Is the world a better place now or worse?

[Kaftan Barlast]

Today there was one mastodont documentary about global warming on one channel and another mastodont about the democratistion of the world in the postwar world. This led me to think about wether or not we're living in a declining society or one on its way to better and bigger things. It's hard to tell because alot of things have changed for the better, while other seem to be locked in a downwards spiral.

 

Being a practical person, I thought wed try to make up our minds about this by listing the things that are good right now(in the last 5 years or so), and the ones that are bad. Then we can make up our minds if things were better in 1995 or 1968 or whatever. Feel free to add to my list or make your own.

 

 

GOOD:

 

-The president of the US seems like a nice chap for once

-Technology

-Medicine

-An increase in global living standard

-The internet has made global communication possible and made the world a lot smaller

 

BAD:

 

-Ever increasing umeployment and poverty in the west with no solution in sight (we cant all be sustainable development consultants)

-A highly unstable economy where the rich gets richer and the poor poorer

-The rise of religious fanatism and violence

-Constant conflicts outside of the west that never die out

-A decrease in western living standards

-Increased 'big brother' behaviour from goverments and bussiness alike. ACTA treaty for example.

 

 

I seem to have a slight problem comming up with good stuff, but I suppose thats the inherent pessimism of the Swedish soul.

[Slowtrain]

That's a pretty difficult question to answer in the sense that good/bad is generally subjective, and often 180 degrees different between people.

 

I was reading an article sometime ago that said the world is on average safer now than it has ever been. If you are into safety and don't live in one of the below average places, I guess that's good. But if you do live a below average place, then the world probably doesn't feel very safe. ASo, again, subjective.

 

On a bad note it appears that antibiotics will be useless soon. So that's not good.

[Hurlshort]

That's an interesting question. It is easy to get lost in the moment and say we are plummeting downward, but if you study history it is pretty amazing how far the entire planet has come. Our quality of life is tremendously different than it was a mere 100 years ago, and it does continue to improve even in third world countries. Of course there are still a ton of tragic cases out there, but there is also opportunity and resources available to make life better.

[Slowtrain]

I'm sure every time period has had its horrible dooms lurking on the horizon, whether its the Cossacks or an asteroid or the 12 plagues.

 

As far as people acting in a generally humane manner, I would guess its more so now than its ever been. But I don't think it would take much to tip it back the other way; the more dependent on technology and specialization we become the more precarious our perch on the roost.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

This depends entirely on where you live in the world. I'd say overall we're better off than any other time, though.

[Meshugger]

In terms of the internet, we are still living in a golden age, but we are at the end of it. Like the radio and TV, it will go from being bidirectional to monodirectional in terms of communication.

[Kaftan Barlast]

In Sweden, the general consensus is that things were at their peak in the 50's and 60's and from then on it has been a steady decline. All the jobs are moved abroad, unemployent keeps rising, cutbacks everywhere.

[Pidesco]

I don't really see how anyone could possibly believe that mankind, from a global standpoint, is worse now that at any time before. That's not to say that life isn't absolutely grim and dire for a huge percentage of the world population, because it is. However, overall, things are still better than at any other point in history, when, for all intents and purposes almost everyone lived in "third world" conditions.

[Hiro Protagonist]

Really depends on your personal situation. I think it's better with things like Travelling. It's cheaper now in releative to your income to travel to another country than it was 40 years ago. The technology is fantastic. Games are like worlds instead of a couple of pixels on the screen. I still have my Atari 2600 and C64 though.

 

Information is at your fingertips instead of going to a library. How I wished I had the internet when I was at school instead of looking in an outdated school encyclopaedia to do my assignments.

 

On the other hand, no one I know play board games which I miss. And I wouldn't mind going to a circus. I mean a real circus with Lions and Tigers and Elephants, etc.

[I want teh kotor 3]

Worse. The President is a socialist, the government neglects constitutional rights (Bush's fault, but I'm an equal opportunity president flamer), and the religious fanatics are becoming crazier and more plentiful.

 

Conversely, we're about to discover the fundamental working of the universe (or, if not, closer than we've ever been) and our medical technology is hella good.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

The President is a socialist...

 

Lol. No.

[Tigranes]

Let's not go off topic, we have enough Obama debates.

