on it, we are a cyborgthat’s what a cyborg is, using technology as an extension of ourselves.”[17]

The first storyline takes place five years in the past and details the revised origin of the original Justice League. Victor Stone appears as a high school football star who is heavily sought after by a number of college scouts, but apparently has a distant relationship with his father, Silas. After winning a big game, Victor is shown calling his father and angrily telling him that he broke his promise and missed yet another one of his son’s games.[18] Later Victor appears at S.T.A.R. Labs where his father works. The scientists appear to be working on the Mother Box that Superman came in contact with from the Parademon. Victor engages in another argument with his father and tells him that the scouts were there to give him full scholarships to college. When asking if his father will ever appear at any of his games, his father replies “No.” Just then the Mother Box explodes, killing the other scientists and destroying most of Victor’s body while Victor’s father looks on in horror.[19] Silas does everything he can for Victor’s survival. He along with Sarah Charles, and T. O. Morrow go in “The Red Room” in S.T.A.R. labs which contains every piece of technology from around the world. Silas attempts to treat Victor with something that has never been attempted before and he is seen injecting Victor with some type of nanites and having Dr. Morrow put the robotic pieces on Victor (devices such as: a Promethean skin graft, Doctor William Magnus’ responsometer, Anthony Ivo’s A-maze operating system, The classified and prototypical B-maze operating system and Ryan Choi’s White Dwarf Stabilizer). Vic’s life is saved and the energies from the motherbox are incorporated into his new form as Cyborg. This allows Victor to access the vast New Gods data library and discover Darkseid’s true invasion plans.[20]

In the following issue we see Victor as Cyborg. As the issue opens Victor cannot feel his hands or legs. He sees himself for the first time with his robotic parts and is panicked by his new body. Suddenly, Parademons burst into the red room and leap toward Sarah Charles. However, Cyborg’s defense system’s reacts automatically weaponizing his arm into a sound cannon from which he fires his powerful white noise cannon, disintegrating the two Parademons and blasting a gigantic hole in the Star Labs building. After saving Sarah’s life Victor asks his father what has happened to him, his father tells him that he couldn’t let him die. Cyborg obviously distraught exclaims, “You did this to me.” and flees, despite Silas’ plea for him to wait. Later in the street Cyborg sees a woman being set upon by a group of Parademons. He leaps to the woman’s aid, punching the parademon. However, in ensuing scuffle Cyborg inadvertently absorbs some of the Parademon’s components giving him access to Boom Tube technology. This new ability automatically transports or teleports Victor to where Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Flash, Green Lantern, and Aquaman are fighting the Parademons, moments before Darkseid arrives. Cyborg fights alongside the other heroes against Darkseid and his Parademons, but despite their best efforts Darkseid proves to be too strong. Fortunately, Cyborg is able to reverse engineer the alien boom tube technology and with a considerable amount of stress on his systems he is able to teleport all the invading aliens including Darkseid off the planet, saving the Earth. After sending Darkseid back where he came from, Cyborg helps to found the Justice League.

Victor has not begun any process of reconciliation with his father, who is primarily concerned with Victor’s mechanics rather than his humanity. Cyborg primarily focuses on his super-heroics, aiding Batman and others when he can and monitoring crime through his cybernetics. After the villain David Graves makes an attack against the Justice League, Cyborg and his teammates travel to the Valley of Souls. There he learns that he walks the line between life and death. He sees a false apparition of his human self that tries to convince him that Victor Stone is dead and Cyborg is just an imitation. Victor quickly sees past this ruse, and he and the rest of the Justice League defeat Graves. We learn through a conversation with Flash, that Cyborg questions his humanity now that he is part machine and that he lives on the Watch Tower, the Justice League’s headquarters.[21] Flash cracks a joke in an attempt to lighten the mood and assure Cyborg he is still human. During the Throne of Atlantis storyline, Cyborg at first rejects an upgrade his father has that would allow him to operate underwater at the price of his remaining lung which to him would mean sacrificing more of his humanity.[22] However following the capture of the rest of the Justice League by Ohm who sentenced then to the bottom of the ocean, Cyborg as he calls in reserves to hold off Ohm’s forces reluctantly accepted the upgrade.[23] This allows him and Mera to rescue the others.[24]

During the “Trinity War” storyline, Cyborg gets a visual of Shazam heading to Kahndaq, to which Batman assembles the Justice League with the help from Zatanna to meet in Kahndaq to stop Shazam.[25] Following the supposed death of Doctor Light in Kahndaq, Batman tells Superman that Cyborg and Martian Manhunter are doing an autopsy to prove his death was not Superman’s fault.[26] As Wonder Woman leads the Justice League Dark to go look for Pandora, Cyborg is among the superheroes that remain at A.R.G.U.S. while Batman, Flash, Aquaman, Shazam, Steve Trevor, the Justice League of America, Zatanna, and Phantom Stranger go to stop Wonder Woman.[27] Cyborg was present when Atom tells him, Superman, Element Woman and Firestorm the true purpose of the creation of the Justice League of America and that she was spying on the Justice League which is how the Justice League of America ended up in Kahndaq.[28] When the Crime Syndicate arrives on Prime Earth, Cyborg’s old prosthetic parts combine to form a robot called Grid (who is operated by a sentient computer virus).[29] During the Forever Evil event, after Batman and Catwoman drop Cyborg off to his father in Detroit,[30] he makes the choice to willingly receive a new cybernetic body and helps his father and Dr. Morrow create one that is slimmer in appearance so Cyborg could look more human.[31] Working together with the Metal Men created by Doc Magus, Cyborg succeeds in shutting down Grid.[32]

Afterwards Cyborg helped newcomer to the group Shazam fit in with the league as the rest set out to find Power ring’s missing accessory which flew off after the death of the former wearer.[33] While on monitor duty he and Shazam experiment with some of his magical powers to aid in finding the ring after joking of having an Xbox in his left shoulder; only for the young ward to conjure up a ping pong table, which they play while having spare time on their hands.[34] Eventually the call goes out and everyone in the league mobilizes to secure the new rampaging Power Ring before the Doom Patrol does.[35] After coaxing Billy into action against Jessica Cruis, Victor moves in to interface with the ring itself finding out a great about the ring of Volthoom and his current host only to be forcefully thrown out after the ring entity rejects him causing his systems to short circuit taking him out of the battle.[36]

He is last seen recovering at S.T.A.R. Labs after Shazam rushed him too the med bay after the power ring crisis was handled. While Superman and Lex Luthor battled Gorilla Grodd Cyborg gave Billy the okay to head out and see if they needed help as the former wondered what he saw within the ring after his dad warned him interfacing with it again could trap him in it forever.[37]

Afterwards, Lex Luthor and Captain Cold were accepted onto the team. An incident involving Batman’s son, Damian Wayne, during the “Robin Rises Alpha & Omega” story arc in Batman led up to most of the justice League battling against Glorious Godfrey and a Parademon horde from Apokolips when they captured the chaos shard and the sarcophagus of Damian and later fled back home.[38] All the league members present, Cyborg included, state to an adamant Bruce Wayne that running headlong into unmarked X-factor territory for a suicide mission was less than ideal considering the consequences that could befall earth. This all boils over, eventually culminating with Batman hijacking Cyborg’s teleportation systems to zip up to the Watchtower in an attempt to retrieve an experimental and highly dangerous combat suit in order to mete out his agenda; But Cyborg manages to block his administrative access so that he, Shazam, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Lex and Cold could physically restrain him, causing Batman to begrudgingly give up and retire to the batcave.[39]

After the Bat left, the rest of the Bat Family turned up asking Victor for help with some digitized doppelgangers of baddies that Bruce initially set up in order to distract the League, destabilize watchtower security to secure the Hellbat, and eventually use a personal Mother Box (secured from a Parademon kept in cold storage) to vacate to Apokolips.[40] After making his way to the Batcave to meet with them, he’s directed over to a console which enabled him to directly access the Batcomputer’s more sophisticated systems. However, it was all a ruse utilizing a preemptive countermeasure devised by Batman tailored to Cyborg’s specific weaknesses. Cyborg was temporarily incapacitated and was set into a VR simulation where he relived his more peaceful days in college, while Batgirl went to work on his Motherbox in order to secure a path towards Apokolips and chase after their father. But Victor eventually snapped out of his dream haze and followed them through, angered that they used him in such a way.[40] Cyborg traveled along with Titus, who hitched a ride on his leg, to catch up with the rest of the Batman Family. They all then have a run in with the scavengers of Armegeddo who quickly vacate after some Apokoliptian Hunger Dogs make their way onto the scene. They eventually catch up with the armor-clad Dark Knight ripping his way through a sizable chunk of Apokolips’s forces singlehandedly. Jason Tim and Barbara show Batman the Robin Medals Alfred gave them in order to remind him of his purpose, causing him to snap out of his berserker rage and note that Cyborg had reluctantly accompanied them to Hell itself. Having made their way into Darkseid’s citadel where Kalibak was readying his Chaos Cannon to fire again, the caped crusaders kept Darkseid’s forces occupied while Cyborg made short work of the massive war engine, literally tearing it in half. But when he went to set a timed self-destruct sequence within the Apokoliptian computers, Vic suffered a catastrophic feedback that fried most of his internal systems leaving him inoperable just as Darkseid himself made his appearance.[41]

While Batman fought and held Darkseid off, Cyborg ran Batgirl through a crash course on how to hot wire his own Motherbox. Since Darkseid smashed Batman’s Boom Tube generator, Cyborg was their only chance off Apokolips. After successfully jury-rigging his internal systems, Cyborg and the rest of the Bat rogues made a hasty exit stage left as Bruce powered his recovered fragment of the Chaos Shard with Darkseid’s Omega Effect, blasting Darkseid against a wall to cover their escape.[42] In the aftermath, Cyborg, who is still unable to facilitate himself, wonders what is going on as Damian Wayne is successfully revived, however a second anomaly cranks out of the Boom Tube that was opened and Kalibak comes charging through it. With Kalibak occupied by the rest of the gang, Vic tries his best to reestablish his downed systems. He is successful and gains control over the still-open tube as Batman readies the Batplane. As Batman rams his jet into the evil New God sending him careening back to Apokolips, Cyborg closes the portal banishing Darksied’s first born for good. With the threat over, Cyborg heads back topside to inform the rest of the league of what all transpired and stating he has JL business to attend to.[43]

An eponymous ongoing series, by writer David F. Walker and artist Ivan Reis, debuted in July 2015.[44]

This article needs to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (August 2017)

As of Rebirth, he is a part of the relaunched Justice League bi-monthly series as well as his own solo monthly series. It is unclear whether he has the ability of flight in Rebirth.

During Dark Nights: Metal, he is captured by the alternate Batmen of the Dark Multiverse, who attempt to hack him in order to learn the secrets of his teammates. As the crisis escalates, Cyborg is confronted by the controlling consciousness of other Mother Boxes, who claim that he will only gain the power to overcome the Dark Batmen if he fully surrenders to the Mother Box that powers his body at the cost of the transformation deleting his old personality. He is nearly tempted to give in to this transformation, but the appearance of Raven’s soul-self convinces him to hold on to himself while partially succumbing to the transformation. This allows him to free his teammates and ‘hack’ the multiverse as they travel to find new allies in the battle against the Dark Batmen.

Original post:

Cyborg (comics) – Wikipedia

Cyborg – Wikipedia

A cyborg (short for “cybernetic organism”) is a being with both organic and biomechatronic body parts. The term was coined in 1960 by Manfred Clynes and Nathan S. Kline.[1]

The term cyborg is not the same thing as bionic, biorobot or android; it applies to an organism that has restored function or enhanced abilities due to the integration of some artificial component or technology that relies on some sort of feedback.[2] While cyborgs are commonly thought of as mammals, including humans, they might also conceivably be any kind of organism.

D. S. Halacy’s Cyborg: Evolution of the Superman in 1965 featured an introduction which spoke of a “new frontier” that was “not merely space, but more profoundly the relationship between ‘inner space’ to ‘outer space’ a bridge…between mind and matter.”[3]

In popular culture, some cyborgs may be represented as visibly mechanical (e.g., Cyborg from DC Comics, the Cybermen in the Doctor Who franchise or The Borg from Star Trek or Darth Vader from Star Wars) or as almost indistinguishable from humans (e.g., the “Human” Cylons from the re-imagining of Battlestar Galactica, etc.). Cyborgs in fiction often play up a human contempt for over-dependence on technology, particularly when used for war, and when used in ways that seem to threaten free will.[citation needed] Cyborgs are also often portrayed with physical or mental abilities far exceeding a human counterpart (military forms may have inbuilt weapons, among other things).[citation needed]

According to some definitions of the term, the physical attachments humanity has with even the most basic technologies have already made them cyborgs.[4] In a typical example, a human with an artificial cardiac pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator would be considered a cyborg, since these devices measure voltage potentials in the body, perform signal processing, and can deliver electrical stimuli, using this synthetic feedback mechanism to keep that person alive. Implants, especially cochlear implants, that combine mechanical modification with any kind of feedback response are also cyborg enhancements. Some theorists[who?] cite such modifications as contact lenses, hearing aids, or intraocular lenses as examples of fitting humans with technology to enhance their biological capabilities. As cyborgs currently are on the rise some theorists argue there is a need to develop new definitions of aging and for instance a bio-techno-social definition of aging has been suggested.[5]

The term is also used to address human-technology mixtures in the abstract. This includes not only commonly used pieces of technology such as phones, computers, the Internet, etc. but also artifacts that may not popularly be considered technology; for example, pen and paper, and speech and language. When augmented with these technologies and connected in communication with people in other times and places, a person becomes capable of much more than they were before. An example is a computer, which gains power by using Internet protocols to connect with other computers. Another example, which is becoming more and more relevant is a bot-assisted human or human-assisted-bot, used to target social media with likes and shares.[6] Cybernetic technologies include highways, pipes, electrical wiring, buildings, electrical plants, libraries, and other infrastructure that we hardly notice, but which are critical parts of the cybernetics that we work within.

Bruce Sterling in his universe of Shaper/Mechanist suggested an idea of alternative cyborg called Lobster, which is made not by using internal implants, but by using an external shell (e.g. a Powered Exoskeleton).[7] Unlike human cyborgs that appear human externally while being synthetic internally (e.g. the Bishop type in the Alien franchise), Lobster looks inhuman externally but contains a human internally (e.g. Elysium, RoboCop). The computer game Deus Ex: Invisible War prominently featured cyborgs called Omar, where “Omar” is a Russian translation of the word “Lobster” (since the Omar are of Russian origin in the game).

The concept of a man-machine mixture was widespread in science fiction before World War II. As early as 1843, Edgar Allan Poe described a man with extensive prostheses in the short story “The Man That Was Used Up”. In 1911, Jean de la Hire introduced the Nyctalope, a science fiction hero who was perhaps the first literary cyborg, in Le Mystre des XV (later translated as The Nyctalope on Mars).[8][9][10] Edmond Hamilton presented space explorers with a mixture of organic and machine parts in his novel The Comet Doom in 1928. He later featured the talking, living brain of an old scientist, Simon Wright, floating around in a transparent case, in all the adventures of his famous hero, Captain Future. He uses the term explicitly in the 1962 short story, “After a Judgment Day,” to describe the “mechanical analogs” called “Charlies,” explaining that “[c]yborgs, they had been called from the first one in the 1960s…cybernetic organisms.” In the short story “No Woman Born” in 1944, C. L. Moore wrote of Deirdre, a dancer, whose body was burned completely and whose brain was placed in a faceless but beautiful and supple mechanical body. Cyborgs are becoming more of a reality each day.

The term was coined by Manfred E. Clynes and Nathan S. Kline in 1960 to refer to their conception of an enhanced human being who could survive in extraterrestrial environments:

Their concept was the outcome of thinking about the need for an intimate relationship between human and machine as the new frontier of space exploration was beginning to open up. A designer of physiological instrumentation and electronic data-processing systems, Clynes was the chief research scientist in the Dynamic Simulation Laboratory at Rockland State Hospital in New York.

The term first appears in print five months earlier when The New York Times reported on the Psychophysiological Aspects of Space Flight Symposium where Clynes and Kline first presented their paper.

A book titled Cyborg: Digital Destiny and Human Possibility in the Age of the Wearable Computer was published by Doubleday in 2001.[13] Some of the ideas in the book were incorporated into the 35mm motion picture film Cyberman.

