Is the World less brutal now than it was a hundred years ago?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The ideal is simple: over the centuries despite frequent setbacks, the overall condition of man has improved. Men live longer, get more to eat, are freer from disease and have more leisure.The speed of progress has accelerated astronoicly over the past 150 years! And shows all prospect of continuing to do so. Place a computer by a typewriter; the case is unarguable.
With this material progress has come an increase in civility. And this for obvious reasons many will find hard to believe. To those not so well grounded in history yet conscious of the Jewish extermination, two world wars , and Hiroshima, Stalin's camps, the Warsaw Ghetto and the conitinued bestialities of men that claim may seem foolishly absurd.Yet it is true.The world is less savage, less brutal , less tyrannical than it was a 100 years ago.
How this progress has happened, is happening is complex and not completely understood but it is a very intersting and fascinating aspect of history! Which should be a primary part of historical study and education.. It relates directly to the scientific and technical world in which we live.The interpretation of how this happened and might possible be accelerated would give a renewwed sense of social purpose to the teaching of history.
To many the idea that men should pursue material progress has become a vulgar and repulsive concept! Yet such gains improve society, advance education and allow for man to establish a continuation of better life for family . Such blessings have been sought by man for thousands of years and we that have them , enjoy them often fail to understand and protect them! A proper knowledge of history is a must if we are to know how and why we must protect our freedoms against those that seek to reduce us to the oppressed peolpes of the recent past. With history not being taught we will knoew nothing of the past or of the horror of pre-industrail society, its filth, its disease, its hunger , the brutality of its pleasures, its frustrations, its tyrannies and its gross superstitions
Slums, , industrial tyranny, , ravaged countrysides, all speak clearly of its evils. That men , women and children wer enslaved, small boys and girls were strung up on gibbbets for petty theft: men were castrated, disembowelled and quarted in public and these were not exceptional events but rather very commonplace and repeated without protest.
Our access to the internet and the great ease and abilities to research history with that quick easy access are not enough. We must start teaching again History in schools , a history free from political bias and rewriting.
Yes despite our recent mounting power struggles around the world we are less savage, less brutal and fully capable of being properly informed. If only we see the great need and relearn that historical information is often key to preventing monumental mistakes, of the kind that destroyed millions of innocent people! Surely the task is well worth the effort!-Tyr

[tailfins]

The ideal is simple: over the centuries despite frequent setbacks, the overall condition of man has improved. Men live longer, get more to eat, are freer from disease and have more leisure.The speed of progress has accelerated astronoicly over the past 150 years! And shows all prospect of continuing to do so. Place a computer by a typewriter; the case is unarguable.
With this material progress has come an increase in civility. And this for obvious reasons many will find hard to believe. To those not so well grounded in history yet conscious of the Jewish extermination, two world wars , and Hiroshima, Stalin's camps, the Warsaw Ghetto and the conitinued bestialities of men that claim may seem foolishly absurd.Yet it is true.The world is less savage, less brutal , less tyrannical than it was a 100 years ago.
How this progress has happened, is happening is complex and not completely understood but it is a very intersting and fascinating aspect of history! Which should be a primary part of historical study and education.. It relates directly to the scientific and technical world in which we live.The interpretation of how this happened and might possible be accelerated would give a renewwed sense of social purpose to the teaching of history.
To many the idea that men should pursue material progress has become a vulgar and repulsive concept! Yet such gains improve society, advance education and allow for man to establish a continuation of better life for family . Such blessings have been sought by man for thousands of years and we that have them , enjoy them often fail to understand and protect them! A proper knowledge of history is a must if we are to know how and why we must protect our freedoms against those that seek to reduce us to the oppressed peolpes of the recent past. With history not being taught we will knoew nothing of the past or of the horror of pre-industrail society, its filth, its disease, its hunger , the brutality of its pleasures, its frustrations, its tyrannies and its gross superstitions
Slums, , industrial tyranny, , ravaged countrysides, all speak clearly of its evils. That men , women and children wer enslaved, small boys and girls were strung up on gibbbets for petty theft: men were castrated, disembowelled and quarted in public and these were not exceptional events but rather very commonplace and repeated without protest.
Our access to the internet and the great ease and abilities to research history with that quick easy access are not enough. We must start teaching again History in schools , a history free from political bias and rewriting.
Yes despite our recent mounting power struggles around the world we are less savage, less brutal and fully capable of being properly informed. If only we see the great need and relearn that historical information is often key to preventing monumental mistakes, of the kind that destroyed millions of innocent people! Surely the task is well worth the effort!-Tyr


So in a nutshell, we can say the New Deal and Lyndon Johnson's Great Society and post-WWII European socialism were successful. Or perhaps is was the establishment of a secular society. There were sure proportionally more church goers a hundred years ago.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So in a nutshell, we can say the New Deal and Lyndon Johnson's Great Society and post-WWII European socialism were successful. Or perhaps is was the establishment of a secular society. There were sure proportionally more church goers a hundred years ago.

Actually capitalism and democracy has had the far far bigger impact. The toppling of kings, dictators and tyrants worldwide coupled with greater wealth for the masses by way of Capitalism not socialism , New Deal or Johnson's give away programs! Its a big world and those were for the most part American experiments which hindered rather than helped IMHO. Nice try ..-Tyr

[jafar00]

I don't think the world is any more or less brutal than it was 100 years ago. We were fighting wars back then over politics, land and resources and we still are doing it. Dictators oppressed people back then and still do today. Apart from some technological advances, we are still a savage and brutal human race.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I don't think the world is any more or less brutal than it was 100 years ago. We were fighting wars back then over politics, land and resources and we still are doing it. Dictators oppressed people back then and still do today. Apart from some technological advances, we are still a savage and brutal human race.