 

Occasionally I would think about whether I would like to live in any other period of time, but ultimately it's the quality of life and risk of personal harm that does it for me. I know from experience that I can't even stand living in the countryside - no matter the differences in 'big things', I think the massive drop in the quality of daily life and the significant increase in risk of death through murder, accident, war or illness going back any more than 50 years does it for me. You can go back only 3 or 4 generations and chances are I'll get my head blown off with a bullet, get advanced tuberculosis from sawdust or something, have my psychological disorders misdiagnosed and poorly treated, mugged off the streets of London and then beaten to death in some back alley by racists.

[Slowtrain]

our medical technology is hella good.

 

 

If nobody can afford it, does it matter?

 

Edit: I would also add that while there have certainly been many medical advances, especially in terms of surgical procedures, the overall cancer rate has remained relaitively unchanged and there is still no cure for HIV and antibiotics on on their last legs with little on deck to replace them. And places like the Amazon rainforest which hold a lot of potential but as yet undiscovered treatments are being strip-cleared in the name of progfress and industrializatio.

 

But, its true that we a lot of spend money on erectile dysfunction treatments for rich old men.

Edited December 4, 2009 by Slowtrain

[Trenitay]

The world as a whole is much better today than it has been in the past. There are so many cool things in the world today. And besides, why be pessimistic about the present and future. You gotta see the best side of things. Of course, being blindly happy doesn't help either

[Slowtrain]

The world as a whole is much better today than it has been in the past. There are so many cool things in the world today. And besides, why be pessimistic about the present and future. You gotta see the best side of things. Of course, being blindly happy doesn't help either

 

 

Speaking of blind, I just noticed your avatar. Now I can't see.

[Kelverin]

Worse, give me the 50's any day. But then again I am a conservative Republican what do you expect me to say.

[Guard Dog]

In terms of the internet, we are still living in a golden age, but we are at the end of it. Like the radio and TV, it will go from being bidirectional to monodirectional in terms of communication.

 

I'd have to agree. Right now free unrestricted access to infomation via the web is still common enough in all but the most restrictive countries. But with the US (since the new admin came into power) and UK starting to take measures to censor web content and restrict access to certain web sites I think we are quickly beginning to move away from that. I think more and more over the coming years we'll see governments trying to limit the information it's citizens can reach in the name of "fairness" and "balance".

[Meshugger]

In terms of the internet, we are still living in a golden age, but we are at the end of it. Like the radio and TV, it will go from being bidirectional to monodirectional in terms of communication.

 

I'd have to agree. Right now free unrestricted access to infomation via the web is still common enough in all but the most restrictive countries. But with the US (since the new admin came into power) and UK starting to take measures to censor web content and restrict access to certain web sites I think we are quickly beginning to move away from that. I think more and more over the coming years we'll see governments trying to limit the information it's citizens can reach in the name of "fairness" and "balance".

 

"Fairness" and "balance" are the last steps, i think. The first steps are always the ones that one cares for one bit; First, it is the racists and other extreme bits of society, this is pushed from the government. Then, industry sees no reason for the end-user to be able to surf to what he wants indiscrimenately. I mean, why should the same amount of bandwidth be reserved for some guys' webpage as to youtube.com? With the government pushing from one side and the industry finding more cost-effective solutions of the other, you'll get the amalgam of the worst: International and global agreements between the industries and the governments on the Internet should be handled.

 

After that, in the name of diversity, multiculturalism, human rights and most likely by bureaucratic incompetence, most sites are banned. In order to satisfy the opposition, the government allows "dissedent" opinion in the name of "fairness" and "balance", which undermines the point further. Meanwhile you pay, like with pay-per-view, for access to a certain amount of sites. The ISPs has shrunk to 5-10 in the western hemisphere, consisting of the EU and USA, all of which getting tax reductions and extra government funding for keeping up the "balance" of information.

 

Meh.

Edited December 4, 2009 by Meshugger

[Hurlshort]

Worse, give me the 50's any day. But then again I am a conservative Republican what do you expect me to say.

 

Really? I mean we still had segregated schools in the 50's. I know Leave it to Beaver and The Andy Griffith Show make it seem like some idyllic wonderland, but it was really a terrible time for civil rights in the US.