Cyborg tissues structured with carbon nanotubes and plant or fungal cells have been used in artificial tissue engineering to produce new materials for mechanical and electrical uses. The work was presented by Di Giacomo and Maresca at MRS 2013 Spring conference on Apr, 3rd, talk number SS4.04.[14] The cyborg obtained is inexpensive, light and has unique mechanical properties. It can also be shaped in desired forms. Cells combined with MWCNTs co-precipitated as a specific aggregate of cells and nanotubes that formed a viscous material. Likewise, dried cells still acted as a stable matrix for the MWCNT network. When observed by optical microscopy the material resembled an artificial “tissue” composed of highly packed cells. The effect of cell drying is manifested by their “ghost cell” appearance. A rather specific physical interaction between MWCNTs and cells was observed by electron microscopy suggesting that the cell wall (the most outer part of fungal and plant cells) may play a major active role in establishing a CNTs network and its stabilization. This novel material can be used in a wide range of electronic applications from heating to sensing and has the potential to open important new avenues to be exploited in electromagnetic shielding for radio frequency electronics and aerospace technology. In particular using Candida albicans cells cyborg tissue materials with temperature sensing properties have been reported.[15]

In current prosthetic applications, the C-Leg system developed by Otto Bock HealthCare is used to replace a human leg that has been amputated because of injury or illness. The use of sensors in the artificial C-Leg aids in walking significantly by attempting to replicate the user’s natural gait, as it would be prior to amputation.[16] Prostheses like the C-Leg and the more advanced iLimb are considered by some to be the first real steps towards the next generation of real-world cyborg applications.[citation needed] Additionally cochlear implants and magnetic implants which provide people with a sense that they would not otherwise have had can additionally be thought of as creating cyborgs.[citation needed]

In vision science, direct brain implants have been used to treat non-congenital (acquired) blindness. One of the first scientists to come up with a working brain interface to restore sight was private researcher William Dobelle. Dobelle’s first prototype was implanted into “Jerry”, a man blinded in adulthood, in 1978. A single-array BCI containing 68 electrodes was implanted onto Jerry’s visual cortex and succeeded in producing phosphenes, the sensation of seeing light. The system included cameras mounted on glasses to send signals to the implant. Initially, the implant allowed Jerry to see shades of grey in a limited field of vision at a low frame-rate. This also required him to be hooked up to a two-ton mainframe, but shrinking electronics and faster computers made his artificial eye more portable and now enable him to perform simple tasks unassisted.[17]

In 1997, Philip Kennedy, a scientist and physician, created the world’s first human cyborg from Johnny Ray, a Vietnam veteran who suffered a stroke. Ray’s body, as doctors called it, was “locked in”. Ray wanted his old life back so he agreed to Kennedy’s experiment. Kennedy embedded an implant he designed (and named “neurotrophic electrode”) near the part of Ray’s brain so that Ray would be able to have some movement back in his body. The surgery went successfully, but in 2002, Johnny Ray died.[18]

In 2002, Canadian Jens Naumann, also blinded in adulthood, became the first in a series of 16 paying patients to receive Dobelle’s second generation implant, marking one of the earliest commercial uses of BCIs. The second generation device used a more sophisticated implant enabling better mapping of phosphenes into coherent vision. Phosphenes are spread out across the visual field in what researchers call the starry-night effect. Immediately after his implant, Naumann was able to use his imperfectly restored vision to drive slowly around the parking area of the research institute.[19]

In contrast to replacement technologies, in 2002, under the heading Project Cyborg, a British scientist, Kevin Warwick, had an array of 100 electrodes fired into his nervous system in order to link his nervous system into the internet to investigate enhancement possibilities. With this in place Warwick successfully carried out a series of experiments including extending his nervous system over the internet to control a robotic hand, also receiving feedback from the fingertips in order to control the hand’s grip. This was a form of extended sensory input. Subsequently, he investigated ultrasonic input in order to remotely detect the distance to objects. Finally, with electrodes also implanted into his wife’s nervous system, they conducted the first direct electronic communication experiment between the nervous systems of two humans.[20][21]

Since 2004, British artist Neil Harbisson has had a cyborg antenna implanted in his head that allows him to extend his perception of colors beyond the human visual spectrum through vibrations in his skull.[22] His antenna was included within his 2004 passport photograph which has been claimed to confirm his cyborg status.[23] In 2012 at TEDGlobal,[24] Harbisson explained that he started to feel cyborg when he noticed that the software and his brain had united and given him an extra sense.[24] Neil Harbisson is a co-founder of the Cyborg Foundation (2004)[25]

Furthermore many cyborgs with multifunctional microchips injected into their hand are known to exist. With the chips they are able swipe cards, open or unlock doors, operate devices such as printers or, with some using a cryptocurrency, buy products, such as drinks, with a wave of the hand.[26][27][28][29][30]

bodyNET is an application of human-electronic interaction currently in development by researchers from Stanford University.[31] The technology is based on stretchable semiconductor materials (Elastronic). According to their article in Nature (journal), the technology is composed of smart devices, screens, and a network of sensors that can be implanted into the body, woven into the skin or worn as clothes. It has been suggested, that this platform can potentially replace the smartphone in the future.[32]

The US-based company Backyard Brains released what they refer to as “The world’s first commercially available cyborg” called the RoboRoach. The project started as a University of Michigan biomedical engineering student senior design project in 2010[33] and was launched as an available beta product on 25 February 2011.[34] The RoboRoach was officially released into production via a TED talk at the TED Global conference,[35] and via the crowdsourcing website Kickstarter in 2013,[36] the kit allows students to use microstimulation to momentarily control the movements of a walking cockroach (left and right) using a bluetooth-enabled smartphone as the controller. Other groups have developed cyborg insects, including researchers at North Carolina State University,[37][38] UC Berkeley,[39][40] and Nanyang Technological University, Singapore,[41][42] but the RoboRoach was the first kit available to the general public and was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health as a device to serve as a teaching aid to promote an interest in neuroscience.[35] Several animal welfare organizations including the RSPCA [43] and PETA [44] have expressed concerns about the ethics and welfare of animals in this project.

In medicine, there are two important and different types of cyborgs: the restorative and the enhanced. Restorative technologies “restore lost function, organs, and limbs”.[45] The key aspect of restorative cyborgization is the repair of broken or missing processes to revert to a healthy or average level of function. There is no enhancement to the original faculties and processes that were lost.

On the contrary, the enhanced cyborg “follows a principle, and it is the principle of optimal performance: maximising output (the information or modifications obtained) and minimising input (the energy expended in the process)”.[46] Thus, the enhanced cyborg intends to exceed normal processes or even gain new functions that were not originally present.

Although prostheses in general supplement lost or damaged body parts with the integration of a mechanical artifice, bionic implants in medicine allow model organs or body parts to mimic the original function more closely. Michael Chorost wrote a memoir of his experience with cochlear implants, or bionic ear, titled “Rebuilt: How Becoming Part Computer Made Me More Human.”[47] Jesse Sullivan became one of the first people to operate a fully robotic limb through a nerve-muscle graft, enabling him a complex range of motions beyond that of previous prosthetics.[48] By 2004, a fully functioning artificial heart was developed.[49] The continued technological development of bionic and nanotechnologies begins to raise the question of enhancement, and of the future possibilities for cyborgs which surpass the original functionality of the biological model. The ethics and desirability of “enhancement prosthetics” have been debated; their proponents include the transhumanist movement, with its belief that new technologies can assist the human race in developing beyond its present, normative limitations such as aging and disease, as well as other, more general incapacities, such as limitations on speed, strength, endurance, and intelligence. Opponents of the concept describe what they believe to be biases which propel the development and acceptance of such technologies; namely, a bias towards functionality and efficiency that may compel assent to a view of human people which de-emphasizes as defining characteristics actual manifestations of humanity and personhood, in favor of definition in terms of upgrades, versions, and utility.[50]

A brain-computer interface, or BCI, provides a direct path of communication from the brain to an external device, effectively creating a cyborg. Research of Invasive BCIs, which utilize electrodes implanted directly into the grey matter of the brain, has focused on restoring damaged eyesight in the blind and providing functionality to paralyzed people, most notably those with severe cases, such as Locked-In syndrome. This technology could enable people who are missing a limb or are in a wheelchair the power to control the devices that aide them through neural signals sent from the brain implants directly to computers or the devices. It is possible that this technology will also eventually be used with healthy people.[51]

Deep brain stimulation is a neurological surgical procedure used for therapeutic purposes. This process has aided in treating patients diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, Tourette syndrome, epilepsy, chronic headaches, and mental disorders. After the patient is unconscious, through anesthesia, brain pacemakers or electrodes, are implanted into the region of the brain where the cause of the disease is present. The region of the brain is then stimulated by bursts of electric current to disrupt the oncoming surge of seizures. Like all invasive procedures, deep brain stimulation may put the patient at a higher risk. However, there have been more improvements in recent years with deep brain stimulation than any available drug treatment.[52]

Retinal implants are another form of cyborgization in medicine. The theory behind retinal stimulation to restore vision to people suffering from retinitis pigmentosa and vision loss due to aging (conditions in which people have an abnormally low number of ganglion cells) is that the retinal implant and electrical stimulation would act as a substitute for the missing ganglion cells (cells which connect the eye to the brain.)

While work to perfect this technology is still being done, there have already been major advances in the use of electronic stimulation of the retina to allow the eye to sense patterns of light. A specialized camera is worn by the subject, such as on the frames of their glasses, which converts the image into a pattern of electrical stimulation. A chip located in the user’s eye would then electrically stimulate the retina with this pattern by exciting certain nerve endings which transmit the image to the optic centers of the brain and the image would then appear to the user. If technological advances proceed as planned this technology may be used by thousands of blind people and restore vision to most of them.

A similar process has been created to aide people who have lost their vocal cords. This experimental device would do away with previously used robotic sounding voice simulators. The transmission of sound would start with a surgery to redirect the nerve that controls the voice and sound production to a muscle in the neck, where a nearby sensor would be able to pick up its electrical signals. The signals would then move to a processor which would control the timing and pitch of a voice simulator. That simulator would then vibrate producing a multitonal sound which could be shaped into words by the mouth.[53]

An article published in Nature Materials in 2012 reported a research on “cyborg tissues” (engineered human tissues with embedded three-dimensional mesh of nanoscale wires), with possible medical implications.[54]

In 2014, researchers from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Washington University in St. Louis had developed a device that could keep a heart beating endlessly. By using 3D printing and computer modeling these scientist developed an electronic membrane that could successfully replace pacemakers. The device utilizes a “spider-web like network of sensors and electrodes” to monitor and maintain a normal heart-rate with electrical stimuli. Unlike traditional pacemakers that are similar from patient to patient, the elastic heart glove is made custom by using high-resolution imaging technology. The first prototype was created to fit a rabbit’s heart, operating the organ in an oxygen and nutrient-rich solution. The stretchable material and circuits of the apparatus were first constructed by Professor John A. Rogers in which the electrodes are arranged in a s-shape design to allow them to expand and bend without breaking. Although the device is only currently used as a research tool to study changes in heart rate, in the future the membrane may serve as a safeguard from heart attacks.[55]

Military organizations’ research has recently focused on the utilization of cyborg animals for the purposes of a supposed tactical advantage. DARPA has announced its interest in developing “cyborg insects” to transmit data from sensors implanted into the insect during the pupal stage. The insect’s motion would be controlled from a Micro-Electro-Mechanical System (MEMS) and could conceivably survey an environment or detect explosives and gas.[56] Similarly, DARPA is developing a neural implant to remotely control the movement of sharks. The shark’s unique senses would then be exploited to provide data feedback in relation to enemy ship movement or underwater explosives.[57]

In 2006, researchers at Cornell University invented[58] a new surgical procedure to implant artificial structures into insects during their metamorphic development.[59][60] The first insect cyborgs, moths with integrated electronics in their thorax, were demonstrated by the same researchers.[61][62] The initial success of the techniques has resulted in increased research and the creation of a program called Hybrid-Insect-MEMS, HI-MEMS. Its goal, according to DARPA’s Microsystems Technology Office, is to develop “tightly coupled machine-insect interfaces by placing micro-mechanical systems inside the insects during the early stages of metamorphosis”.[63]

The use of neural implants has recently been attempted, with success, on cockroaches. Surgically applied electrodes were put on the insect, which were remotely controlled by a human. The results, although sometimes different, basically showed that the cockroach could be controlled by the impulses it received through the electrodes. DARPA is now funding this research because of its obvious beneficial applications to the military and other areas[64]

In 2009 at the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Micro-electronic mechanical systems (MEMS) conference in Italy, researchers demonstrated the first “wireless” flying-beetle cyborg.[65] Engineers at the University of California at Berkeley have pioneered the design of a “remote controlled beetle”, funded by the DARPA HI-MEMS Program. Filmed evidence of this can be viewed here.[66] This was followed later that year by the demonstration of wireless control of a “lift-assisted” moth-cyborg.[67]

Eventually researchers plan to develop HI-MEMS for dragonflies, bees, rats and pigeons.[68][69] For the HI-MEMS cybernetic bug to be considered a success, it must fly 100 metres (330ft) from a starting point, guided via computer into a controlled landing within 5 metres (16ft) of a specific end point. Once landed, the cybernetic bug must remain in place.[68]

In 2016 the first cyborg Olympics were celebrated in Zurich Switzerland. Cybathlon 2016 were the first Olympics for cyborgs and the first worldwide and official celebration of cyborg sports. In this event, 16 teams of people with disabilities used technological developments to turn themselves into cyborg athletes. There were six different events and its competitors used and controlled advanced technologies such as powered prosthetic legs and arms, robotic exoskeletons, bikes and motorized wheelchairs.[70]

If on one hand this was already a remarkable improvement, as it allowed disabled people to compete and showed the several technological enhancements that are already making a difference, on the other hand it showed that there is still a long way to go. For instance, the exoskeleton race still required its participants to stand up from a chair and sit down, navigate a slalom and other simple activities such as walk over stepping stones and climb up and down stairs. Despite the simplicity of these activities, 8 of the 16 teams that participated in the event drop of before the start.[71]

Nonetheless, one of the main goals of this event and such simple activities is to show how technological enhancements and advanced prosthetic can make a difference in peoples’ lives. The next Cybathlon is expected to occur in 2020

The concept of the cyborg is often associated with science fiction. However, many artists have tried to create public awareness of cybernetic organisms; these can range from paintings to installations. Some artists who create such works are Neil Harbisson, Moon Ribas, Patricia Piccinini, Steve Mann, Orlan, H. R. Giger, Lee Bul, Wafaa Bilal, Tim Hawkinson and Stelarc.

Stelarc is a performance artist who has visually probed and acoustically amplified his body. He uses medical instruments, prosthetics, robotics, virtual reality systems, the Internet and biotechnology to explore alternate, intimate and involuntary interfaces with the body. He has made three films of the inside of his body and has performed with a third hand and a virtual arm. Between 19761988 he completed 25 body suspension performances with hooks into the skin. For ‘Third Ear’ he surgically constructed an extra ear within his arm that was internet enabled, making it a publicly accessible acoustical organ for people in other places.[72] He is presently performing as his avatar from his second life site.[73]

Tim Hawkinson promotes the idea that bodies and machines are coming together as one, where human features are combined with technology to create the Cyborg. Hawkinson’s piece Emoter presented how society is now dependent on technology.[74]

Wafaa Bilal is an Iraqi-American performance artist who had a small 10 megapixel digital camera surgically implanted into the back of his head, part of a project entitled 3rd I.[75] For one year, beginning 15 December 2010, an image is captured once per minute 24 hours a day and streamed live to http://www.3rdi.me and the Mathaf: Arab Museum of Modern Art. The site also displays Bilal’s location via GPS. Bilal says that the reason why he put the camera in the back of the head was to make an “allegorical statement about the things we don’t see and leave behind.”[76] As a professor at NYU, this project has raised privacy issues, and so Bilal has been asked to ensure that his camera does not take photographs in NYU buildings.[76]

Machines are becoming more ubiquitous in the artistic process itself, with computerized drawing pads replacing pen and paper, and drum machines becoming nearly as popular as human drummers. This is perhaps most notable in generative art and music. Composers such as Brian Eno have developed and utilized software which can build entire musical scores from a few basic mathematical parameters.[77]

Scott Draves is a generative artist whose work is explicitly described as a “cyborg mind”. His Electric Sheep project generates abstract art by combining the work of many computers and people over the internet.[78]

Artists have explored the term cyborg from a perspective involving imagination. Some work to make an abstract idea of technological and human-bodily union apparent to reality in an art form utilizing varying mediums, from sculptures and drawings to digital renderings. Artists that seek to make cyborg-based fantasies a reality often call themselves cyborg artists, or may consider their artwork “cyborg”. How an artist or their work may be considered cyborg will vary depending upon the interpreter’s flexibility with the term. Scholars that rely upon a strict, technical description of cyborg, often going by Norbert Wiener’s cybernetic theory and Manfred E. Clynes and Nathan S. Kline’s first use of the term, would likely argue that most cyborg artists do not qualify to be considered cyborgs.[79] Scholars considering a more flexible description of cyborgs may argue it incorporates more than cybernetics.[80] Others may speak of defining subcategories, or specialized cyborg types, that qualify different levels of cyborg at which technology influences an individual. This may range from technological instruments being external, temporary, and removable to being fully integrated and permanent.[81] Nonetheless, cyborg artists are artists. Being so, it can be expected for them to incorporate the cyborg idea rather than a strict, technical representation of the term,[82] seeing how their work will sometimes revolve around other purposes outside of cyborgism.[79]

As medical technology becomes more advanced, some techniques and innovations are adopted by the body modification community. While not yet cyborgs in the strict definition of Manfred Clynes and Nathan Kline, technological developments like implantable silicon silk electronics,[83] augmented reality[84] and QR codes[85] are bridging the disconnect between technology and the body. Hypothetical technologies such as digital tattoo interfaces[86][87] would blend body modification aesthetics with interactivity and functionality, bringing a transhumanist way of life into present day reality.

In addition, it is quite plausible for anxiety expression to manifest. Individuals may experience pre-implantation feelings of fear and nervousness. To this end, individuals may also embody feelings of uneasiness, particularly in a socialized setting, due to their post-operative, technologically augmented bodies, and mutual unfamiliarity with the mechanical insertion. Anxieties may be linked to notions of otherness or a cyborged identity.[88]

Cyborgs have become a well-known part of science fiction literature and other media. Although many of these characters may be technically androids, they are often referred to as cyborgs. Well-known examples from film and television include RoboCop, The Terminator, Evangelion, United States Air Force Colonel Steve Austin in both Cyborg and, as acted out by Lee Majors, The Six Million Dollar Man, Replicants from Blade Runner, Daleks and Cybermen from Doctor Who, the Borg from Star Trek, Darth Vader and General Grievous from Star Wars, Inspector Gadget, and Cylons from the 2004 Battlestar Galactica series. From comics, manga and anime are characters such as 8 Man (the inspiration for RoboCop), Kamen Rider, Ghost in the Shell’s Motoko Kusanagi, as well as characters from western comic books like Tony Stark (after his Extremis and Bleeding Edge armor) and Victor “Cyborg” Stone. The Deus Ex videogame series deals extensively with the near-future rise of cyborgs and their corporate ownership, as does the Syndicate series. William Gibson’s Neuromancer features one of the first female cyborgs, a “Razorgirl” named Molly Millions, who has extensive cybernetic modifications and is one of the most prolific cyberpunk characters in the science fiction canon.[89]

Sending humans to space is a dangerous task in which the implementation of various cyborg technologies could be used in the future for risk mitigation.[90] Stephen Hawking, a renowned physicist, stated “Life on Earth is at the ever-increasing risk of being wiped out by a disaster such as sudden global warming, nuclear war… I think the human race has no future if it doesn’t go into space.” The difficulties associated with space travel could mean it might be centuries before humans ever become a multi-planet species.[citation needed] There are many effect of spaceflight on the human body. One major issue of space exploration is the biological need for oxygen. If this necessity was taken out of the equation, space exploration would be revolutionized. A theory proposed by Manfred E. Clynes and Nathan S. Kline is aimed at tackling this problem. The two scientists theorized that the use of an inverse fuel cell that is “capable of reducing CO2 to its components with removal of the carbon and re-circulation of the oxygen…”[91] could make breathing unnecessary. Another prominent issue is radiation exposure. Yearly, the average human on earth is exposed to approximately 0.30 rem of radiation, while an astronaut aboard the International Space Station for 90 days is exposed to 9 rem.[92] To tackle the issue, Clynes and Kline theorized a cyborg containing a sensor that would detect radiation levels and a Rose osmotic pump “which would automatically inject protective pharmaceuticals in appropriate doses.” Experiments injecting these protective pharmaceuticals into monkeys have shown positive results in increasing radiation resistance.[91]

Although the effects of spaceflight on our body is an important issue, the advancement of propulsion technology is just as important. With our current technology, it would take us about 260 days to get to Mars.[93] A study backed by NASA proposes an interesting way to tackle this issue through deep sleep, or torpor. With this technique, it would “reduce astronauts’ metabolic functions with existing medical procedures”.[94] So far experiments have only resulted in patients being in torpor state for one week. Advancements to allow for longer states of deep sleep would lower the cost of the trip to mars as a result of reduced astronaut resource consumption.

