What are some ways the government tries to control the people in Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451? Do Americans today experience something similar?

Perhaps the most significant theme in Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 is that of the government's control over freedom of thought.

In the novel, members of society are not allowed to read books because it promotes freethinking and original thought. Anyone who is found hiding books is taken into custody, and their books and home burned to the ground. It is not without irony that one of the story's strongest rebels against this process is found in Guy Montag. At the beginning, he is a fireman who burns books and houses. He muses, "It was a pleasure to burn." However, he receives guidance in the form of Clarisse McClellan's challenging questions, as well as witnessing the woman at 11 N. Elm Street who is willing to die rather than live in a world without her books. In response, Montag's once-unquestioned perceptions (based on the government's dumbing-down propaganda) begin to change.

Beatty provides a glimpse not only of what the fireman's job is, but also the skewed perspective society has perpetuated upon its members—who mindlessly engage in activities and behaviors that deaden them to individual freedoms, especially independent thoughts and actions:

The important thing for you to remember, Montag, is we're the Happiness Boys, the Dixie Duo, you and I and the others. We stand against the small tide of those who want to make everyone unhappy with conflicting theory and thought...I don't think you realize how important you are, we are, to our happy world as it stands now.

The government is selling the idea that ignorance is bliss. Beatty notes that anyone who questions the norms that are perpetuated within the society is a threat to the collective's overall happiness and the cause of conflict.

The same might be said of the political rhetoric that is often fed to Americans either by political candidates for office or by representatives of the government that do not always provide citizens with the complete truth. People are often told what politicians and officials believe the populace wants to hear. Other politicians or special interest groups that speak out against these "pie in the sky" ("unlikely to happen") ideas are often vilified and dismissed.

For example, while there is a great debate about the effects and fall out from global warming, there are groups that still try to debunk what scientists are seeing in terms of climate change. Gun control is also a hot topic: one side argues for the right to bear arms, while others point to devastating attacks in this country by American citizens upon other members of the community at large with the use of automatic assault rifles.

Any lobbyist in Washington, DC, that supports the freedom to purchase and bear arms is in direct conflict with those who oppose firearms, supporting gun control. The debate rages, in these instances, between government special interest groups and social institutions/organizations that oppose such widespread freedoms.

One might argue that a majority of government officials may see a situation of any kind as a problem, using their influence to bring Americans to their way of thinking, while an opposing side in the argument will do its best to influence American perceptions, especially as they are played out in voting booths across the country.

While the control of Bradbury's futuristic society is almost absolute, a few dissenters are able to turn the tide in saving books (which represent ideas and knowledge) to be a part of the rebuilding of their society. In modern-day America, there is no absolute control, but the rhetoric shared with the public is often accepted without question, while small groups of committed citizens who see things differently do their best to change the widely-accepted societal norms in this country.