[Meshugger]

Worse, give me the 50's any day. But then again I am a conservative Republican what do you expect me to say.

 

Really? I mean we still had segregated schools in the 50's. I know Leave it to Beaver and The Andy Griffith Show make it seem like some idyllic wonderland, but it was really a terrible time for civil rights in the US.

 

The seventeeth century was an awesome time if you were a french aristocrat. It all depends on what part of society you belong to. From what i gather, the 50's USA was awesome if you were a white, christian, and heterosexual male. The women knew their place and were there just to treat you like a king. The minorities were there for your entertainment only, but never near you. **** were ashamed of themselves and hid their sexuality by the best they could. When in times of war, everyone joined and they only question was whether if you did your duty enough or not. The workplace was filled with the likes of you and the sky was the limit. There was no uprising, or social disorder. Only backbone, discipline and hard work. Everyone dressed and had haircuts like a gentleman, and not like some lower-class ruffian of today.

 

Something in the vein of that, i presume.

Edited December 4, 2009 by Meshugger

[Hurlshort]

Yeah, I'm a white heterosexual male, and that doesn't really appeal to me. I'd rather have equality and opportunity for all. I know we are still not there, but we are a heck of a lot closer than we were 60 years ago.

[Meshugger]

I wasn't talking about how it would appeal to you, i was presuming on how it would appeal to him

[Walsingham]

I think we are in a bubble of prosperity and peace which can't last. On the one hand the have nots are just as desperate as ever. on teh other hand the haves adopt poseur solutions to the problems while neglecting to prepare for teh conflict which will arise if those problems are not resolved. Overpopulation, an energy crisis, the clash of ideological power spheres will simply be the spark.

 

However, for the moment I have a snug library with books, whisky, and a pipe. I can ring out for a hundred different dinners, and settle back to watch epics the likes of which my ancestors would have gone mad looking at. I live in a society which at least tries to be fair, and am largely free of venomous snakes. Times are good.

[Nightshape]

Today there was one mastodont documentary about global warming on one channel and another mastodont about the democratistion of the world in the postwar world. This led me to think about wether or not we're living in a declining society or one on its way to better and bigger things. It's hard to tell because alot of things have changed for the better, while other seem to be locked in a downwards spiral.

 

Being a practical person, I thought wed try to make up our minds about this by listing the things that are good right now(in the last 5 years or so), and the ones that are bad. Then we can make up our minds if things were better in 1995 or 1968 or whatever. Feel free to add to my list or make your own.

 

 

GOOD:

 

-The president of the US seems like a nice chap for once

-Technology

-Medicine

-An increase in global living standard

-The internet has made global communication possible and made the world a lot smaller

 

BAD:

 

-Ever increasing umeployment and poverty in the west with no solution in sight (we cant all be sustainable development consultants)

-A highly unstable economy where the rich gets richer and the poor poorer

-The rise of religious fanatism and violence

-Constant conflicts outside of the west that never die out

-A decrease in western living standards

-Increased 'big brother' behaviour from goverments and bussiness alike. ACTA treaty for example.

 

 

I seem to have a slight problem comming up with good stuff, but I suppose thats the inherent pessimism of the Swedish soul.

 

It's f***ed mate, so much so it isn't even worth bothering talking about.

 

I'll see you at the end of the world.

[kingofsquid]

In terms of the internet, we are still living in a golden age, but we are at the end of it. Like the radio and TV, it will go from being bidirectional to monodirectional in terms of communication.

 

I'd have to agree. Right now free unrestricted access to infomation via the web is still common enough in all but the most restrictive countries. But with the US (since the new admin came into power) and UK starting to take measures to censor web content and restrict access to certain web sites I think we are quickly beginning to move away from that. I think more and more over the coming years we'll see governments trying to limit the information it's citizens can reach in the name of "fairness" and "balance".

 

Well, I'm moving to Australia if the web becomes like the internet at my school. ANYTHING that could be considered offensive to ANYBODY is blocked:

 

Youtube

All Forums

Every wiki but wikipedia

much of wikipedia

Game Cheat sites

Yahoo Games

Some News Sites

Flickr

And A WHOLE lot more