Theorists such as Andy Clark suggest that interactions between humans and technology result in the creation of a cyborg system. In this model “cyborg” is defined as a part biological, part mechanical system which results in the augmentation of the biological component and the creation of a more complex whole. Clark argues that this broadened definition is necessary to an understanding of human cognition. He suggests that any tool which is used to offload part of a cognitive process may be considered the mechanical component of a cyborg system. Examples of this human and technology cyborg system can be very low tech and simplistic, such as using a calculator to perform basic mathematical operations or pen and paper to make notes, or as high tech as using a personal computer or phone. According to Clark, these interactions between a person and a form of technology integrate that technology into the cognitive process in a way which is analogous to the way that a technology which would fit the traditional concept a cyborg augmentation becomes integrated with its biological host. Because all humans in some way use technology to augment their cognitive processes, Clark comes to the conclusion that we are “natural-born cyborgs”.[95]

In 2010, the Cyborg Foundation became the world’s first international organization dedicated to help humans become cyborgs.[96] The foundation was created by cyborg Neil Harbisson and Moon Ribas as a response to the growing number of letters and emails received from people around the world interested in becoming a cyborg.[97] The foundation’s main aims are to extend human senses and abilities by creating and applying cybernetic extensions to the body,[98] to promote the use of cybernetics in cultural events and to defend cyborg rights.[99] In 2010, the foundation, based in Matar (Barcelona), was the overall winner of the Cre@tic Awards, organized by Tecnocampus Matar.[100]

In 2012, Spanish film director Rafel Duran Torrent, created a short film about the Cyborg Foundation. In 2013, the film won the Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival’s Focus Forward Filmmakers Competition and was awarded with $100,000 USD.[101]

Given the technical scope of current and future implantable sensory/telemetric devices, these devices will be greatly proliferated, and will have connections to commercial, medical, and governmental networks. For example, in the medical sector, patients will be able to login to their home computer, and thus visit virtual doctors offices, medical databases, and receive medical prognoses from the comfort of their own home from the data collected through their implanted telemetric devices.[102] However, this online network presents huge security concerns because it has been proven by several U.S. universities that hackers could get onto these networks and shut down peoples electronic prosthetics.[102] These sorts of technologies are already present in the U.S. workforce as a firm in River Falls, Wisconsin called Three Square Market partnered with a Swedish firm called Biohacks Technology to implant RFID microchips in the hands of its employees (which are about the size of a grain of rice) that allow employees to access offices, computers, and even vending machines. More than 50 of the firms 85 employees were chipped. It was confirmed that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved of these implantations.[103] If these devices are to be proliferated within society, then the question that begs to be answered is what regulatory agency will oversee the operations, monitoring, and security of these devices? According to this case study of Three Square Market, it seems that the FDA is assuming the role in regulating and monitoring these devices.

Go here to read the rest:

Cyborg – Wikipedia

Cyborg (comics) – Wikipedia

This article is about the Teen Titans character. For the character “The Batman” or “Cyborg Superman”, see Hank Henshaw.CyborgCyborg on the cover of Cyborg #1 (September 2015)Art by Ivan ReisPublication informationPublisherDC ComicsFirst appearanceDC Comics Presents #26 (October 1980)Created byMarv WolfmanGeorge PrezIn-story informationFull nameVictor StoneSpeciesHuman turned cyborgTeam affiliationsTeen TitansJustice LeagueS.T.A.R. LabsPartnershipsBeast BoyStarfireGreen Lantern (Hal Jordan)AquamanFlash (Barry Allen)Robin (Dick Grayson)Notable aliasesCyberion, Robotman, Technis, Bionic Man, Cyborg 2.0, Omegadrome, Cy, Sparky, The Man with the Iron Fists, Tin-Man, Silver FistsAbilities

Genius-level intellectCybernetic Enhancement grants:

Cyborg is a fictional superhero appearing in American comic books published by DC Comics. The character was created by writer Marv Wolfman and artist George Prez and first appears in a special insert in DC Comics Presents #26 (October 1980). Originally known as a member of the Teen Titans,[1] Cyborg was established as a founding member of the Justice League in DC’s 2011 reboot of its comic book titles and subsequently in the 2016 relaunch of its continuity. However, he has since been re-established as a past member of the Teen Titans again.[2]

The character appears in the DC Extended Universe, where he is played by actor Ray Fisher. This adaptation of Cyborg had a cameo appearance in the 2016 film Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and a main role in the 2017 film Justice League, and is set to appear in a standalone Cyborg film in 2020.

Victor Stone is the son of Silas Stone and Elinore Stone, scientists who use him as a test subject for various intelligence enhancement projects. While these treatments are ultimately successful and Victor’s IQ subsequently grows to genius levels, he grows to resent his treatment. He strikes up a friendship with Ron Evers, a young miscreant who leads him into trouble with the law. This is the beginning of a struggle in which Victor strives for independence, engaging in pursuits of which his parents disapprove, such as athletics and abandoning his studies. Victor’s association with underage criminals leads him down a dark path in which he is often injured, but he still lives a “normal” life in which he is able to make his own decisions. He occasionally refuses to participate in Evers’ grandiose plans of racially motivated terrorism.

Victor joins the Teen Titans, initially for the benefit of a support group of kindred spirits and freaks, and has remained with that group ever since.[1] His teammates are like a group of juveniles who are adjusting to their own prosthetics for they idolize him because of his fancy parts and his exciting adventures. It also turns out that their beautiful teacher Sarah Simms, who has often assisted Cyborg and the Titans, admires him as well.

Another person who sees past the cybernetic shell is Dr. Sarah Charles, a S.T.A.R. Labs scientist who helps him to recuperate after having his cybernetic parts replaced. Cyborg and Dr. Charles date for some time and she, along with Changeling, keeps trying to reach him when he is seemingly mindless following the severe injuries he incurs during the “Titans Hunt” storyline.[citation needed]

Although Cyborg’s body was repaired by a team of Russian scientists after the missile crash he had been in, albeit with more mechanical parts than previously, his mind was not. Eventually, his mind was restored by an alien race of computer intelligences called the Technis, created from the sexual union of Swamp Thing and a machine-planet when Swamp Thing was travelling through space. Cyborg, however, had to remain with the Technis both to maintain his mind and because, in return for restoring him, he had to teach them about humanity. He took the name Cyberion, and gradually started becoming less human in outlook, connecting entirely to the Technis planet.

Eventually, Cyberion returned to Earth, establishing a Technis construct on the moon and a smaller base on Earth. With Vic’s consciousness dormant, but his desire for companionship controlling the actions of the Technis’ planet, it began kidnapping former Titans members, his conscious mind so suppressed that he was not only searching for deceased Titans, but even sent one probe looking for himself as Cyborg. He ended up plugging them into virtual reality scenarios, representing what he believed to be their “perfect worlds”; for example, Beast Boy was back with the Doom Patrol, Damage was spending time being congratulated by the Justice Society as a true hero, and Nightwing was confronted by a Batman who actually smiled and offered to talk about their relationship. Although the Titans were freed, there was a strong disagreement between them and the Justice League over what action to take; the League believed that there was nothing left of Victor to save, whereas the Titans were willing to try, culminating in a brief battle, where the Atom and Catwoman (who had followed the Justice League to investigate) sided with the League while the Flash fought with the Titans. While Vic was distracted trying to aid his friends, a Titans team consisting of Changeling and the original five Titans were sent by Raven to try making contact with Vic’s human side, while Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, the Martian Manhunter, Power Girl, Captain Marvel, and Mary Marvel moved the moon back to its proper place. Eventually, thanks primarily to Changeling’s encouragement, and Omen and Raven holding Vic together long enough to come up with a plan, Vic’s consciousness was restored, and “downloaded” into the Omegadrome, a morphing war-suit belonging to former Titan Minion. In the wake of this event, the Titans reformed and Vic was part of the new group.[1] However, he felt less human than ever before.

Shortly after this, Nightwing revealed he had cloned Vic’s body, and by flowing the Omegadrome through the clone, Vic regained his human form, but still had the abilities of the Omegadrome. He often used the Omegadrome to recreate his original look in battle. With his newfound humanity, Vic took a leave of absence, moving first to L.A. with Beast Boy and then to Central City. While in Central City, Vic was involved in one of the Thinker’s schemes, helping Wally hack the Thinker’s attempt to plug himself into the minds of Central City’s population so that Wally could outthink his opponent, though Vic lost the abilities of the Omegadrome in the process.

Vic mentored the new incarnation of the Teen Titans, consisting mainly of sidekicks, most of whom have taken over the identities of former members (i.e. Tim Drake, the third Robin, instead of Dick Grayson, the original Robin and Titans leader), as well as stalwarts such as Starfire, Raven, and Beast Boy, where they have fought enemies such as Deathstroke, Brother Blood, Doctor Light, The Titans Tomorrow, and a brainwashed Superboy and Indigo during a team up with the Outsiders in the Insiders storyline. In the end, Cyborg was the only one capable of standing up to Dr. Light, thanks to his solar shields, although he makes it clear that he only won the fight because the rest of the Titans had softened Light up first.

During the 20052006 storyline “Infinite Crisis”, Cyborg joined Donna’s New Cronus team that went to investigate a hole in the universe that was found during the Rann-Thanagar War. He left Beast Boy in charge of the Titans while he was gone. They arrived at the reset center of the universe and with the help of assorted heroes aided in the defeat of Alexander Luthor, who was attempting to recreate the multiverse and build a perfect Earth from it.

According to 52 Week 5, Cyborg was fused together with Firestorm after returning to Earth. This was caused by the energy ripples caused by Alexander Luthor Jr. which altered the Zeta Ray Beams the heroes were going to use to return home.

After being severely damaged during the events of “Infinite Crisis”, Cyborg was rebuilt over time in thanks to Tower caretakers Wendy and Marvin. He awoke a year later to find a wholly different Teen Titans being led by Robin, the only member from the team he formed prior to going into space. He is still a member of the team, but feels that Kid Devil and Ravager are hardly worthy Titans, and thus is attempting to find a way to reform “the real Titans”.

After the team along with the Doom Patrol defeated the Brotherhood of Evil, Cyborg asked Beast Boy to rejoin the Titans, but Gar refused, saying that his skills were needed with the Doom Patrol. After returning to Titans Tower, Cyborg began reviewing the security tapes during the last year, in which it appears that he was looked to by all the Titans of the past year for a shoulder to lean on, despite being in a coma-like state.

It appears that although Cyborg has returned to the team, the role of leader is now in the hands of Robin. He does however retain the position of statesman amongst the team and occasionally plays second-in-command.

In Justice League of America (vol. 2) #3, Batman, Wonder Woman, and Superman agree that Cyborg should be offered membership in the new Justice League. However, following a battle against Amazo, Green Lantern and Black Canary take over the formation of the JLA, and Cyborg is not amongst the roster.

In the Teen Titans East one-shot, Cyborg gathered together a new team of Titans. During a training exercise, the group was attacked by Trigon, and Cyborg was blasted by a giant energy beam. He was last seen in a crater, with only his head and torso remaining.

In the aftermath of Trigon’s assault in the Titans East one shot, Cyborg has been placed into a special hoverchair while he recuperates. Cyborg’s body is completely repaired in Titans #5. Soon after, the resurrected and unbalanced Jericho enters Cyborg’s body, using him to manipulate the defenses at Titans Tower to kill the Teen Titans. Jericho’s plans are foiled when Static, the newest Teen Titan, uses his electrical powers to overload the Tower’s systems, causing feedback that knocks Jericho out of Cyborg.[3] After recovering, Cyborg pretends to still have Jericho inside of him, in order to draw out Vigilante, who was currently targeting Jericho. The plot works too well when Vigilante appears and shoots Cyborg in the head.[4]

In an unspecified time during the Teen Titans comics, a man with enhancements similar to Cyborg’s attacks Dr. Sarah Charles on the day of her wedding to Deshaun, a young scientist. Cyborg rushes in for the save, discovering how Deshaun, connected to Project M, has sold the technology used to turn Stone into Cyborg to the military. He also finds that the enhanced man was Ron Evers, once Vic’s best friend now turned terrorist, who was seeking vengeance for the soldiers used as test subjects. After Cyborg manages to calm down his friend and discovers the truth: Mr. Orr, revealed as the mastermind behind Project M’s cyborg research, brings his Stone-derived best subjects: the current Equus, an armored form of the Wildebeest, and a cyberized man sporting enhancements even more powerful than Stone’s current ones called Cyborg 2.0.

Cyborg 2.0 turns out to be the Titans Tomorrow Cyborg 2.0, snatched from his proper timeline and cajoled by Orr into fighting his younger self for the possession of their shared technology and Orr’s permission to use it in the battlefield. Cyborg is soon forced to fight simultaneously against the Phantom Limbs, an elite force of soldiers crippled in the Middle East and restored by his tech, and the Cyborg Revenge Squad, a broader formation composed of the Fearsome Five, Magenta, Girder, the Thinker, and Cyborgirl. Although the Cyborg Revenge Squad soon gains the upper hand, with the help of his fellow Titans Cyborg is able to hold his own in combat, reverse engineer on the fly some of the future technology used by Cyborg 2.0, and enhance his own body enough to win against Mr. Orr. He later decides to get a new lease in life, forgiving Deshaun and Sarah Charles on their wedding day for abusing his technology, resuming dating Sarah Simms and having the Phantom Limbs fitted with new, non-military, prosthetics. It is however implied the Phantom Limbs, unwilling to see Stone’s offer as a sign of good will, are trying to get back their weaponized prosthetics and wait for a rematch.

During the events of Blackest Night, Cyborg joins with Starfire, Beast Boy, and several other heroes to form an emergency team to fight off the army of dead Titans who have been reanimated as Black Lanterns. He later joins in the final battle at Coast City.

Following the dissolution of the current JLA after Justice League: Cry for Justice, Cyborg is invited by Donna to join Kimiyo Hoshi’s new Justice League.[5] He befriends Red Tornado, and claims that he has come up with a plan to make him indestructible.[6]

After a battle with Doctor Impossible’s gang, Cyborg is forced to take a leave of absence from the team in order to not only help rebuild Red Tornado, but also help Roy Harper, who had his arm severed by Prometheus.[7] During this time, Victor leads Superboy and Kid Flash to the city of Dakota to rescue the Teen Titans, who had been defeated and captured by Holocaust.[8] The Titans emerge victorious from the battle after Kid Flash uses his powers to send Holocaust plummeting into the Earth’s inner core.[9]

Despite apparently being written off the team, writer James Robinson explained that Cyborg will continue to have a presence on the JLA, and will even be given a co-feature in the back of the book for Justice League of America #4850.[10] In the co-feature, Cyborg battles Red Tornado after he has been driven insane by the power of the Starheart. In the midst of the battle, a flashback reveals that Victor had rebuilt Red Tornado using self-replicating nanites similar to the ones that Prometheus infected Roy with after cutting off his arm, thus making the android indestructible.[11] Cyborg manages to free Red Tornado his power matrix.[12]

Cyborg briefly appears in Justice League: Generation Lost, where he is shown helping Wonder Woman and Starfire search for Maxwell Lord after his resurrection.[13]

Following an adventure in another dimension, Static is left powerless, and Miss Martian is rendered comatose. Cyborg stops the powerless Static from returning to Dakota, and instead tells him that he and a scientist named Rochelle Barnes will be taking him to Cadmus Labs to find a way to get his powers back and awaken Miss Martian. As Static packs up his belongings, Cyborg and Rochelle have a conversation which reveals that they are lying to Static, and have an ulterior motive for taking the two Titans to Cadmus.[14]

He later appears in the final two issues of The Return of Bruce Wayne, where he helps his former teammate Red Robin in his attempt to stop Bruce Wayne from inadvertently unleashing an apocalyptic explosion of Omega Energy.

Cyborg and Red Tornado later travel to the moon alongside Doctor Light, Animal Man, Congorilla, Zauriel, Tasmanian Devil and Bulleteer as part of an emergency group of heroes gathered to assist the Justice League in their battle against Eclipso. Shortly into the battle, Cyborg and the others are taken over by Eclipso and are turned against their JLA comrades.[15] The reserve JLA members are all freed after Eclipso is defeated.[16]

As of August 2011, Cyborg is featured as one of the main characters in a new Justice League ongoing series written by Geoff Johns and drawn by Jim Lee as part of DC’s The New 52 relaunch. Johns has said of Cyborg, “He represents all of us in a lot of ways. If we have a cellphone and we’re texting on it, we are a cyborgthat’s what a cyborg is, using technology as an extension of ourselves.”[17]

The first storyline takes place five years in the past and details the revised origin of the original Justice League. Victor Stone appears as a high school football star who is heavily sought after by a number of college scouts, but apparently has a distant relationship with his father, Silas. After winning a big game, Victor is shown calling his father and angrily telling him that he broke his promise and missed yet another one of his son’s games.[18] Later Victor appears at S.T.A.R. Labs where his father works. The scientists appear to be working on the Mother Box that Superman came in contact with from the Parademon. Victor engages in another argument with his father and tells him that the scouts were there to give him full scholarships to college. When asking if his father will ever appear at any of his games, his father replies “No.” Just then the Mother Box explodes, killing the other scientists and destroying most of Victor’s body while Victor’s father looks on in horror.[19] Silas does everything he can for Victor’s survival. He along with Sarah Charles, and T. O. Morrow go in “The Red Room” in S.T.A.R. labs which contains every piece of technology from around the world. Silas attempts to treat Victor with something that has never been attempted before and he is seen injecting Victor with some type of nanites and having Dr. Morrow put the robotic pieces on Victor (devices such as: a Promethean skin graft, Doctor William Magnus’ responsometer, Anthony Ivo’s A-maze operating system, The classified and prototypical B-maze operating system and Ryan Choi’s White Dwarf Stabilizer). Vic’s life is saved and the energies from the motherbox are incorporated into his new form as Cyborg. This allows Victor to access the vast New Gods data library and discover Darkseid’s true invasion plans.[20]

In the following issue we see Victor as Cyborg. As the issue opens Victor cannot feel his hands or legs. He sees himself for the first time with his robotic parts and is panicked by his new body. Suddenly, Parademons burst into the red room and leap toward Sarah Charles. However, Cyborg’s defense system’s reacts automatically weaponizing his arm into a sound cannon from which he fires his powerful white noise cannon, disintegrating the two Parademons and blasting a gigantic hole in the Star Labs building. After saving Sarah’s life Victor asks his father what has happened to him, his father tells him that he couldn’t let him die. Cyborg obviously distraught exclaims, “You did this to me.” and flees, despite Silas’ plea for him to wait. Later in the street Cyborg sees a woman being set upon by a group of Parademons. He leaps to the woman’s aid, punching the parademon. However, in ensuing scuffle Cyborg inadvertently absorbs some of the Parademon’s components giving him access to Boom Tube technology. This new ability automatically transports or teleports Victor to where Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Flash, Green Lantern, and Aquaman are fighting the Parademons, moments before Darkseid arrives. Cyborg fights alongside the other heroes against Darkseid and his Parademons, but despite their best efforts Darkseid proves to be too strong. Fortunately, Cyborg is able to reverse engineer the alien boom tube technology and with a considerable amount of stress on his systems he is able to teleport all the invading aliens including Darkseid off the planet, saving the Earth. After sending Darkseid back where he came from, Cyborg helps to found the Justice League.

