1. Current Events and the Ego
People use drama to report events of their own times, always making it appear more important than past events of similar or greater importance. The first century Jewish historian Josephus bemoaned this aspect of Human nature two thousand years ago1 and our egos show no sign of letting us be more objective. I believe it is the common ego of the normal person that makes current events in the world around us seem more significant and cataclysmic than times gone before.
Those who lived through the industrial revolution reported that Humanity was going through its most significant and disastrous change. Those who now live through the technological, internet-based revolution think the same: Now is a time of wonderful change! But I think all times are times of change, and that our changes are akin to the changes of history, and will be dwarfed by the changes of the future.
Downmarket media publications reflect - and exaggerate - many of the fears of society itself. People want their lives to be part of historical drama. The millennium bug, worldwide pandemics, moral panics and fear that society is going wrong all betray humankind's neophobic reactions to progress and change. Newspaper editors pick on this fear and concoct alarmist stories from everyday events and statistics; for example they publish alarmist articles on dangers from mobile phone masts even though there are none. Many editors and media owners have explained the usefulness of fear-mongering and sensationalism - it certainly sells more copy than balanced news. Fears become amplified and made more real by their appearance in headlines, creating a hysteria about a topic whereas in reality things are much better. Always remember that after thousands of hyped-up press warnings, on midnight of the 31st of December 1999, nothing happened.
"Modern Mass Media: The Bane of Human Cultural Evolution: 1.2. Perception of Crime Rates in the UK " by Vexen Crabtree (2009)
2. Cataclysm and Chaos is Always on the Horizon
Just as common as the ego-driven feeling that now, around us, are important changes, is the feeling that brooding, significant upset awaits on the horizon. It seems to be a universal, negative human apprehension that we think that historically-important catastrophe is threatening us.
[The] media emphasizes the negative and pessimistic side of events and therefore creates perceptual crises of faith where no real crises exists.
"Global Trends 2005" by Michael J. Mazarr2
These feelings of the importance and foreboding of present events are shared by professional sociologists and analysts, who in addition to the typical Human desire to be at the centre of events, also have professional interest in highlighting the perils of the present time, and hence the relevance of their own skills, warnings and teachings.
The influential political and cultural theorist Alvin Toffler saw the 1980s and 1990s as a period of immense and cataclysmic change.
"Literature, Politics and Intellectual Crises in Britain Today" by Clive Bloom (2001)3
Such motivations, normally subconscious, have afflicted public intellectuals for as long as recorded history. The ancient Dao De Jing is traditionally said to be authored by Lao Zi. He was convinced that civilisation itself was a mistake, which had diverted people from the Dao (true way) and people had become unethical as a result. "Laozi looked back to a Golden Age of agrarian simplicity, when people lived in small villages with no technology, no art or culture, and no war". The solution to the problems of Lao Zi's time was, he argued, to abandon the goal-directed ethos of civilisation, and therefore find The Way, and rediscover how things ought to be. Needless to say, not many sociologists have gone that far in their warnings against modern society.4
End-of-the-world-mania is dependent upon certain properties of human ego. We want to witness important historical times, and we want to be at the fore and center of tumultuous and attention-grabbing events. There have been thousands of end-of-the-world predictions. They have been the products of many great minds, many devoted believers in various religions and many predictions from cults, all with a lot of time and effort put in to each and every theory, building up supporting evidence from religious texts, historical trends and numerology. What do all these predictions have in common about the end of the world? They have all been wrong. Those promoting these fears, and those subject to them, are all in the grips of their own ego!
3. Changes Are Amplified By Our Egos
Four sociologists from the Open University staff describe the "contemporary UK" as "a society which appears to almost everyone who lives in it to be in the throes of change"5. Changes which are affecting us in our living lives seem much more important to us than the changes of the past. The Industrial Revolution is now 'history', it is no longer an urgent issue. Once change has passed we no longer experience its importance. It becomes abstract. Changes that affect our own lives are made by our hungry egos into things that must be important for everyone. Every generation feels under siege from the throes of change.
The popular press is the worst; an intentional sensationalisation of all news only reinforces people's confused opinions about the present era. Fans of prophecy always look to the present to find signs that their religion is witness to, or about to witness, events of significance to the religion that prove its own truth.