Very clever your leaving out fighting wars over religion! How could you make that big of a mistake? You listed three-1. politics
2. land
3. resources
Why the glaring mistake of not listing religion which has directly caused the deaths of hundreds of millions?
Is it because Islam is so guilty in that realm? Because most of the world's ongoing conflicts now are the results of muslims killing innocent people?-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Very clever your leaving out fighting wars over religion! How could you make that big of a mistake? You listed three-1. politics
2. land
3. resources
Why the glaring mistake of not listing religion which has directly caused the deaths of hundreds of millions?
Is it because Islam is so guilty in that realm? Because most of the world's ongoing conflicts now are the results of muslims killing innocent people?-Tyr

Bump for jafar...
Because I'd like a straight answer to my question..-;)

[logroller]

Very clever your leaving out fighting wars over religion! How could you make that big of a mistake? You listed three-1. politics
2. land
3. resources
Why the glaring mistake of not listing religion which has directly caused the deaths of hundreds of millions?
Is it because Islam is so guilty in that realm? Because most of the world's ongoing conflicts now are the results of muslims killing innocent people?-Tyr
I would say religion is spiritual politics. Though I'd disagree wars are fought over politics, but rather, politics are used to secure resources and land (which is, itself, a resource). So really, all war is over resources. I've yet to find a war which violates that axiom.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I would say religion is spiritual politics. Though I'd disagree wars are fought over politics, but rather, politics are used to secure resources and land (which is, itself, a resource). So really, all war is over resources. I've yet to find a war which violates that axiom.

Surely not true unless you count man's soul as a resource! Or do you maintain all wars ,even religious wars, are really just about greed and power? If you go on record agreeing with that about all wars being just about greed and power then the muslims will mark your name down to be a future Jihadi victim..-;) For they believe their ongoing worldwide war is all about gathering souls for Allah to control.-Tyr

[logroller]

[/B]Surely not true unless you count man's soul as a resource! Or do you maintain all wars ,even religious wars, are really just about greed and power? If you go on record agreeing with that about all wars being just about greed and power then the muslims will mark your name down to be a future Jihadi victim..-;) For they believe their ongoing worldwide war is all about gathering souls for Allah to control.-Tyr
From an individual perspective, boots on the ground sense, you're right; just as we may justify war in the name of securing freedom and justice-- it's an effective motivator. But from an organizational standpoint, it's about allocation of resources. That religious zealots pervert the faith of others doesn't override the root motivation, resources and the power they extoll.

[jafar00]

Bump for jafar...
Because I'd like a straight answer to my question..-;)

Religious wars are still political in the end. Such as the Christian Crusades that killed millions for refusing to forcefully convert :p

[jafar00]

For they believe their ongoing worldwide war is all about gathering souls for Allah to control.-Tyr

<blink> What worldwide war?!?

[logroller]

Religious wars are still political in the end. Such as the Christian Crusades that killed millions for refusing to forcefully convert :p
The Christian crusades had more to do with controlling transportation routes (and derivitive taxes) than religious conversion. In the pursuit of power, the rub is always the spoils. Too often, a group is persecuted and their wealth pillaged--it's a pattern as old as recorded time. Western powers of the last century have, through capitalism, promoted a relatively peaceful mechanism of converting wealth. But with that wealth evolves power, and collusion between the haves seeks to parlay their power to extoll more influence upon trade regulations/taxes etc. This has been an extremely successful I might add-- but as wealth/power consolidates, prudence gives way to greed and the seeds of despotism are sown.

[Gaffer]

Religious wars are still political in the end. Such as the Christian Crusades that killed millions for refusing to forcefully convert :p

As usual, you have it backwards.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

<blink> What worldwide war?!?

Islam's use of jihad around the world, do try to keep up.-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Religious wars are still political in the end. Such as the Christian Crusades that killed millions for refusing to forcefully convert :p

The tens of millions were killed by the spread of Islam, I posted a linked source on the numbers on a thread here before.. Show me a good source for how many the crusades killed. Then break it down to how many they killed--for refusing to convert-?? That was a muslim thing--the convert or die method/declaration..-Tyr

[logroller]

The tens of millions were killed by the spread of Islam, I posted a linked source on the numbers on a thread here before.. Show me a good source for how many the crusades killed. Then break it down to how many they killed--for refusing to convert-?? That was a muslim thing--the convert or die method/declaration..-Tyr
Does an emailed excel spreadsheet from pope urban count as a "good source"? I mean seriously Tyr, sometimes your requests are impossible; it's not as though they tracked how many people died and for what reasoning. For example, if I run some Muslim off their land and they perish, did I kill them for being Muslim? Not really, I was able to run them off their land b/c they were Muslim and they starved as a result. That or sold them into slavery, again, not gonna hit the death toll. Jews were slaughtered by christians during the crusades as well; and later, so were other christians. There were many Muslims who lived justly under Christian rule, but to say there was inferior numbers of Muslims killed then compared to Christians killed by Muslims is to ignore the insanity of religiously-waged war. It's not a numbers game.