Victor has not begun any process of reconciliation with his father, who is primarily concerned with Victor’s mechanics rather than his humanity. Cyborg primarily focuses on his super-heroics, aiding Batman and others when he can and monitoring crime through his cybernetics. After the villain David Graves makes an attack against the Justice League, Cyborg and his teammates travel to the Valley of Souls. There he learns that he walks the line between life and death. He sees a false apparition of his human self that tries to convince him that Victor Stone is dead and Cyborg is just an imitation. Victor quickly sees past this ruse, and he and the rest of the Justice League defeat Graves. We learn through a conversation with Flash, that Cyborg questions his humanity now that he is part machine and that he lives on the Watch Tower, the Justice League’s headquarters.[21] Flash cracks a joke in an attempt to lighten the mood and assure Cyborg he is still human. During the Throne of Atlantis storyline, Cyborg at first rejects an upgrade his father has that would allow him to operate underwater at the price of his remaining lung which to him would mean sacrificing more of his humanity.[22] However following the capture of the rest of the Justice League by Ohm who sentenced then to the bottom of the ocean, Cyborg as he calls in reserves to hold off Ohm’s forces reluctantly accepted the upgrade.[23] This allows him and Mera to rescue the others.[24]

During the “Trinity War” storyline, Cyborg gets a visual of Shazam heading to Kahndaq, to which Batman assembles the Justice League with the help from Zatanna to meet in Kahndaq to stop Shazam.[25] Following the supposed death of Doctor Light in Kahndaq, Batman tells Superman that Cyborg and Martian Manhunter are doing an autopsy to prove his death was not Superman’s fault.[26] As Wonder Woman leads the Justice League Dark to go look for Pandora, Cyborg is among the superheroes that remain at A.R.G.U.S. while Batman, Flash, Aquaman, Shazam, Steve Trevor, the Justice League of America, Zatanna, and Phantom Stranger go to stop Wonder Woman.[27] Cyborg was present when Atom tells him, Superman, Element Woman and Firestorm the true purpose of the creation of the Justice League of America and that she was spying on the Justice League which is how the Justice League of America ended up in Kahndaq.[28] When the Crime Syndicate arrives on Prime Earth, Cyborg’s old prosthetic parts combine to form a robot called Grid (who is operated by a sentient computer virus).[29] During the Forever Evil event, after Batman and Catwoman drop Cyborg off to his father in Detroit,[30] he makes the choice to willingly receive a new cybernetic body and helps his father and Dr. Morrow create one that is slimmer in appearance so Cyborg could look more human.[31] Working together with the Metal Men created by Doc Magus, Cyborg succeeds in shutting down Grid.[32]

Afterwards Cyborg helped newcomer to the group Shazam fit in with the league as the rest set out to find Power ring’s missing accessory which flew off after the death of the former wearer.[33] While on monitor duty he and Shazam experiment with some of his magical powers to aid in finding the ring after joking of having an Xbox in his left shoulder; only for the young ward to conjure up a ping pong table, which they play while having spare time on their hands.[34] Eventually the call goes out and everyone in the league mobilizes to secure the new rampaging Power Ring before the Doom Patrol does.[35] After coaxing Billy into action against Jessica Cruis, Victor moves in to interface with the ring itself finding out a great about the ring of Volthoom and his current host only to be forcefully thrown out after the ring entity rejects him causing his systems to short circuit taking him out of the battle.[36]

He is last seen recovering at S.T.A.R. Labs after Shazam rushed him too the med bay after the power ring crisis was handled. While Superman and Lex Luthor battled Gorilla Grodd Cyborg gave Billy the okay to head out and see if they needed help as the former wondered what he saw within the ring after his dad warned him interfacing with it again could trap him in it forever.[37]

Afterwards, Lex Luthor and Captain Cold were accepted onto the team. An incident involving Batman’s son, Damian Wayne, during the “Robin Rises Alpha & Omega” story arc in Batman led up to most of the justice League battling against Glorious Godfrey and a Parademon horde from Apokolips when they captured the chaos shard and the sarcophagus of Damian and later fled back home.[38] All the league members present, Cyborg included, state to an adamant Bruce Wayne that running headlong into unmarked X-factor territory for a suicide mission was less than ideal considering the consequences that could befall earth. This all boils over, eventually culminating with Batman hijacking Cyborg’s teleportation systems to zip up to the Watchtower in an attempt to retrieve an experimental and highly dangerous combat suit in order to mete out his agenda; But Cyborg manages to block his administrative access so that he, Shazam, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Lex and Cold could physically restrain him, causing Batman to begrudgingly give up and retire to the batcave.[39]

After the Bat left, the rest of the Bat Family turned up asking Victor for help with some digitized doppelgangers of baddies that Bruce initially set up in order to distract the League, destabilize watchtower security to secure the Hellbat, and eventually use a personal Mother Box (secured from a Parademon kept in cold storage) to vacate to Apokolips.[40] After making his way to the Batcave to meet with them, he’s directed over to a console which enabled him to directly access the Batcomputer’s more sophisticated systems. However, it was all a ruse utilizing a preemptive countermeasure devised by Batman tailored to Cyborg’s specific weaknesses. Cyborg was temporarily incapacitated and was set into a VR simulation where he relived his more peaceful days in college, while Batgirl went to work on his Motherbox in order to secure a path towards Apokolips and chase after their father. But Victor eventually snapped out of his dream haze and followed them through, angered that they used him in such a way.[40] Cyborg traveled along with Titus, who hitched a ride on his leg, to catch up with the rest of the Batman Family. They all then have a run in with the scavengers of Armegeddo who quickly vacate after some Apokoliptian Hunger Dogs make their way onto the scene. They eventually catch up with the armor-clad Dark Knight ripping his way through a sizable chunk of Apokolips’s forces singlehandedly. Jason Tim and Barbara show Batman the Robin Medals Alfred gave them in order to remind him of his purpose, causing him to snap out of his berserker rage and note that Cyborg had reluctantly accompanied them to Hell itself. Having made their way into Darkseid’s citadel where Kalibak was readying his Chaos Cannon to fire again, the caped crusaders kept Darkseid’s forces occupied while Cyborg made short work of the massive war engine, literally tearing it in half. But when he went to set a timed self-destruct sequence within the Apokoliptian computers, Vic suffered a catastrophic feedback that fried most of his internal systems leaving him inoperable just as Darkseid himself made his appearance.[41]

While Batman fought and held Darkseid off, Cyborg ran Batgirl through a crash course on how to hot wire his own Motherbox. Since Darkseid smashed Batman’s Boom Tube generator, Cyborg was their only chance off Apokolips. After successfully jury-rigging his internal systems, Cyborg and the rest of the Bat rogues made a hasty exit stage left as Bruce powered his recovered fragment of the Chaos Shard with Darkseid’s Omega Effect, blasting Darkseid against a wall to cover their escape.[42] In the aftermath, Cyborg, who is still unable to facilitate himself, wonders what is going on as Damian Wayne is successfully revived, however a second anomaly cranks out of the Boom Tube that was opened and Kalibak comes charging through it. With Kalibak occupied by the rest of the gang, Vic tries his best to reestablish his downed systems. He is successful and gains control over the still-open tube as Batman readies the Batplane. As Batman rams his jet into the evil New God sending him careening back to Apokolips, Cyborg closes the portal banishing Darksied’s first born for good. With the threat over, Cyborg heads back topside to inform the rest of the league of what all transpired and stating he has JL business to attend to.[43]

An eponymous ongoing series, by writer David F. Walker and artist Ivan Reis, debuted in July 2015.[44]

This article needs to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (August 2017)

As of Rebirth, he is a part of the relaunched Justice League bi-monthly series as well as his own solo monthly series. It is unclear whether he has the ability of flight in Rebirth.

During Dark Nights: Metal, he is captured by the alternate Batmen of the Dark Multiverse, who attempt to hack him in order to learn the secrets of his teammates. As the crisis escalates, Cyborg is confronted by the controlling consciousness of other Mother Boxes, who claim that he will only gain the power to overcome the Dark Batmen if he fully surrenders to the Mother Box that powers his body at the cost of the transformation deleting his old personality. He is nearly tempted to give in to this transformation, but the appearance of Raven’s soul-self convinces him to hold on to himself while partially succumbing to the transformation. This allows him to free his teammates and ‘hack’ the multiverse as they travel to find new allies in the battle against the Dark Batmen.

Large portions of Victor Stone’s body have been replaced by advanced mechanical parts (hence the name Cyborg), granting him superhuman strength, speed, stamina, and flight. His mechanically-enhanced body, much of which is metallic, is far more durable than a normal human body. Cyborg’s internal computer system can interface with external computers. Other features include an electronic ‘eye’ which replicates vision, but at a superhuman level. His mechanical parts contain a wide variety of tools and weapons, such as a grappling hook/line and a finger-mounted laser. Perhaps his most frequently-used weapon is his sound amplifier (often referred to as his “white sound blaster” in the comic books; the Teen Titans animated series calls it a “sonic cannon”), which can be employed at various settings either to stun the ears of his foes or to deliver concentrated blasts of sound potent enough to shatter rock or deform steel.[45]

In addition to his mechanical enhancements, Stone possesses an “exceptionally gifted” level of intelligence; his IQ has been measured at 170.[46]

Cyborg has tinkered over time with his cybernetic parts, enhancing his functions and abilities to levels beyond those set by his father. One feature that sets him apart from the “mass production” version built by Project M is a self-repair system, able to flawlessly repair the mechanical parts of his body, no matter how worn out they are, and even improve the health of the still biological parts to an unknown degree.

Cyborg’s New 52 (DCnU) functions

Cyborg possesses cybernetic enhancements that provide superhuman strength, endurance and durability. Cyborg can also interface with computers. Built into his body-armor are an infrared eye with HUD, a bionic ear that allows him to hear sounds from long distance, computer generator, sound amplifier (similar to a sonic cannon), and special programming adapters that allow him to interface with other body extensions. This enhances his durability, strength, speed, and endurance. He also has multiple sensors, and can fly via rocket boosters. While he can use Boom Tubes, he usually use Jump Jets to help him leap great distances. His body can also absorb technology at will, as well as control technology and shift his body. He can also emit an EMP blast to disable any electrical devices within a fifty-meter radius, codenamed the “Heart Attack”. His body uses the Grid, a program Vic and Batman created to help him better manage the constant flow of uploading and downloading data he receives on a constant basis; it acts as his solipisistic engram into the Cyberverse/Digitalverse where he can better prioritize and interface with the worldwide networking system, focusing on high-priority items and filter out other received data. As part of the events of the Throne of Atlantis Aquaman crossover, Cyborg’s lungs were replaced by cybernetic lungs that allow him to breathe underwater. His body can also regenerate from damage, and he can enhance his strength.

After he lost his original cybernetic enhancements which became Grid at the end of the Trinity War arc,[31] during the Forever Evil event, he has his father Silas Stone and Dr. Morrow help create a new cybernetic body. As explained in that issue, by cutting down on strength, speed, and stamina, Cyborg’s new cybernetic body looks slimmer in appearance as Victor describes looking more human compared to looking like a tank. It is unknown whether or not Cyborg had re-integrated the technology stripped from him after Grid’s defeat. After a run in with alternate universe invaders calling themselves the “Techbreakers,” Cyborg’s systems had undergone a complete systems overhaul causing a new operating system to come online restoring him to life and healing his damaged circuitry as well as reintegrating his ruined flesh into it, turning him into a full on Techno-Organic being.[47]

In the Flashpoint event, the timeline is greatly altered. In this alternate version of events, Cyborg is America’s greatest superhero (occupying the role held by Superman in DC’s standard timeline). He attempts to put together a group to stop the war between Aquaman and Wonder Woman’s forces. However, the heroes he approaches all refuse, after Batman declines.[48] Cyborg connects the resistance member Lois Lane to spy on the Amazons for any information.[49] Cyborg rescues people in the subway station from arsonist Heat Wave.[50] Abin Sur crashes on Earth; he is subsequently taken into custody by Cyborg and the US government to be questioned about his reasons for being on Earth. When Abin Sur is recovering, he is on a mission to retrieve the Entity, however Cyborg convinces him to join with Earth’s heroes.[51] Afterwards, Cyborg is seen talking with the President in his headquarters in Detroit. The President states that Steve Trevor sent a signal to the resistance but was intercepted by a traitor among the heroes that Cyborg tried to recruit and suspicion leads to the Outsider. For Cyborg’s failure, he is relieved of duty as the Element Woman sneaks into the headquarters. Later, Cyborg is called by Batman and the Flash for help in tracking down “Project: Superman”, the government branch responsible for ‘raising’ Kal-El after his rocket destroyed Metropolis upon its arrival. Cyborg and them agree to join the cause to stop Wonder Woman and Aquaman, but only if Batman gets to choose who to recruit, and Cyborg agrees as long as he comes with them. The three sneak into the government underground bunkers, and the group comes across a giant vault door bearing the Superman logo. Cyborg opens the door and sees a weakened Kal-El, with the arrival of guards. Forced to escape, Kal-El’s powers begin to manifest and flies off leaving them at the hands of the guards.[52] While they are fending off the guards, they are rescued by Element Woman. Later, Cyborg and other heroes arrive at the Marvel Family’s place helping the Flash from drastically forgetting his memories. After the Flash is recovering, he asked to stop the Atlantean/Amazon war from casualty, although Cyborg and the heroes are not willing unless Batman wants to join them, because Cyborg explains to him that they believe Batman was invincible. However, the Flash convinces him that no one is invincible and the group of heroes are agreeing to join the Flash. The heroes arrive at New Themyscira to stop the Atlantean/Amazon war, and the Flash tells Cyborg to find Aquaman’s ultimate bomb to dispose of it.[53]

In the Titans Tomorrow storyline, a future version of Victor Stone called Cyborg 2.0 is a member of Titans East. He is shown having similar plating as the animated Cyborg from the Teen Titans animated series.[54]

An alternate version of Cyborg appears as part of the Justice League of Earth-23 in the DC Multiverse.[55]

Cyborg appears as the third Robotman as part of Superman’s Justice League. Robotman is now completely liquid metal. He is petrified by the nuclear blast.

Cyborg appears as a character in the prequel comic to the game, where he joins Superman’s Regime to force peace on the world. He serves as Superman’s eyes and ears over the world, offering insight on any activity deemed disruptive. At the end of Year Two he discovers someone is trying to hack into the Regime’s system during a war with the Green Lantern Corps (Oracle) and goes to the Watchtower to locate her. Jim Gordon follows and corners him, managing to rip Cyborg’s metallic face plate off and knock him unconscious, stopping the locating sequence. Cyborg spends most of the next year a prisoner of the Insurgency until he is released when the two groups collide in a battle that nearly destroys them when Trigon and Mr. Mxyzptlk get involved. In Year Four he and the Regime are confronted by the Greek Gods, who want Superman to step down as ruler. While the Regime is forced to go underground, they come together to defeat the gods once and for all. During Year Five tension grows among the Regime because of Superman’s growing hostility and controversial decisions, such as enlisting the aid of villains to help the Regime. Cyborg is especially disgusted when he discovers that during a rally with supporters of the Joker who reject Superman, the Man of Steel killed over two hundred defenseless protesters in anger. Batman and Batwoman later go to the Hall of Justice to kidnap Cyborg because he is the only one aware of this and has the information stored in his data. He is incapacitated and taken underground to the ruins of Metropolis where Batgirl works to find the data and reveal to the world. While they succeed in finding it, Raven casts a massive black out over the world to prevent the video from being seen, and the Insurgency is forced to retreat before Flash comes to get Cyborg. Superman has Cyborg erase any data containing information on his killings so the incident will not repeat itself.

Cyborg appears in a prequel comic to the sequel game. He remained in prison with Superman, even after the League of Assassins and impostor Batman’s Suicide Squad raid the Ryker’s Island to free only Damian Wayne/the current Nightwing.

Cyborg appears in the DC Extended Universe played by Ray Fisher. He first appears in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice in a brief sequence of footage that is viewed by Wonder Woman. The footage depicts Cyborg’s origin story. Fisher reprises the character in the Justice League films: the first was released on November 17, 2017, its sequel, and the standalone Flash film Flashpoint. A standalone Cyborg film is scheduled for April 3, 2020.[57][58] In the films, his cybernetic parts are 100% CGI.[59]

Read the rest here:

Cyborg (comics) – Wikipedia

Cyborg | Teen Titans Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

It’s not in the circuitry, is it? It’s not the machine that resists you; it’s me, my spirit! That’s the part you can’t break! I don’t need you to make me a man! I already am one! Cyborg to an overwhelmed Brother BloodCyborgVoiceKhary Payton (English), Ken Uo (Japanese), Daniel Lob (French), Tobias Kluckert (German), Roberto Draghetti (Italian), Kim So-hyung (Korean), Zoltn Dzsa (Hungarian), Onur Glcolu (Turkish)Real name

Victor “Vic” Stone

Elinore Stone (mother, deceased)Silas Stone (father)Tucker Stone (grandfather)Maude Stone (grandmother)

Eating Food,Electronic Gadgets,Fourth of July,Listening to Music,Playing Practical Jokes,Science Fiction Movies,Sports Videogames,Watching TV, Hanging Out With Beast Boy

Brother BloodAnyone who abuses his technology,Being half machine,Gizmo,Losing battles,Not being strong enough,Not Having the remote for the TV,Tofu,Beast Boy losing things,Being ignored by Beast Boy, Starfire’s singing and cooking

A body made up of entirely robotic systems granting him superhuman strength, resilience to damage, capability to fix many appliances, unsurpassed knowledge of technology and robotics, a cannon built into his arm that can shoot sonic blasts, and numeral other gadgets built into his body

Sonic Cannons built into his arms and numerous other gadgets installed throughout his body

Cyborg (sometimes “Cy”) is the half-cybernetic half-man, chief technological expert and one of the five founding members of the Teen Titans.