No-one likes to feel unimportant, therefore everyone imagines the present changes that they perceive in society to be more important than the changes affecting other people. The importance of events is eroded by physical distance or the distance of time. If we worry about the future we worry because of the meaning it has for us now (what should we be doing?), and if we worry about the past it only pales in comparison to the worries we have about our own age. Our egos rule our perceptions of change.
4. The Demise of the European Union
An example of the distorting effect of the ego affecting even the most high calibre professionals comes from the doom-laden prophesies of EU politicians. The following is taken from "The European Union: Democratic Values, The Euro, Crises and Migration" by Vexen Crabtree (2007); the original contains fuller references:
Every decade has seen prominent politicians pronounce the EU is now facing "it's most serious crises yet". [...]
By 1980 some academics warned about the possible disintegration of the EEC and even leading members of EC institutions openly spoke of the dismal state that Europe was in. At the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Rome Treaty, in 1982, the president of the European Parliament compared the Community to a 'feeble cardiac patient whose condition is so poor that he cannot even be disturbed by a birthday party' (Lagerfeld 1990).
"Origins and Evolution of the European Union" by Desmond Dinan (2006)
After that dismal diatribe, the pronouncements continued throughout the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s. "Jacques Delors, who was president of the European Commission from 1985 to 1994, says that the present "crises" is the worst in the project's history". And again in 2005 Jeane-Claude Juncker, prime minister of Luxembourg, which then held the EU presidency, said "the EU is not in crises: it is in deep crisis". The EU is always in crises, just like crime is always getting worse, immigrants more dastardly, the weather deteriorating and employment evaporating.
"The European Union: Democratic Values, The Euro, Crises and Migration" by Vexen Crabtree (2007)
In reality the psychological effects of the ego, placing oneself at the centre of a cataclysm where the (perceived) most important events are occurring, is the cause of the EU crises.
5. The Truth: Crime is Falling and War is Less Frequent
[Today] you will read about a shocking act of violence. Somewhere in the world there will be a terrorist bombing, a senseless murder, a bloody insurrection. It's impossible to learn about these catastrophes without thinking, "What is the world coming to?". Believe it or not, the world of the past was much worse. Violence has been in decline for thousands of years, and today we may be living in the most peaceable era in the existence of our species.
Steven Pinker (2011), Wall Street Journal6
This decline in violence is apparent not just recently, and not just in the modern era: it is apparent over a timescale of hundreds and thousands of years. Violence, per person, has been declining. Steven Pinker divides this humanitarian victory in terms of various stages. The first main declines in violence occurred as nations emerged with central governance, taking over from tribal rulerships.
Forensic archeologya kind of "CSI: Paleolithic"can estimate rates of violence from the proportion of skeletons in ancient sites with bashed-in skulls, decapitations or arrowheads embedded in bones. And ethnographers can tally the causes of death in tribal peoples that have recently lived outside of state control. [...] These investigations show that, on average, about 15% of people in prestate eras died violently, compared to about 3% of the citizens of the earliest states.
Steven Pinker (2011)6
The second decline of violence was a civilizing process that is best documented in Europe. Historical records show that between the late Middle Ages and the 20th century, European countries saw a 10- to 50-fold decline in their rates of homicide.
Steven Pinker (2011)6
Another improvement occurred since the enlightenment-era concentration on individual human rights, alongside the increase in good and balanced governance that is based on rules of law, not on individual power. "A growing wave of countries abolished blood sports, dueling, witchhunts, religious persecution, absolute despotism and slavery"6.
Since World War II there has been an unprecedented period of peace. Before it, for example, there were non-global wars between European countries every year. "Though it's tempting to attribute the Long Peace to nuclear deterrence, non-nuclear developed states have stopped fighting each other as well. Political scientists point instead to the growth of democracy, trade and international organizations - all of which, the statistical evidence shows, reduce the likelihood of conflict. They also credit the rising valuation of human life over national grandeur - a hard-won lesson of two world wars"6.
The news will continue to show us all the bad stuff because although no news is good news, they have to show something! This can make it hard to appreciate the statistical facts that violence and violent deaths have been declining. Because it is not very exciting and hard to turn into story (unlike a murder), few people can adopt the "things are continually getting better" motif as opposed to the "everything is going wrong" motif. The former gives people little to get their teeth stuck into, whereas lets people rant and rave about how, right now, during their own lives, important things are happening that must be resisted and shouted about. It's all about the ego.
