While Nineteen Eighty-Four seemed to be a historical nightmare in Orwell's age, today we can meet many of the philosophical and linguistic "inventions" of the novel such as the aesthetization and thereby verification of war. The essay examines the historical, geopolitical and structural reasons of why the developed Western core countries returned to the once discredited dichotomy of civilization versus barbarism, and uncritically associated their social and political order with civilization. This new world order is supported by a manager-elite, which is not committed to any ideology, and is always ready to re-define its ethics and world view.

According to the famous leftist author, the "red canon", the most important goal of social movements is to understand that there are alternatives to the present capitalist economic order. There is an increasing resistance in various movement circles and at various levels but no-one believes that a political revolution can alone bring about rapid changes. For the time being, it is early to speak of the synthesis of various alternatives both in theory and practice. The attraction of market economy is palpable everywhere. And still today the neo-liberal model is opposed by two economic directions: neo-Keynesiasm and postcapitalism that are at issue also with each other.

The interview with the author of "New imperialism" published last year analyses the changes of American imperialism in the last decades. According to the analysis, from the 1970s, the classical power policy was followed by a more sophisticated, neoliberal imperialism, which is today replaced by a neoconservative model that combines economic pressure with brutal oppression.

Neoliberalism is today seen as the only theory that is able to describe and at the same time control the process of modern globalization. Neoliberalism is, however, inadequate even theoretically as it does not recognize the immanent controversies of the "almighty" market logic let alone other important economic and social aspects that are crucial for the human life.

The study analyses the articles and assessments published for the ten-year anniversary of the Bokros-package. The author shows that even today the majority of them are characterised either by a deep antipathy against the package or by the need of self-justification and the ideology of de-nationalisation. Therefore the package is either presented as a scapegoat or it is accepted and glorified uncritically supported by one-dimensional and sometimes self-contradictory professional arguments.