Cyborg was a promising strong teenage athlete named Victor Stone before an accident that killed his mother and injured him so severely that his father replaced the damaged body parts with cybernetics to keep his son alive. But since these mechanical parts were not inconspicuous, he was shunned by his home environment and his friends, which frustrated him greatly.

One night, Cyborg took to the streets wearing a hoodie to cover his cybernetic parts, where he ran into the new arrivals Robin and Beast Boy fighting a rather violent alien girl, who was actually a fugitive from a prisoner transport. Soon joined by the mystery girl Raven, the youngsters teamed up to defeat the girl’s alien captors and formed a permanent team to combat villainy. Cyborg constructed the Titans Tower and its systems from a Gordanian landing ship, and the team moved into its new headquarters. From that point on Cyborg served as the team’s chief technician, constructing their primary vehicles such as the T-Car and T-Ship.

Cyborg wearing a hoodie to hide his cybernetics.

In the series’ third season, Cyborg used the alias of Stone and a pair of holographic rings to infiltrate the H.I.V.E. Academy, which was at that time administered and mind-controlled by Brother Blood.

The Titans exposed and foiled his scheme to utilize a new superweapon called the Ion Amplifier, but in the process Cyborg unknowingly had the construction plans for his cybernetics copied by Blood, who used them to build new superweapons. Outraged, Cyborg declared a personal vendetta on Blood and confronted him personally when he attempted to employ a gigantic sonic cannon from an undersea base. However, Blood’s martial arts skills got the better of him, and he won only with Bumblebee’s assistance, who was at that time infiltrating the H.I.V.E. with the help of Aqualad. In order to hunt down Blood and other supervillains more efficiently, Cyborg helped Bumblebee and Aqualad establish and outfit an Eastern branch of the Titans, with Speedy and Ms y Menos joining the ranks. Soon they were attacked by Blood and an army of Cyborg-modeled robots, but apparently managed to repel them all. Met with a proposal to remain and become the leader of the Titans East, Cyborg decided to stay with his new team.

Cyborg as his original “human” self

At one point, Cyborg attempted to upgrade himself by installing a super-processor chip called Maximum-7 (or Max-7) into his cybernetic brain. Initially it did work for his benefit, boosting his physical and mental processing speed well beyond his former capacities. But when the Titans first engaged Billy Numerous and were unable to catch him, a frustrated and obsessive Cyborg began shutting down his human personality in order to increase the Max-7’s efficiency, which had the detrimental effect of making him more and more a robot, and eventually this conflict between human and cybernetic nature led to a short-circuit which nearly killed him. The other Titans managed to remove the chip before this could happen, and now restored to his true self, Cyborg devised a successful plan which brought down Numerous for good.

In the comic series based on the TV show, Cyborg meets a young teaching volunteer by the name of Sarah Simms. Despite several rocky times they have since formed a very close romance.

Cyborg eating meat

Cyborg is a very outgoing, cool, and fun-loving character who likes to enjoy life, especially since he found friends who consider him a person, not a freak. He is upbeat, smart, funny, and cheerful, but serious and heroic when he needs to be. He likes to enjoy playing video games, tinkering with technological gizmos and eating. He also tends to be stubborn at times and has had some serious arguments with Robin in the past, but he does make a capable second-in-command in Robin’s absence. He also frequently bickers with Beast Boy, mostly about the latter’s culinary taste and habit of misplacing all manners of personal items, though the two entertain a close friendship.

Cyborg often plays the protective big brother role of the team, getting quite serious when they are upset and does whatever he can to make them feel better. He is never hesitant to put Beast Boy in his place when he thinks the younger Titan is being inconsiderate of Raven’s or Starfire’s feelings. Likewise, Raven and Starfire also do the same for him, evident in Car Trouble and Deception.

Much like the other Titans, Cyborg does not take betrayal lightly. He hates losing battles, especially to seemingly insignificant opponents. Their first defeat from Terra made him extremely angry with himself, because he had a chance to take a shot but didn’t. He has been known to display emotions of anger (which he often takes out on his friends), frustration, and becoming depressed.

Cyborg’s replacement robot dressed up

One facet of personal vulnerability is Cyborg’s great personal pride in his inventions and constructions. For this reason, he tends to foster an immense dislike for anyone abusing his technology for selfish reasons, especially Gizmo and Brother Blood, and to be overprotective of his most personal projects, like the T-Car.[1][2][3][4]

He also possesses a tremendous appetite, and he will consume any edibles within his reach when hungry. His favorite food is barbecue and he also especially enjoys other meat, milkshakes, pizza, and waffles. The only food he would not voluntarily touch is Starfire’s cooking and tofu (especially since Beast Boy goes to great lengths to try and make him eat it) although he once mistakenly ate the alien meat substitute.

As revealed in Troq, he has a personal dislike for bigots as shown when he became disgusted with Val-Yor when he found out what he had really be calling Starfire.

Beast Boy is Cyborg’s best friend. Cyborg is never hesitant to put Beast Boy in his place, especially if he feels that the younger hero is being rude or inconsiderate. This is particularly true in interactions with Raven, where he tries his best to include her, but is still considerate of Raven’s feelings and preference for peace and quiet. Yet, he is just as often seen at his friend’s side causing mischief with him. Despite Cyborg’s love of meat, and Beast Boy’s love of tofu, the two remain close friends. Cyborg and Beast Boy have a lot in common, including a fondness for breakfast food, playing video games, watching movies, and playing practical jokes on each other. Throughout the series, Cyborg is shown to have a tough love relationship with Beast Boy. The two are close, but Cyborg feels the need to keep Beast Boy in line and maybe instill a little more consideration and maturity in him.

However, he can be surprised when Beast Boy adopts a more serious persona as shown when he took note of the latter’s behavior when reuniting with the Doom Patrol. He was even more surprised Beast Boy went with them to defeat their old enemies. This likely showed him Beast Boy merely puts up an act, as he had no problem with Beast Boy’s leadership when fighting the Brotherhood of Evil.

Despite this Cyborg can sometime show his immature side with Beast Boy as they also enjoy playing their favorite game they made up “Stankball”.

Cyborg and Raven fixing the T-Car

Raven and Cyborg have a fairly stable and healthy relationship. They had very few episodes dedicated to mostly the two of them, but this is likely because the two of them have always been fairly close and comfortable around each other. Cyborg, despite being the Titan most similar to Beast Boy, is more mature than he is and is more considerate of Raven’s preferences. Raven, for her part, reciprocates this, as she is more patient with Cyborg than she is with Beast Boy.

Cyborg often looks out for Raven, making sure that Beast Boy does not go over the top to annoy her or hurt her feelings. In Nevermore, Cyborg was especially serious with Beast Boy, reminding him that he shouldn’t be messing with her following the prior night’s events, and made sure he went to apologize. Even though he tried to get Raven to play Stank Ball with him and Beast Boy, she clearly stated she doesn’t want to play, which made Beast Boy angry. He called her creepy, with Raven still listening, and Cyborg told him to leave her be, knowing she wanted to be alone.

In the Teen Titans Go! comics, on Christmas, Cyborg bought Raven an antique bookcase he knew she wanted, causing Raven to become uncharacteristically elated and showing an appreciation for her tastes and hobbies.

When they first met, Raven felt as if she did not fit in, but Cyborg reassures her that she fits in just fine. Even though they fight occasionally, they maintain a healthy friendship.

Despite sometimes being a bit inconsiderate of Cyborg’s feelings, Raven never intends to hurt him emotionally. This is evident in Car Trouble, where she initially dismissed Cyborg’s dismay over his stolen T-Car by telling him “Calm down, it’s just a car.” which made Cyborg rather angry. However she ultimately realizes her fault, and goes to comfort him and help him get his car back. Although he was forced to destroy it, Raven goes as far as to help him rebuild it, further proving their close friendship.

When Cyborg is the only one left with Raven in Fear Itself, he likely knew she was afraid, and tried to reassure her that they’ll get through the ordeal. Cyborg being the last Titan to disappear that night may further hint at his big brother role to Raven, being protective of her when she wanted to save Starfire when there was no possible way to.

Cyborg is shown to often be more understanding of Raven than the other Titans, as he respects her desires to be alone but still tries to include her when he can. Raven, in turn, seems to accept Cyborg as he is without question and accepts his enthusiasm for his hobbies, even if she does not share it.

Cyborg makes Raven smile more than anyone else in the series. Her biggest smiles, at least, two episodes centering around Cyborg’s troubles.

Cyborg and Robin fighting

It is revealed that Cyborg is Robin’s second-in-command.

“I didn’t know you before,so to me – you are normal.”

Starfire and Cyborg are incredibly close. Their relationship is much like an older brother and younger sister, and Cyborg is really protective over her. They hardly ever get angry at each other, however, in Final Exam, Cyborg does lose his temper and hurt Starfire. Despite this, the two have remained extremely close throughout the series.

Cyborg had helped Starfire greatly in How Long is Forever? when she was pushed forward in time. Even after so many years, Cyborg cared deeply for Starfire’s well-being. In the series, Cyborg seems to act like the big brother to Starfire, and Starfire looks up to him.

The two often like to lift weights together, and despite countless times having witnessed Starfire’s impressive strength, is still shocked when she is able to lift heavier weights than he is with relative ease. They are the strongest in the team physically, as their physical prowess far outmatches Robin’s, Raven’s, and even Beast Boy’s.

Cyborg and Starfire have a practically mirrored personality, both being cheerful yet considerate of others’ feelings, and they seemed to get along well from the very beginning.

In the episode, Troq, Cyborg was the first one to learn the meaning of the word Val Yor had been calling Starfire, (Troq, which is a slur for literally “nothing”). Because he initially misinterpreted Starfire’s explanation that it meant nothing, he went to call her that, which hurt her deeply. But after learning that it literally meant nothing, Cyborg went to comfort her. Being half-robot, Cyborg knows exactly what it is like to be mistreated just for how you look, and completely empathized with her. He then told Robin, who was equally outraged.

Cyborg also makes note of Starfire’s close relationship with Robin, and in Stranded, he even teased Robin, calling Starfire his girlfriend. And when Starfire and Robin had their first real kiss in the final movie-episode of the series, Trouble in Tokyo, Cyborg voiced his approval, saying, “Well, it’s about time.”

Cyborg with cannons

This ability has its own cons though. His entire power cell and the whole power of Titans’ Tower is only just enough to make one blast. This is why he only uses it in desperation, and it is much like an ultimate form, much like Beast Boy’s Werebeast form and Raven’s white form.

Main article: Cyborg/Gallery

Originally posted here:

Cyborg | Teen Titans Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

Cyborg (1989) – IMDb

Edit Storyline

Gibson Rickenbacker is a hired fighter living in a plague-ravaged apocalyptic America where a plague has infested most of the United States and the rest of the world. In New York City, Gibson encounters a woman named Pearl Prophet. Pearl reveals to Gibson that she is a cyborg who is carrying vital-information for a group of scientists in Atlanta who are working on a cure to the plague and Pearl hires Gibson to escort her back to Atlanta. But Pearl is kidnapped by “Pirates” a murderous gang led by Fender Tremolo, who wants the cure for themselves and they decide to take Pearl to Atlanta themselves. Gibson, joined by a young woman named Nady Simmons, goes in pursuit of Fender and his gang, as Gibson sets out to rescue Pearl, stop Fender and his gang from reaching Atlanta and defeat Fender who slaughtered Gibson’s family. Written byDaniel Williamson

Taglines:He’s the First Hero of the 21st Century…And He’s Our Only Hope.

Budget:$500,000 (estimated)

Opening Weekend USA: $3,179,811,9 April 1989, Wide Release

Gross USA: $10,166,459

Runtime: 86 min

Aspect Ratio: 1.85 : 1

View original post here:

Cyborg (1989) – IMDb

Cris Cyborg – Official UFC Fighter Profile

When and why did you start training for fighting? Istarted training over a decade ago. I was always an athlete, and once Idiscovered that unlike handball, MMA doesn’tissue red cards, I knew I had found my true sport.

What ranks and titles have you held? UFC Womens Featherweight Champion. Former Invicta FCWorldChampion. FormerStrikeforce World Champion. 2x IBJJF World Champion. ADCC Bronze Medalist.

Do you have any heroes? Jesus Christ, who died for our sins.

What does it mean for you to fight in the UFC? It is anhonor.

Did you go to college and if so what degree did you earn? I never finished university; however, it issomethingI plan to return to once my MMA career isfinished. Animals are a passion for me and I think it would be amazing to one day further my knowledge and find a way to work with them.

What was your job before you started fighting? I used to work inside of a pet grooming store.

Ranks in any martial arts styles: Chute Boxe Muay Thai black belt, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu brown belt under Andre Galvao of Atos BJJ TeamFavorite grappling technique: SuplexFavorite Striking technique: Whatever strikefinishes with a KO

17 wins by KO, three by decision

Lost pro debut unbeaten since

10 first round finishes

Has won 10 straight

Had 4-0, 1 NC record in Strikeforce

Was 5-0 with five finishes in Invicta FC

Owns wins over Gina Carano, Marloes Coenen (twice), Shayna Baszler and Vanessa Porto

Has finished 13 of last 14 wins

See original here:

Cris Cyborg – Official UFC Fighter Profile

UC San Diego NanoEngineering Department

The NanoEngineering program has received accreditation by the Accreditation Commission of ABET, the global accreditor of college and university programs in applied and natural science, computing, engineering and engineering technology. UC San Diego’s NanoEngineering program is the first of its kind in the nation to receive this accreditation. Our NanoEngineering students can feel confident that their education meets global standards and that they will be prepared to enter the workforce worldwide.

ABET accreditation assures that programs meet standards to produce graduates ready to enter critical technical fields that are leading the way in innovation and emerging technologies, and anticipating the welfare and safety needs of the public. Please visit the ABET website for more information on why accreditation matters.

Congratulations to the NanoEngineering department and students!

See the rest here:

UC San Diego NanoEngineering Department

NanoEngineering (NANO) Courses

[ undergraduate program | graduate program | faculty ]

All courses, faculty listings, and curricular and degree requirements described herein are subject to change or deletion without notice.

For course descriptions not found in the UC San Diego General Catalog 201819, please contact the department for more information.

The department website is http://nanoengineering.ucsd.edu/undergrad-programs

All students enrolled in NanoEngineering courses or admitted to the NanoEngineering major are expected to meet prerequisite and performance standards, i.e., students may not enroll in any NanoEngineering courses or courses in another department that are required for the major prior to having satisfied prerequisite courses with a C or better. (The department does not consider D or F grades as adequate preparation for subsequent material.) Additional details are given under the program outline, course descriptions, and admission procedures for the Jacobs School of Engineering in this catalog.

NANO 1. NanoEngineering Seminar (1)

Overview of NanoEngineering. Presentations and discussions of basic knowledge and career opportunities in nanotechnology for professional development. Introduction to campus library resources. P/NP grades only. Prerequisites: none.

NANO 4. ExperienceNanoEngineering(1)

Introduction to NanoEngineering lab-based skills. Hands-on training and experimentation with nanofabrication techniques, integration, and analytical tools. This class is for NANO majors who are incoming freshmen, to be taken their first year.This class is for NanoEngineering majors who are incoming freshmen, to be taken their first year. P/NP grades only. Prerequisites: department approval required.

NANO 15. Engineering Computation Using Matlab (4)

Introduction to the solution of engineering problems using computational methods. Formulating problem statements, selecting algorithms, writing computer programs, and analyzing output using Matlab. Computational problems from NanoEngineering, chemical engineering, and materials science are introduced. The course requires no prior programming skills. Cross-listed with CENG 15. Prerequisites: none.

NANO 100L. Physical Properties of Materials Lab (4)

Experimental investigation of physical properties of materials such as: thermal expansion coefficient, thermal conductivity, glass transitions in polymers, resonant vibrational response, longitudinal and shear acoustic wave speeds, Curie temperatures, UV-VIS absorption and reflection. Prerequisites: NANO 108.

NANO 101. Introduction to NanoEngineering (4)

Introduction to NanoEngineering; nanoscale fabrication: nanolithography and self-assembly; characterization tools; nanomaterials and nanostructures: nanotubes, nanowires, nanoparticles, and nanocomposites; nanoscale and molecular electronics; nanotechnology in magnetic systems; nanotechnology in integrative systems; nanoscale optoelectronics; nanobiotechnology: biomimetic systems, nanomotors, nanofluidics, and nanomedicine. Priority enrollment given to NanoEngineering majors. Prerequisites: Chem 6B, Phys 2B, Math 20C, and CENG 15 or MAE 8 or NANO 15. Department approval required.

NANO 102. Foundations in NanoEngineering: Chemical Principles (4)

Chemical principles involved in synthesis, assembly, and performance of nanostructured materials and devices. Chemical interactions, classical and statistical thermodynamics of small systems, diffusion, carbon-based nanomaterials, supramolecular chemistry, liquid crystals, colloid and polymer chemistry, lipid vesicles, surface modification, surface functionalization, catalysis. Priority enrollment given to NanoEngineering majors. Prerequisites: Chem 6C, Math 20D, NANO 101, PHYS 2D, and NANO 106. Restricted to NanoEngineering majors or by department approval.

NANO 103. Foundations in NanoEngineering: Biochemical Principles (4)

Principles of biochemistry tailored to nanotechnologies. The structure and function of biomolecules and their specific roles in molecular interactions and signal pathways. Detection methods at the micro and nano scales. Priority enrollment will be given to NanoEngineering majors. Prerequisites: BILD 1, Chem 6C, NANO 101, and NANO 102. Department approval required.

NANO 104. Foundations in NanoEngineering: Physical Principles (4)

Introduction to quantum mechanics and nanoelectronics. Wave mechanics, the Schroedinger equation, free and confined electrons, band theory of solids. Nanosolids in 0D, 1D, and 2D. Application to nanoelectronic devices. Priority enrollment given to NanoEngineering majors Prerequisites: Math 20D, NANO 101. Department approval required.

NANO 106. Crystallography of Materials (4)

Fundamentals of crystallography, and practice of methods to study material structure and symmetry. Curie symmetries. Tensors as mathematical description of material properties and symmetry restrictions. Introduction to diffraction methods, including X-ray, neutron, and electron diffraction. Close-packed and other common structures of real-world materials. Derivative and superlattice structures. Prerequisites: Math 20F.

NANO 107.Electronic Devices and Circuits for Nanoengineers (4)

Overview of electrical devices and CMOS integrated circuits emphasizing fabrication processes, and scaling behavior. Design, and simulation of submicron CMOS circuits including amplifiers active filters digital logic, and memory circuits. Limitations of current technologies and possible impact of nanoelectronic technologies.Prerequisites: NANO 15, NANO 101, Math 20B or Math 20D, and Phys 2B.

NANO 108. Materials Science and Engineering (4)

Structure and control of materials: metals, ceramics, glasses, semiconductors, polymers to produce useful properties. Atomic structures. Defects in materials, phase diagrams, micro structural control. Mechanical, rheological, electrical, optical and magnetic properties discussed. Time temperature transformation diagrams. Diffusion. Scale dependent material properties. Prerequisites: upper-division standing.

NANO 110. Molecular Modeling of Nanoscale Systems (4)

Principles and applications of molecular modeling and simulations toward NanoEngineering. Topics covered include molecular mechanics, energy minimization, statistical mechanics, molecular dynamics simulations, and Monte Carlo simulations. Students will get hands-on training in running simulations and analyzing simulation results. Prerequisites: Math 20F, NANO 102, NANO 104, and NANO 15 or CENG 15 or MAE 8. Restricted to NanoEngineering majors or by department approval.

NANO 111. Characterization of NanoEngineering Systems (4)

Fundamentals and practice of methods to image, measure, and analyze materials and devices that are structured at the nanometer scale. Optical and electron microscopy; scanning probe methods; photon-, ion-, electron-probe methods, spectroscopic, magnetic, electrochemical, and thermal methods. Prerequisites: NANO 102.

NANO 112. Synthesis and Fabrication of NanoEngineering Systems (4)

Introduction to methods for fabricating materials and devices in NanoEngineering. Nano-particle, -vesicle, -tube, and -wire synthesis. Top-down methods including chemical vapor deposition, conventional and advanced lithography, doping, and etching. Bottom-up methods including self-assembly. Integration of heterogeneous structures into functioning devices. Prerequisites: NANO 102, NANO 104, NANO 111.

NANO 114. Probability and Statistical Methods for Engineers (4)

Probability theory, conditional probability, Bayes theorem, discrete random variables, continuous random variables, expectation and variance, central limit theorem, graphical and numerical presentation of data, least squares estimation and regression, confidence intervals, testing hypotheses. Cross-listed with CENG 114. Students may not receive credit for both NANO 114 and CENG 114. Prerequisites: Math 20F and NANO 15 or CENG 15 or MAE 8.

NANO 120A. NanoEngineering System Design I (4)

Principles of product design and the design process. Application and integration of technologies in the design and production of nanoscale components. Engineering economics. Initiation of team design projects to be completed in NANO 120B. Prerequisites: NANO 110.

NANO 120B. NanoEngineering System Design II (4)

Principles of product quality assurance in design and production. Professional ethics. Safety and design for the environment. Culmination of team design projects initiated in NANO 120A with a working prototype designed for a real engineering application. Prerequisites: NANO 120A.

NANO 134. Polymeric Materials (4)

Foundations of polymeric materials. Topics: structure of polymers; mechanisms of polymer synthesis; characterization methods using calorimetric, mechanical, rheological, and X-ray-based techniques; and electronic, mechanical, and thermodynamic properties. Special classes of polymers: engineering plastics, semiconducting polymers,photoresists, and polymers for medicine. Cross-listed with CENG 134.Students may not receive credit for bothCENG134 andNANO134. Prerequisites:Chem 6Cand Phys2C.

NANO 141A. Engineering Mechanics I: Analysis of Equilibrium (4)

Newtons laws. Concepts of force and moment vector. Free body diagrams. Internal and external forces. Equilibrium of concurrent, coplanar, and three-dimensional system of forces. Equilibrium analysis of structural systems, including beams, trusses, and frames. Equilibrium problems with friction. Prerequisites:Math 20C and Phys 2A.

NANO 141B.Engineering Mechanics II: Analysis of Motion (4)

Newtons laws of motion. Kinematic and kinetic description of particle motion. Angular momentum. Energy and work principles. Motion of the system of interconnected particles.Mass center. Degrees of freedom. Equations of planar motion of rigid bodies. Energy methods. Lagranges equations of motion. Introduction to vibration. Free and forced vibrations of a single degree of freedom system. Undamped and damped vibrations. Application to NanoEngineering problems.Prerequisites:Math 20D and NANO 141A.

NANO 146. Nanoscale Optical Microscopy and Spectroscopy (4)

Fundamentals in optical imaging and spectroscopy at the nanometer scale. Diffraction-limited techniques, near-field methods, multi-photon imaging and spectroscopy, Raman techniques, Plasmon-enhanced methods, scan-probe techniques, novel sub-diffraction-limit imaging techniques, and energy transfer methods. Prerequisites: NANO 103 and 104.

NANO 148. Thermodynamics of Materials (4)

Fundamental laws of thermodynamics for simple substances; application to flow processes and to non-reacting mixtures; statistical thermodynamics of ideal gases and crystalline solids; chemical and materials thermodynamics; multiphase and multicomponent equilibria in reacting systems; electrochemistry. Prerequisites: upper-division standing.

NANO 150. Mechanics of Nanomaterials (4)

Introduction to mechanics of rigid and deformable bodies. Continuum and atomistic models, interatomic forces and intermolecular interactions. Nanomechanics, material defects, elasticity, plasticity, creep, and fracture. Composite materials, nanomaterials, biological materials. Prerequisites: NANO 108.

NANO 156. Nanomaterials (4)

Basic principles of synthesis techniques, processing, microstructural control, and unique physical properties of materials in nanodimensions. Nanowires, quantum dots, thin films, electrical transport, optical behavior, mechanical behavior, and technical applications of nanomaterials. Cross-listed with MAE 166. Prerequisites: upper-division standing.

NANO 158. Phase Transformations and Kinetics (4)

Materials and microstructures changes. Understanding of diffusion to enable changes in the chemical distribution and microstructure of materials, rates of diffusion. Phase transformations, effects of temperature and driving force on transformations and microstructure. Prerequisites: NANO 108 and NANO 148.

NANO 158L.Materials Processing Laboratory(4)

Metal casting processes, solidification, deformation processing, thermal processing: solutionizing, aging, and tempering, joining processes such as welding and brazing. The effect of processing route on microstructure and its effect on mechanical and physical properties will be explored.NanoEngineering majors have priority enrollment. Prerequisites:NANO 158.

NANO 161. Material Selection in Engineering (4)

Selection of materials for engineering systems, based on constitutive analyses of functional requirements and material properties. The role and implications of processing on material selection. Optimizing material selection in a quantitative methodology. NanoEngineering majors receive priority enrollment. Prerequisites: NANO 108. Department approval required. Restricted to major code NA25.

NANO 164. Advanced Micro- and Nano-materials for Energy Storage and Conversion (4)

Materials for energy storage and conversion in existing and future power systems, including fuel cells and batteries, photovoltaic cells, thermoelectric cells, and hybrids. Prerequisites: NANO 101, NANO 102, NANO 148.

NANO 168. Electrical, Dielectric, and Magnetic Properties of Engineering Materials (4)

Introduction to physical principles of electrical, dielectric, and magnetic properties. Semiconductors, control of defects, thin film, and nanocrystal growth, electronic and optoelectronic devices. Processing-microstructure-property relations of dielectric materials, including piezoelectric, pyroelectric and ferroelectric, and magnetic materials. Prerequisites: NANO 102 and NANO 104.

NANO 174. Mechanical Behavior of Materials (4)

Microscopic and macroscopic aspects of the mechanical behavior of engineering materials, with emphasis on recent development in materials characterization by mechanical methods. The fundamental aspects of plasticity in engineering materials, strengthening mechanisms, and mechanical failure modes of materials systems. Prerequisites: NANO 108.

NANO 174L. Mechanical Behavior Laboratory (4)

Experimental investigation of mechanical behavior of engineering materials. Laboratory exercises emphasize the fundamental relationship between microstructure and mechanical properties, and the evolution of the microstructure as a consequence of rate process. Prerequisites: NANO 174.

NANO 199. Independent Study for Undergraduates (4)

Independent reading or research on a problem by special arrangement with a faculty member. P/NP grades only. Prerequisites: upper division and department stamp.

NANO 200. Graduate Seminar in Chemical Engineering (1)

Each graduate student in NANO is expected to attend three seminars per quarter, of his or her choice, dealing with current topics in chemical engineering. Topics will vary. Cross-listed with CENG 205. S/U grades only. May be taken for credit four times. Prerequisites: graduate standing.

NANO 201. Introduction to NanoEngineering (4)

Understanding nanotechnology, broad implications, miniaturization: scaling laws; nanoscale physics; types and properties of nanomaterials; nanomechanical oscillators, nano(bio)electronics, nanoscale heat transfer; fluids at the nanoscale; machinery cell; applications of nanotechnology and nanobiotechnology. Students may not receive credit for both NANO 201 and CENG 211. Prerequisites: graduate standing.

NANO 202. Intermolecular and Surface Forces (4)

Development of quantitative understanding of the different intermolecular forces between atoms and molecules and how these forces give rise to interesting phenomena at the nanoscale, such as flocculation, wetting, self-assembly in biological (natural) and synthetic systems. Cross-listed with CENG 212. Students may not receive credit for both NANO 202 and CENG 212. Prerequisites: consent of instructor.

NANO 203. Nanoscale Synthesis and Characterization (4)

Nanoscale synthesistop-down and bottom-up; chemical vapor deposition; plasma processes; soft-lithography; self-assembly; layer-by-layer. Characterization; microscopy; scanning probe microscopes; profilometry; reflectometry and ellipsometry; X-ray diffraction; spectroscopies (EDX, SIMS, Mass spec, Raman, XPS); particle size analysis; electrical, optical. Cross-listed with CENG 213. Students may not receive credit for both NANO 203 and CENG 213. Prerequisites: consent of instructor.

NANO 204. Nanoscale Physics and Modeling (4)

This course will introduce students to analytical and numerical methods such as statistical mechanisms, molecular simulations, and finite differences and finite element modeling through their application to NanoEngineering problems involving polymer and colloiod self-assembly, absorption, phase separation, and diffusion. Cross-listed with CENG 214. Students may not receive credit for both NANO 204 and CENG 214. Prerequisites: NANO 202 or consent ofinstructor.

NANO 205. Nanosystems Integration (4)

Scaling issues and hierarchical assembly of nanoscale components into higher order structures which retain desired properties at microscale and macroscale levels. Novel ways to combine top-down and bottom-up processes for integration of heterogeneous components into higher order structures. Cross-listed with CENG 215. Students may not receive credit for both NANO 205 and CENG 215. Prerequisites: consent of instructor.

NANO 208. Nanofabrication (4)

Basic engineering principles of nanofabrication. Topics include: photo-electronbeam and nanoimprint lithography, block copolymers and self-assembled monolayers, colloidal assembly, biological nanofabrication. Cross-listed with CENG 208. Students may not receive credit for both NANO 208 and CENG 208. Prerequisites: consent of instructor.

NANO 210. Molecular Modeling and Simulations of Nanoscale Systems (4)

Molecular and modeling and simulation techniques like molecular dynamics, Monte Carlo, and Brownian dynamics to model nanoscale systems and phenomena like molecular motors, self-assembly, protein-ligand binding, RNA, folding. Valuable hands-on experience with different simulators.Prerequisites: consent of instructor.

NANO 212. Computational Modeling of Nanosystems (4)

Various modeling techniques like finite elements, finite differences, and simulation techniques like molecular dynamics and Monte Carlo to model fluid flow, mechanical properties, self-assembly at the nanoscale, and protein, RNA and DNA folding.Prerequisites: consent of instructor.

NANO 227. Structure and Analysis of Solids (4)

Key concepts in the atomic structure and bonding of solids such as metals, ceramics, and semiconductors. Symmetry operations, point groups, lattice types, space groups, simple and complex inorganic compounds, structure/property comparisons, structure determination with X-ray diffraction. Ionic, covalent, metallic bonding compared with physical properties. Atomic and molecular orbitals, bands verses bonds, free electron theory. Cross-listed with MATS 227, MAE 251 and Chem 222.Prerequisites: consent of instructor.

NANO 230. Synchrotron Characterization of Nanomaterials (4)

Advanced topics in characterizing nanomaterials using synchrotron X-ray sources. Introduction to synchrotron sources, X-ray interaction with matter, spectroscopic determination of electronic properties of nanomagnetic, structural determination using scattering techniques and X-ray imaging techniques. Cross-listed with CENG 230. Students may not receive credit for both NANO 230 and CENG 230. Prerequisites: consent of instructor.

NANO 234. Advanced Nanoscale Fabrication (4)

Engineering principles of nanofabrication. Topics include: photo-, electron beam, and nanoimprint lithography, block copolymers and self-assembled monolayers, colloidal assembly, biological nanofabrication. Relevance to applications in energy, electronics, and medicine will be discussed.Prerequisites: consent of instructor.

NANO 238. Scanning Probe Microscopy (4)

Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) detectors, imaging, image interpretation, and artifacts, introduction to lenses, electron beam-specimen interactions. Operating principles and capabilities for atomic force microscopy and scanning tunneling microscopy, scanning optical microscopy and scanning transmission electron microscopy.Prerequisites: consent of instructor.

NANO 239. Nanomanufacturing (4)

Fundamental nanomanufacturing science and engineering, top-down nanomanufacturing processes, bottom-up nanomanufacturing processes, integrated top-down and bottom-up nanofabrication processes, three-dimensional nanomanufacturing, nanomanufacturing systems, nanometrology, nanomanufactured devices for medicine, life sciences, energy, and defense applications.Prerequisites: department approval required.

NANO 241. Organic Nanomaterials (4)

This course will provide an introduction to the physics and chemistry of soft matter, followed by a literature-based critical examination of several ubiquitous classes of organic nano materials and their technological applications. Topics include self-assembled monolayers, block copolymers, liquid crystals, photoresists, organic electronic materials, micelles and vesicles, soft lithography, organic colloids, organic nano composites, and applications in biomedicine and food science. Cross-listed with Chem 241.Prerequisites: consent of instructor.

NANO 242. Biochemisty and Molecular Biology (4)

Go here to read the rest:

NanoEngineering (NANO) Courses

IEEE-NANOMED 2016 The 10th IEEE International Conference …

Holiday Inn Macao Cotai Central Sands Cotai Central, Cotai Strip, Taipa, Macau SAR, China

Program Timetable (PDF version) is available. (FINAL, updated on Oct 26)

Registration Time:

IEEE-NANOMED is one of the premier annual events organized by the IEEE Nanotechnology Council to bring together physicians, scientists and engineers alike from all over the world and every sector of academy and industry, working at advancement of basic and clinical research in medical and biological sciences using nano/molecular and engineering methods. IEEE-NANOMED is the conference where practitioners will see nano/molecular medicine and engineering at work in both their own and related fields, from essential and advanced scientific and engineering research and theory to translational and clinical research.

Conference Theme:

Authors are also invited to submit results to a special issue of the journal Micromachines (impact factor 1.295), on the topic of Microdevices and Microsystems for Cell Manipulation. More information on the special issue and paper submission can be found here:http://www.mdpi.com/journal/micromachines/special_issues/cell_manipulation

Authors are also invited to submit results to a special issue of the journal Micromachines (impact factor 1.295), on the topic of MEMS/NEMS for Biomedical Imaging and Sensing. More information on the special issue and paper submission can be found here:http://www.mdpi.com/journal/micromachines/special_issues/MEMS_biomedical_imaging_sensing

Continue reading here:

IEEE-NANOMED 2016 The 10th IEEE International Conference …

What is Nanotechnology? | Nano

Nanotechnology is science, engineering, and technologyconductedat the nanoscale, which is about 1 to 100 nanometers.

Physicist Richard Feynman, the father of nanotechnology.

Nanoscience and nanotechnology are the study and application of extremely small things and can be used across all the other science fields, such as chemistry, biology, physics, materials science, and engineering.

The ideas and concepts behind nanoscience and nanotechnology started with a talk entitled Theres Plenty of Room at the Bottom by physicist Richard Feynman at an American Physical Society meeting at the California Institute of Technology (CalTech) on December 29, 1959, long before the term nanotechnology was used. In his talk, Feynman described a process in which scientists would be able to manipulate and control individual atoms and molecules. Over a decade later, in his explorations of ultraprecision machining, Professor Norio Taniguchi coined the term nanotechnology. It wasn’t until 1981, with the development of the scanning tunneling microscope that could “see” individual atoms, that modern nanotechnology began.

Its hard to imagine just how small nanotechnology is. One nanometer is a billionth of a meter, or 10-9 of a meter. Here are a few illustrative examples:

Nanoscience and nanotechnology involve the ability to see and to control individual atoms and molecules. Everything on Earth is made up of atomsthe food we eat, the clothes we wear, the buildings and houses we live in, and our own bodies.

But something as small as an atom is impossible to see with the naked eye. In fact, its impossible to see with the microscopes typically used in a high school science classes. The microscopes needed to see things at the nanoscale were invented relatively recentlyabout 30 years ago.

Once scientists had the right tools, such as thescanning tunneling microscope (STM)and the atomic force microscope (AFM), the age of nanotechnology was born.

Although modern nanoscience and nanotechnology are quite new, nanoscale materialswereused for centuries. Alternate-sized gold and silver particles created colors in the stained glass windows of medieval churches hundreds of years ago. The artists back then just didnt know that the process they used to create these beautiful works of art actually led to changes in the composition of the materials they were working with.

Today’s scientists andengineers are finding a wide variety of ways to deliberatelymake materials at the nanoscale to take advantage of their enhanced properties such as higher strength, lighter weight,increased control oflight spectrum, and greater chemical reactivity than theirlarger-scale counterparts.

Go here to see the original:

What is Nanotechnology? | Nano

Nano Electron. Sci. & Eng. Lab (NESEL)

NESEL is world class research laboratory in the field of fabricating nanoscale devices. In the laboratory, we are growing nanostructures and composite nanostructures of variety of materials in various shapes and characterizing them by several techniques. Further, we are using these nanostructures and composite nanostructures in making several nanoelectronic devices. These devices are nanogenerators, hybrid organic inorganic solar cells, etc.

Materials Today Piezoelectric properties in two-dimensional materials:Simulations and experiments

Nature Communications Rewritable ghost floating gates by tunnelling triboelectrification for two-dimensional electronics

Advanced Materials Point-Defect-Passivated MoS2 Nanosheet-Based High Performance Piezoelectric Nanogenerator

Advanced Energy MaterialsHigh-Performance Triboelectric Nanogenerators Based on Solid Polymer Electrolytes with Asymmetric Pairing of Ions

Advanced Functional Materials High-Performance Triboelectric Nanogenerators Based on Electrospun Polyvinylidene FluorideSilver Nanowire Composite Nanofibers

Energy & Environmental Science Sustainable direct current powering a triboelectric nanogenerator via a novel asymmetrical design

Angewante Chemie International EditionNanocrystalline Graphene-Tailored Hexagonal Boron Nitride Thin Film

ACS Nano Fully Stretchable Textile Triboelectric Nanogenerator with Knitted Fabric Structures

Nano EnergyUnderstanding and modeling of triboelectric-electret nanogenerator

View post:

Nano Electron. Sci. & Eng. Lab (NESEL)

JAS Oceania – JAS Home

More than just another online ordering platform, the new JAS Oceania system gives the trade fast access to the entire JAS stock network for checking price and availability, your online account balance and orders you have in the system.

eJas is set to improve the way trade workshops place product orders and access marketing information in the Automotive Industry.

Access to eJas is available to JAS Oceania account holders only. If you do not have an existing account, please fill in an Account Application Form.

Read the original:

JAS Oceania – JAS Home

Nineteen Eighty-Four – Wikipedia

Nineteen Eighty-Four, often published as 1984, is a dystopian novel published in 1949 by English author George Orwell.[2][3] The novel is set in the year 1984 when most of the world population have become victims of perpetual war, omnipresent government surveillance and public manipulation.

In the novel, Great Britain (“Airstrip One”) has become a province of a superstate named Oceania. Oceania is ruled by the “Party”, who employ the “Thought Police” to persecute individualism and independent thinking.[4] The Party’s leader is Big Brother, who enjoys an intense cult of personality but may not even exist. The protagonist of the novel, Winston Smith, is a rank-and-file Party member. Smith is an outwardly diligent and skillful worker, but he secretly hates the Party and dreams of rebellion against Big Brother. Smith rebels by entering a forbidden relationship with fellow employee Julia.

As literary political fiction and dystopian science-fiction, Nineteen Eighty-Four is a classic novel in content, plot, and style. Many of its terms and concepts, such as Big Brother, doublethink, thoughtcrime, Newspeak, Room 101, telescreen, 2 + 2 = 5, and memory hole, have entered into common usage since its publication in 1949. Nineteen Eighty-Four popularised the adjective Orwellian, which describes official deception, secret surveillance, brazenly misleading terminology, and manipulation of recorded history by a totalitarian or authoritarian state.[5] In 2005, the novel was chosen by Time magazine as one of the 100 best English-language novels from 1923 to 2005.[6] It was awarded a place on both lists of Modern Library 100 Best Novels, reaching number 13 on the editor’s list, and 6 on the readers’ list.[7] In 2003, the novel was listed at number 8 on the BBC’s survey The Big Read.[8]

Orwell “encapsulate[d] the thesis at the heart of his unforgiving novel” in 1944, the implications of dividing the world up into zones of influence, which had been conjured by the Tehran Conference. Three years later, he wrote most of it on the Scottish island of Jura from 1947 to 1948 despite being seriously ill with tuberculosis.[9][10] On 4 December 1948, he sent the final manuscript to the publisher Secker and Warburg, and Nineteen Eighty-Four was published on 8 June 1949.[11][12] By 1989, it had been translated into 65 languages, more than any other novel in English until then.[13] The title of the novel, its themes, the Newspeak language and the author’s surname are often invoked against control and intrusion by the state, and the adjective Orwellian describes a totalitarian dystopia that is characterised by government control and subjugation of the people.

Orwell’s invented language, Newspeak, satirises hypocrisy and evasion by the state: the Ministry of Love (Miniluv) oversees torture and brainwashing, the Ministry of Plenty (Miniplenty) oversees shortage and rationing, the Ministry of Peace (Minipax) oversees war and atrocity and the Ministry of Truth (Minitrue) oversees propaganda and historical revisionism.

The Last Man in Europe was an early title for the novel, but in a letter dated 22 October 1948 to his publisher Fredric Warburg, eight months before publication, Orwell wrote about hesitating between that title and Nineteen Eighty-Four.[14] Warburg suggested choosing the main title to be the latter, a more commercial one.[15]

In the novel 1985 (1978), Anthony Burgess suggests that Orwell, disillusioned by the onset of the Cold War (194591), intended to call the book 1948. The introduction to the Penguin Books Modern Classics edition of Nineteen Eighty-Four reports that Orwell originally set the novel in 1980 but that he later shifted the date to 1982 and then to 1984. The introduction to the Houghton Mifflin Harcourt edition of Animal Farm and 1984 (2003) reports that the title 1984 was chosen simply as an inversion of the year 1948, the year in which it was being completed, and that the date was meant to give an immediacy and urgency to the menace of totalitarian rule.[16]

Throughout its publication history, Nineteen Eighty-Four has been either banned or legally challenged, as subversive or ideologically corrupting, like Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (1932), We (1924) by Yevgeny Zamyatin, Darkness at Noon (1940) by Arthur Koestler, Kallocain (1940) by Karin Boye and Fahrenheit 451 (1953) by Ray Bradbury.[17] Some writers consider the Russian dystopian novel We by Zamyatin to have influenced Nineteen Eighty-Four,[18][19] and the novel bears significant similarities in its plot and characters to Darkness at Noon, written years before by Arthur Koestler, who was a personal friend of Orwell.[20]

The novel is in the public domain in Canada,[21] South Africa,[22] Argentina,[23] Australia,[24] and Oman.[25] It will be in the public domain in the United Kingdom, the EU,[26] and Brazil in 2021[27] (70 years after the author’s death), and in the United States in 2044.[28]

Nineteen Eighty-Four is set in Oceania, one of three inter-continental superstates that divided the world after a global war.

Smith’s memories and his reading of the proscribed book, The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism by Emmanuel Goldstein, reveal that after the Second World War, the United Kingdom became involved in a war fought in Europe, western Russia, and North America during the early 1950s. Nuclear weapons were used during the war, leading to the destruction of Colchester. London would also suffer widespread aerial raids, leading Winston’s family to take refuge in a London Underground station. Britain fell to civil war, with street fighting in London, before the English Socialist Party, abbreviated as Ingsoc, emerged victorious and formed a totalitarian government in Britain. The British Commonwealth was absorbed by the United States to become Oceania. Eventually Ingsoc emerged to form a totalitarian government in the country.

Simultaneously, the Soviet Union conquered continental Europe and established the second superstate of Eurasia. The third superstate of Eastasia would emerge in the Far East after several decades of fighting. The three superstates wage perpetual war for the remaining unconquered lands of the world in “a rough quadrilateral with its corners at Tangier, Brazzaville, Darwin, and Hong Kong” through constantly shifting alliances. Although each of the three states are said to have sufficient natural resources, the war continues in order to maintain ideological control over the people.

However, due to the fact that Winston barely remembers these events and due to the Party’s manipulation of history, the continuity and accuracy of these events are unclear. Winston himself notes that the Party has claimed credit for inventing helicopters, airplanes and trains, while Julia theorizes that the perpetual bombing of London is merely a false-flag operation designed to convince the populace that a war is occurring. If the official account was accurate, Smith’s strengthening memories and the story of his family’s dissolution suggest that the atomic bombings occurred first, followed by civil war featuring “confused street fighting in London itself” and the societal postwar reorganisation, which the Party retrospectively calls “the Revolution”.

Most of the plot takes place in London, the “chief city of Airstrip One”, the Oceanic province that “had once been called England or Britain”.[29][30] Posters of the Party leader, Big Brother, bearing the caption “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU”, dominate the city (Winston states it can be found on nearly every house), while the ubiquitous telescreen (transceiving television set) monitors the private and public lives of the populace. Military parades, propaganda films, and public executions are said to be commonplace.

The class hierarchy of Oceania has three levels:

As the government, the Party controls the population with four ministries:

The protagonist Winston Smith, a member of the Outer Party, works in the Records Department of the Ministry of Truth as an editor, revising historical records, to make the past conform to the ever-changing party line and deleting references to unpersons, people who have been “vaporised”, i.e., not only killed by the state but denied existence even in history or memory.

The story of Winston Smith begins on 4 April 1984: “It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.” Yet he is uncertain of the true date, given the regime’s continual rewriting and manipulation of history.[31]

In the year 1984, civilization has been damaged by war, civil conflict, and revolution. Airstrip One (formerly Britain) is a province of Oceania, one of the three totalitarian super-states that rules the world. It is ruled by the “Party” under the ideology of “Ingsoc” and the mysterious leader Big Brother, who has an intense cult of personality. The Party stamps out anyone who does not fully conform to their regime using the Thought Police and constant surveillance, through devices such as Telescreens (two-way televisions).

Winston Smith is a member of the middle class Outer Party. He works at the Ministry of Truth, where he rewrites historical records to conform to the state’s ever-changing version of history. Those who fall out of favour with the Party become “unpersons”, disappearing with all evidence of their existence removed. Winston revises past editions of The Times, while the original documents are destroyed by fire in a “memory hole”. He secretly opposes the Party’s rule and dreams of rebellion. He realizes that he is already a “thoughtcriminal” and likely to be caught one day.

While in a proletarian neighbourhood, he meets an antique shop owner called Mr. Charrington and buys a diary. He uses an alcove to hide it from the Telescreen in his room, and writes thoughts criticising the Party and Big Brother. In the journal, he records his sexual frustration over a young woman maintaining the novel-writing machines at the ministry named Julia, whom Winston is attracted to but suspects is an informant. He also suspects that his superior, an Inner Party official named O’Brien, is a secret agent for an enigmatic underground resistance movement known as the Brotherhood, a group formed by Big Brother’s reviled political rival Emmanuel Goldstein.

The next day, Julia secretly hands Winston a note confessing her love for him. Winston and Julia begin an affair, an act of the rebellion as the Party insists that sex may only be used for reproduction. Winston realizes that she shares his loathing of the Party. They first meet in the country, and later in a rented room above Mr. Charrington’s shop. During his affair with Julia, Winston remembers the disappearance of his family during the civil war of the 1950s and his terse relationship with his ex-wife Katharine. Winston also interacts with his colleague Syme, who is writing a dictionary for a revised version of the English language called Newspeak. After Syme admits that the true purpose of Newspeak is to reduce the capacity of human thought, Winston speculates that Syme will disappear. Not long after, Syme disappears and no one acknowledges his absence.

Weeks later, Winston is approached by O’Brien, who offers Winston a chance to join the Brotherhood. They arrange a meeting at O’Brien’s luxurious flat where both Winston and Julia swear allegiance to the Brotherhood. He sends Winston a copy of The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism by Emmanuel Goldstein. Winston and Julia read parts of the book, which explains more about how the Party maintains power, the true meanings of its slogans and the concept of perpetual war. It argues that the Party can be overthrown if proles (proletarians) rise up against it.

Mr. Charrington is revealed to be an agent of the Thought Police. Winston and Julia are captured in the shop and imprisoned in the Ministry of Love. O’Brien reveals that he is loyal to the party, and part of a special sting operation to catch “thoughtcriminals”. Over many months, Winston is tortured and forced to “cure” himself of his “insanity” by changing his own perception to fit the Party line, even if it requires saying that “2 + 2 = 5”. O’Brien openly admits that the Party “is not interested in the good of others; it is interested solely in power.” He says that once Winston is brainwashed into loyalty, he will be released back into society for a period of time, before they execute him. Winston points out that the Party has not managed to make him betray Julia.

O’Brien then takes Winston to Room 101 for the final stage of re-education. The room contains each prisoner’s worst fear, in Winston’s case rats. As a wire cage holding hungry rats is fitted onto his face, Winston shouts “Do it to Julia!”, thus betraying her. After being released, Winston meets Julia in a park. She says that she was also tortured, and both reveal betraying the other. Later, Winston sits alone in a caf as Oceania celebrates a supposed victory over Eurasian armies in Africa, and realizes that “He loved Big Brother.”

Ingsoc (English Socialism) is the predominant ideology and pseudophilosophy of Oceania, and Newspeak is the official language of official documents.

In London, the capital city of Airstrip One, Oceania’s four government ministries are in pyramids (300 m high), the faades of which display the Party’s three slogans. The ministries’ names are the opposite (doublethink) of their true functions: “The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation.” (Part II, Chapter IX The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism)

The Ministry of Peace supports Oceania’s perpetual war against either of the two other superstates:

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 Ministry of Plenty rations and controls food, goods, and domestic production; every fiscal quarter, it publishes false claims of having raised the standard of living, when it has, in fact, reduced rations, availability, and production. The Ministry of Truth substantiates Ministry of Plenty’s claims by revising historical records to report numbers supporting the current, “increased rations”.

The Ministry of Truth controls information: news, entertainment, education, and the arts. Winston Smith works in the Minitrue RecDep (Records Department), “rectifying” historical records to concord with Big Brother’s current pronouncements so that everything the Party says is true.

The Ministry of Love identifies, monitors, arrests, and converts real and imagined dissidents. In Winston’s experience, the dissident is beaten and tortured, and, when near-broken, he is sent to Room 101 to face “the worst thing in the world”until love for Big Brother and the Party replaces dissension.

The keyword here is blackwhite. Like so many Newspeak words, this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary. This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink. Doublethink is basically the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.

Three perpetually warring totalitarian super-states control the world:[34]

The perpetual war is fought for control of the “disputed area” lying “between the frontiers of the super-states”, which forms “a rough parallelogram with its corners at Tangier, Brazzaville, Darwin and Hong Kong”,[34] and Northern Africa, the Middle East, India and Indonesia are where the superstates capture and use slave labour. Fighting also takes place between Eurasia and Eastasia in Manchuria, Mongolia and Central Asia, and all three powers battle one another over various Atlantic and Pacific islands.

Goldstein’s book, The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism, explains that the superstates’ ideologies are alike and that the public’s ignorance of this fact is imperative so that they might continue believing in the detestability of the opposing ideologies. The only references to the exterior world for the Oceanian citizenry (the Outer Party and the Proles) are Ministry of Truth maps and propaganda to ensure their belief in “the war”.

Winston Smith’s memory and Emmanuel Goldstein’s book communicate some of the history that precipitated the Revolution. Eurasia was formed when the Soviet Union conquered Continental Europe, creating a single state stretching from Portugal to the Bering Strait. Eurasia does not include the British Isles because the United States annexed them along with the rest of the British Empire and Latin America, thus establishing Oceania and gaining control over a quarter of the planet. Eastasia, the last superstate established, emerged only after “a decade of confused fighting”. It includes the Asian lands conquered by China and Japan. Although Eastasia is prevented from matching Eurasia’s size, its larger populace compensates for that handicap.

The annexation of Britain occurred about the same time as the atomic war that provoked civil war, but who fought whom in the war is left unclear. Nuclear weapons fell on Britain; an atomic bombing of Colchester is referenced in the text. Exactly how Ingsoc and its rival systems (Neo-Bolshevism and Death Worship) gained power in their respective countries is also unclear.

While the precise chronology cannot be traced, most of the global societal reorganization occurred between 1945 and the early 1960s. Winston and Julia once meet in the ruins of a church that was destroyed in a nuclear attack “thirty years” earlier, which suggests 1954 as the year of the atomic war that destabilised society and allowed the Party to seize power. It is stated in the novel that the “fourth quarter of 1983” was “also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan”, which implies that the first quarter of the first three-year plan began in July 1958. By then, the Party was apparently in control of Oceania.

In 1984, there is a perpetual war between Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia, the superstates that emerged from the global atomic war. The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism, by Emmanuel Goldstein, explains that each state is so strong it cannot be defeated, even with the combined forces of two superstates, despite changing alliances. To hide such contradictions, history is rewritten to explain that the (new) alliance always was so; the populaces are accustomed to doublethink and accept it. The war is not fought in Oceanian, Eurasian or Eastasian territory but in the Arctic wastes and in a disputed zone comprising the sea and land from Tangiers (Northern Africa) to Darwin (Australia). At the start, Oceania and Eastasia are allies fighting Eurasia in northern Africa and the Malabar Coast.

That alliance ends and Oceania, allied with Eurasia, fights Eastasia, a change occurring on Hate Week, dedicated to creating patriotic fervour for the Party’s perpetual war. The public are blind to the change; in mid-sentence, an orator changes the name of the enemy from “Eurasia” to “Eastasia” without pause. When the public are enraged at noticing that the wrong flags and posters are displayed, they tear them down; the Party later claims to have captured Africa.

Goldstein’s book explains that the purpose of the unwinnable, perpetual war is to consume human labour and commodities so that the economy of a superstate cannot support economic equality, with a high standard of life for every citizen. By using up most of the produced objects like boots and rations, the proles are kept poor and uneducated and will neither realise what the government is doing nor rebel. Goldstein also details an Oceanian strategy of attacking enemy cities with atomic rockets before invasion but dismisses it as unfeasible and contrary to the war’s purpose; despite the atomic bombing of cities in the 1950s, the superstates stopped it for fear that would imbalance the powers. The military technology in the novel differs little from that of World War II, but strategic bomber aeroplanes are replaced with rocket bombs, helicopters were heavily used as weapons of war (they did not figure in World War II in any form but prototypes) and surface combat units have been all but replaced by immense and unsinkable Floating Fortresses, island-like contraptions concentrating the firepower of a whole naval task force in a single, semi-mobile platform (in the novel, one is said to have been anchored between Iceland and the Faroe Islands, suggesting a preference for sea lane interdiction and denial).

The society of Airstrip One and, according to “The Book”, almost the whole world, lives in poverty: hunger, disease and filth are the norms. Ruined cities and towns are common: the consequence of the civil war, the atomic wars and the purportedly enemy (but possibly false flag) rockets. Social decay and wrecked buildings surround Winston; aside from the ministerial pyramids, little of London was rebuilt. Members of the Outer Party consume synthetic foodstuffs and poor-quality “luxuries” such as oily gin and loosely-packed cigarettes, distributed under the “Victory” brand. (That is a parody of the low-quality Indian-made “Victory” cigarettes, widely smoked in Britain and by British soldiers during World War II. They were smoked because it was easier to import them from India than it was to import American cigarettes from across the Atlantic because of the War of the Atlantic.)

Winston describes something as simple as the repair of a broken pane of glass as requiring committee approval that can take several years and so most of those living in one of the blocks usually do the repairs themselves (Winston himself is called in by Mrs. Parsons to repair her blocked sink). All Outer Party residences include telescreens that serve both as outlets for propaganda and to monitor the Party members; they can be turned down, but they cannot be turned off.

In contrast to their subordinates, the Inner Party upper class of Oceanian society reside in clean and comfortable flats in their own quarter of the city, with pantries well-stocked with foodstuffs such as wine, coffee and sugar, all denied to the general populace.[35] Winston is astonished that the lifts in O’Brien’s building work, the telescreens can be switched off and O’Brien has an Asian manservant, Martin. All members of the Inner Party are attended to by slaves captured in the disputed zone, and “The Book” suggests that many have their own motorcars or even helicopters. Nonetheless, “The Book” makes clear that even the conditions enjoyed by the Inner Party are only “relatively” comfortable, and standards would be regarded as austere by those of the prerevolutionary lite.[36]

The proles live in poverty and are kept sedated with alcohol, pornography and a national lottery whose winnings are never actually paid out; that is obscured by propaganda and the lack of communication within Oceania. At the same time, the proles are freer and less intimidated than the middle-class Outer Party: they are subject to certain levels of monitoring but are not expected to be particularly patriotic. They lack telescreens in their own homes and often jeer at the telescreens that they see. “The Book” indicates that is because the middle class, not the lower class, traditionally starts revolutions. The model demands tight control of the middle class, with ambitious Outer-Party members neutralised via promotion to the Inner Party or “reintegration” by the Ministry of Love, and proles can be allowed intellectual freedom because they lack intellect. Winston nonetheless believes that “the future belonged to the proles”.[37]

The standard of living of the populace is low overall. Consumer goods are scarce, and all those available through official channels are of low quality; for instance, despite the Party regularly reporting increased boot production, more than half of the Oceanian populace goes barefoot. The Party claims that poverty is a necessary sacrifice for the war effort, and “The Book” confirms that to be partially correct since the purpose of perpetual war consumes surplus industrial production. Outer Party members and proles occasionally gain access to better items in the market, which deals in goods that were pilfered from the residences of the Inner Party.[citation needed]

Nineteen Eighty-Four expands upon the subjects summarised in Orwell’s essay “Notes on Nationalism”[38] about the lack of vocabulary needed to explain the unrecognised phenomena behind certain political forces. In Nineteen Eighty-Four, the Party’s artificial, minimalist language ‘Newspeak’ addresses the matter.

O’Brien concludes: “The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.”

In the book, Inner Party member O’Brien describes the Party’s vision of the future:

There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But alwaysdo not forget this, Winstonalways there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human faceforever.

Part III, Chapter III, Nineteen Eighty-Four

A major theme of Nineteen Eighty-Four is censorship, especially in the Ministry of Truth, where photographs are modified and public archives rewritten to rid them of “unpersons” (persons who are erased from history by the Party). On the telescreens, figures for all types of production are grossly exaggerated or simply invented to indicate an ever-growing economy, when the reality is the opposite. One small example of the endless censorship is Winston being charged with the task of eliminating a reference to an unperson in a newspaper article. He proceeds to write an article about Comrade Ogilvy, a made-up party member who displayed great heroism by leaping into the sea from a helicopter so that the dispatches he was carrying would not fall into enemy hands.

The inhabitants of Oceania, particularly the Outer Party members, have no real privacy. Many of them live in apartments equipped with two-way telescreens so that they may be watched or listened to at any time. Similar telescreens are found at workstations and in public places, along with hidden microphones. Written correspondence is routinely opened and read by the government before it is delivered. The Thought Police employ undercover agents, who pose as normal citizens and report any person with subversive tendencies. Children are encouraged to report suspicious persons to the government, and some denounce their parents. Citizens are controlled, and the smallest sign of rebellion, even something so small as a facial expression, can result in immediate arrest and imprisonment. Thus, citizens, particularly party members, are compelled to obedience.

“The Principles of Newspeak” is an academic essay appended to the novel. It describes the development of Newspeak, the Party’s minimalist artificial language meant to ideologically align thought and action with the principles of Ingsoc by making “all other modes of thought impossible”. (A linguistic theory about how language may direct thought is the SapirWhorf hypothesis.)

Whether or not the Newspeak appendix implies a hopeful end to Nineteen Eighty-Four remains a critical debate, as it is in Standard English and refers to Newspeak, Ingsoc, the Party etc., in the past tense: “Relative to our own, the Newspeak vocabulary was tiny, and new ways of reducing it were constantly being devised” p.422). Some critics (Atwood,[39] Benstead,[40] Milner,[41] Pynchon[42]) claim that for the essay’s author, both Newspeak and the totalitarian government are in the past.

Nineteen Eighty-Four uses themes from life in the Soviet Union and wartime life in Great Britain as sources for many of its motifs. Some time at an unspecified date after the first American publication of the book, producer Sidney Sheldon wrote to Orwell interested in adapting the novel to the Broadway stage. Orwell sold the American stage rights to Sheldon, explaining that his basic goal with Nineteen Eighty-Four was imagining the consequences of Stalinist government ruling British society:

[Nineteen Eighty-Four] was based chiefly on communism, because that is the dominant form of totalitarianism, but I was trying chiefly to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office.[43]

The statement “2 + 2 = 5”, used to torment Winston Smith during his interrogation, was a communist party slogan from the second five-year plan, which encouraged fulfillment of the five-year plan in four years. The slogan was seen in electric lights on Moscow house-fronts, billboards and elsewhere.[44]

The switch of Oceania’s allegiance from Eastasia to Eurasia and the subsequent rewriting of history (“Oceania was at war with Eastasia: Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia. A large part of the political literature of five years was now completely obsolete”; ch 9) is evocative of the Soviet Union’s changing relations with Nazi Germany. The two nations were open and frequently vehement critics of each other until the signing of the 1939 Treaty of Non-Aggression. Thereafter, and continuing until the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941, no criticism of Germany was allowed in the Soviet press, and all references to prior party lines stoppedincluding in the majority of non-Russian communist parties who tended to follow the Russian line. Orwell had criticised the Communist Party of Great Britain for supporting the Treaty in his essays for Betrayal of the Left (1941). “The Hitler-Stalin pact of August 1939 reversed the Soviet Union’s stated foreign policy. It was too much for many of the fellow-travellers like Gollancz [Orwell’s sometime publisher] who had put their faith in a strategy of construction Popular Front governments and the peace bloc between Russia, Britain and France.”[45]

The description of Emmanuel Goldstein, with a “small, goatee beard”, evokes the image of Leon Trotsky. The film of Goldstein during the Two Minutes Hate is described as showing him being transformed into a bleating sheep. This image was used in a propaganda film during the Kino-eye period of Soviet film, which showed Trotsky transforming into a goat.[46] Goldstein’s book is similar to Trotsky’s highly critical analysis of the USSR, The Revolution Betrayed, published in 1936.

The omnipresent images of Big Brother, a man described as having a moustache, bears resemblance to the cult of personality built up around Joseph Stalin.

The news in Oceania emphasised production figures, just as it did in the Soviet Union, where record-setting in factories (by “Heroes of Socialist Labor”) was especially glorified. The best known of these was Alexey Stakhanov, who purportedly set a record for coal mining in 1935.

The tortures of the Ministry of Love evoke the procedures used by the NKVD in their interrogations,[47] including the use of rubber truncheons, being forbidden to put your hands in your pockets, remaining in brightly lit rooms for days, torture through the use of provoked rodents, and the victim being shown a mirror after their physical collapse.

The random bombing of Airstrip One is based on the Buzz bombs and the V-2 rocket, which struck England at random in 19441945.

The Thought Police is based on the NKVD, which arrested people for random “anti-soviet” remarks.[48] The Thought Crime motif is drawn from Kempeitai, the Japanese wartime secret police, who arrested people for “unpatriotic” thoughts.

The confessions of the “Thought Criminals” Rutherford, Aaronson and Jones are based on the show trials of the 1930s, which included fabricated confessions by prominent Bolsheviks Nikolai Bukharin, Grigory Zinoviev and Lev Kamenev to the effect that they were being paid by the Nazi government to undermine the Soviet regime under Leon Trotsky’s direction.

The song “Under the Spreading Chestnut Tree” (“Under the spreading chestnut tree, I sold you, and you sold me”) was based on an old English song called “Go no more a-rushing” (“Under the spreading chestnut tree, Where I knelt upon my knee, We were as happy as could be, ‘Neath the spreading chestnut tree.”). The song was published as early as 1891. The song was a popular camp song in the 1920s, sung with corresponding movements (like touching your chest when you sing “chest”, and touching your head when you sing “nut”). Glenn Miller recorded the song in 1939.[49]

The “Hates” (Two Minutes Hate and Hate Week) were inspired by the constant rallies sponsored by party organs throughout the Stalinist period. These were often short pep-talks given to workers before their shifts began (Two Minutes Hate), but could also last for days, as in the annual celebrations of the anniversary of the October revolution (Hate Week).

Orwell fictionalized “newspeak”, “doublethink”, and “Ministry of Truth” as evinced by both the Soviet press and that of Nazi Germany.[50] In particular, he adapted Soviet ideological discourse constructed to ensure that public statements could not be questioned.[51]

Winston Smith’s job, “revising history” (and the “unperson” motif) are based on the Stalinist habit of airbrushing images of ‘fallen’ people from group photographs and removing references to them in books and newspapers.[53] In one well-known example, the Soviet encyclopaedia had an article about Lavrentiy Beria. When he fell in 1953, and was subsequently executed, institutes that had the encyclopaedia were sent an article about the Bering Strait, with instructions to paste it over the article about Beria.[54]

Big Brother’s “Orders of the Day” were inspired by Stalin’s regular wartime orders, called by the same name. A small collection of the more political of these have been published (together with his wartime speeches) in English as “On the Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union” By Joseph Stalin.[55][56] Like Big Brother’s Orders of the day, Stalin’s frequently lauded heroic individuals,[57] like Comrade Ogilvy, the fictitious hero Winston Smith invented to ‘rectify’ (fabricate) a Big Brother Order of the day.

The Ingsoc slogan “Our new, happy life”, repeated from telescreens, evokes Stalin’s 1935 statement, which became a CPSU slogan, “Life has become better, Comrades; life has become more cheerful.”[48]

In 1940 Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges published Tln, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius which described the invention by a “benevolent secret society” of a world that would seek to remake human language and reality along human-invented lines. The story concludes with an appendix describing the success of the project. Borges’ story addresses similar themes of epistemology, language and history to 1984.[58]

During World War II, Orwell believed that British democracy as it existed before 1939 would not survive the war. The question being “Would it end via Fascist coup d’tat from above or via Socialist revolution from below”?[citation needed] Later, he admitted that events proved him wrong: “What really matters is that I fell into the trap of assuming that ‘the war and the revolution are inseparable’.”[59]

Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) and Animal Farm (1945) share themes of the betrayed revolution, the person’s subordination to the collective, rigorously enforced class distinctions (Inner Party, Outer Party, Proles), the cult of personality, concentration camps, Thought Police, compulsory regimented daily exercise, and youth leagues. Oceania resulted from the US annexation of the British Empire to counter the Asian peril to Australia and New Zealand. It is a naval power whose militarism venerates the sailors of the floating fortresses, from which battle is given to recapturing India, the “Jewel in the Crown” of the British Empire. Much of Oceanic society is based upon the USSR under Joseph StalinBig Brother. The televised Two Minutes Hate is ritual demonisation of the enemies of the State, especially Emmanuel Goldstein (viz Leon Trotsky). Altered photographs and newspaper articles create unpersons deleted from the national historical record, including even founding members of the regime (Jones, Aaronson and Rutherford) in the 1960s purges (viz the Soviet Purges of the 1930s, in which leaders of the Bolshevik Revolution were similarly treated). A similar thing also happened during the French Revolution in which many of the original leaders of the Revolution were later put to death, for example Danton who was put to death by Robespierre, and then later Robespierre himself met the same fate.

In his 1946 essay “Why I Write”, Orwell explains that the serious works he wrote since the Spanish Civil War (193639) were “written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism”.[3][60] Nineteen Eighty-Four is a cautionary tale about revolution betrayed by totalitarian defenders previously proposed in Homage to Catalonia (1938) and Animal Farm (1945), while Coming Up for Air (1939) celebrates the personal and political freedoms lost in Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949). Biographer Michael Shelden notes Orwell’s Edwardian childhood at Henley-on-Thames as the golden country; being bullied at St Cyprian’s School as his empathy with victims; his life in the Indian Imperial Police in Burma and the techniques of violence and censorship in the BBC as capricious authority.[61]

Other influences include Darkness at Noon (1940) and The Yogi and the Commissar (1945) by Arthur Koestler; The Iron Heel (1908) by Jack London; 1920: Dips into the Near Future[62] by John A. Hobson; Brave New World (1932) by Aldous Huxley; We (1921) by Yevgeny Zamyatin which he reviewed in 1946;[63] and The Managerial Revolution (1940) by James Burnham predicting perpetual war among three totalitarian superstates. Orwell told Jacintha Buddicom that he would write a novel stylistically like A Modern Utopia (1905) by H. G. Wells.[citation needed]

Extrapolating from World War II, the novel’s pastiche parallels the politics and rhetoric at war’s endthe changed alliances at the “Cold War’s” (194591) beginning; the Ministry of Truth derives from the BBC’s overseas service, controlled by the Ministry of Information; Room 101 derives from a conference room at BBC Broadcasting House;[64] the Senate House of the University of London, containing the Ministry of Information is the architectural inspiration for the Minitrue; the post-war decrepitude derives from the socio-political life of the UK and the US, i.e., the impoverished Britain of 1948 losing its Empire despite newspaper-reported imperial triumph; and war ally but peace-time foe, Soviet Russia became Eurasia.

The term “English Socialism” has precedents in his wartime writings; in the essay “The Lion and the Unicorn: Socialism and the English Genius” (1941), he said that “the war and the revolution are inseparable…the fact that we are at war has turned Socialism from a textbook word into a realisable policy” because Britain’s superannuated social class system hindered the war effort and only a socialist economy would defeat Adolf Hitler. Given the middle class’s grasping this, they too would abide socialist revolution and that only reactionary Britons would oppose it, thus limiting the force revolutionaries would need to take power. An English Socialism would come about which “will never lose touch with the tradition of compromise and the belief in a law that is above the State. It will shoot traitors, but it will give them a solemn trial beforehand and occasionally it will acquit them. It will crush any open revolt promptly and cruelly, but it will interfere very little with the spoken and written word.”[65]

In the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four, “English Socialism”(or “Ingsoc” in Newspeak) is a totalitarian ideology unlike the English revolution he foresaw. Comparison of the wartime essay “The Lion and the Unicorn” with Nineteen Eighty-Four shows that he perceived a Big Brother regime as a perversion of his cherished socialist ideals and English Socialism. Thus Oceania is a corruption of the British Empire he believed would evolve “into a federation of Socialist states, like a looser and freer version of the Union of Soviet Republics”.[66][verification needed]

When first published, Nineteen Eighty-Four was generally well received by reviewers. V. S. Pritchett, reviewing the novel for the New Statesman stated: “I do not think I have ever read a novel more frightening and depressing; and yet, such are the originality, the suspense, the speed of writing and withering indignation that it is impossible to put the book down.”[67] P. H. Newby, reviewing Nineteen Eighty-Four for The Listener magazine, described it as “the most arresting political novel written by an Englishman since Rex Warner’s The Aerodrome.”[68] Nineteen Eighty-Four was also praised by Bertrand Russell, E. M. Forster and Harold Nicolson.[68] On the other hand, Edward Shanks, reviewing Nineteen Eighty-Four for The Sunday Times, was dismissive; Shanks claimed Nineteen Eighty-Four “breaks all records for gloomy vaticination”.[68] C. S. Lewis was also critical of the novel, claiming that the relationship of Julia and Winston, and especially the Party’s view on sex, lacked credibility, and that the setting was “odious rather than tragic”.[69]

Nineteen Eighty-Four has been adapted for the cinema, radio, television and theatre at least twice each, as well as for other art media, such as ballet and opera.

The effect of Nineteen Eighty-Four on the English language is extensive; the concepts of Big Brother, Room 101, the Thought Police, thoughtcrime, unperson, memory hole (oblivion), doublethink (simultaneously holding and believing contradictory beliefs) and Newspeak (ideological language) have become common phrases for denoting totalitarian authority. Doublespeak and groupthink are both deliberate elaborations of doublethink, and the adjective “Orwellian” means similar to Orwell’s writings, especially Nineteen Eighty-Four. The practice of ending words with “-speak” (such as mediaspeak) is drawn from the novel.[70] Orwell is perpetually associated with 1984; in July 1984, an asteroid was discovered by Antonn Mrkos and named after Orwell.

References to the themes, concepts and plot of Nineteen Eighty-Four have appeared frequently in other works, especially in popular music and video entertainment. An example is the worldwide hit reality television show Big Brother, in which a group of people live together in a large house, isolated from the outside world but continuously watched by television cameras.

The book touches on the invasion of privacy and ubiquitous surveillance. From mid-2013 it was publicized that the NSA has been secretly monitoring and storing global internet traffic, including the bulk data collection of email and phone call data. Sales of Nineteen Eighty-Four increased by up to seven times within the first week of the 2013 mass surveillance leaks.[79][80][81] The book again topped the Amazon.com sales charts in 2017 after a controversy involving Kellyanne Conway using the phrase “alternative facts” to explain discrepancies with the media.[82][83][84][85]

The book also shows mass media as a catalyst for the intensification of destructive emotions and violence. Since the 20th century, news and other forms of media have been publicizing violence more often.[86][87] In 2013, the Almeida Theatre and Headlong staged a successful new adaptation (by Robert Icke and Duncan Macmillan), which twice toured the UK and played an extended run in London’s West End. The play opened on Broadway in 2017.

In the decades since the publication of Nineteen Eighty-Four, there have been numerous comparisons to Aldous Huxley’s novel Brave New World, which had been published 17 years earlier, in 1932.[88][89][90][91] They are both predictions of societies dominated by a central government and are both based on extensions of the trends of their times. However, members of the ruling class of Nineteen Eighty-Four use brutal force, torture and mind control to keep individuals in line, but rulers in Brave New World keep the citizens in line by addictive drugs and pleasurable distractions.

In October 1949, after reading Nineteen Eighty-Four, Huxley sent a letter to Orwell and wrote that it would be more efficient for rulers to stay in power by the softer touch by allowing citizens to self-seek pleasure to control them rather than brute force and to allow a false sense of freedom:

Within the next generation I believe that the world’s rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.[92]

Elements of both novels can be seen in modern-day societies, with Huxley’s vision being more dominant in the West and Orwell’s vision more prevalent with dictators in ex-communist countries, as is pointed out in essays that compare the two novels, including Huxley’s own Brave New World Revisited.[93][94][95][85]

Comparisons with other dystopian novels like The Handmaid’s Tale, Virtual Light, The Private Eye and Children of Men have also been drawn.[96][97]

More here:

Nineteen Eighty-Four – Wikipedia


...23456...102030...