4 ms·

I'm 28 years old. In the time I've been aware of world events, it's felt like the world has been accelerating in a downward spiral towards authoritarianism and

I'm 28 years old. In the time I've been aware of world events, it's felt like the world has been accelerating in a downward spiral towards authoritarianism and away from progress. Things are worse in some places than others, but seemingly no corner of the globe is spared from the trend. I genuinely can't tell how much of this perceived trend is real, and how much of it is a shift in my own perspective. And even then: am I just becoming more aware of how the world has always been, or is an increase in media sensationalism to blame (either for my perspective shift, or for an actual shifting reality?) Does it all come down to the impact of social media, or other technologies enabling oppressors? Is it the increasing concentration of global wealth? Was the latter half of the 20th century just an anomaly where much of the world was turned off to authoritarianism by the second world war, and we're at a point now where that's worn off and we're getting back on with the normal trajectory? Was it just my American information bubble telling me that things were ever somewhat better, even for a few decades? I don't know what to think, but what it feels like is that this train is going off the rails.

axguscbklp 6y ago
For most of the second half of the 20th century, the USSR existed, China was (as it still is) authoritarian, and the US supported authoritarian regimes in places like South Korea, Indonesia, Iran, and Chile. US-supported regimes killed something like a million people between 1950-1990. Then the 1990s came and the USSR collapsed, liberating Eastern Europe. Also, the US pulled back a bit from its support of the worst sort of authoritarians. So there were reasons to be hopeful during the 1990s. I'd say that on the whole, if there was an anomaly it was more the 1990s specifically than any of the time from 1950-1990. I think the world in general is still less authoritarian on average than it was between 1950-1990.
- brundolf 6y ago
  I have a similar impression of the 90s, though I've been skeptical of it since that happened to also be my childhood
  - alisonatwork 6y ago
    The 90s weren't great. We had wars in Yugoslavia, Chechnya, and more. But, in general, I do have a sense it was a uniquely optimistic decade for many people in the former First World, mainly because the Cold War ended and there was a sense that we had "won". Western Europe in particular demilitarized a lot as a result, the EU was formalized, the Good Friday Agreement was signed, Oslo Accords happened, end of apartheid etc. For Americans I think 9/11 derailed things again. Outside of the former First World, I'm not sure they'd see the 90s the same way.
    - KLexpat 6y ago
      It was nearly a golden age in indochina. People in countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, (South) Korea, Thailand, Taiwan, etc experienced incredible and permanent improvement in living standards but yeah it wasn't that great anywhere south of cancun or cairo
- KLexpat 6y ago
  >US-supported regimes killed something like a million people between 1950-1990. They killed far more than that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_1965%E2%80%9366 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_19... 1965–1966, 500k - 1m https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Laos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Laos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Cambodia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Cambodia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Myanmar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Myanmar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_squads_in_El_Salvador https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_squads_in_El_Salvador "The paramilitaries committed the vast majority of murders and massacres during the civil war and were heavily aligned with the United States-backed government"
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
lukestevens 6y ago
I don't know, but listening to Dan Carlin discuss the Nuclear Age made me think in some ways we're beyond all of that -- it's both already far worse than we imagine, and kind of amazing we're alive at all: https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-59-the-destroyer-of-worlds/ https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-59-the-de...
Gravityloss 6y ago
You should look at Hans Rosling's videos online. He actually looks at the stats. On average we have positive human development. The long steady progress happening in many countries just doesn't provide any headlines.
rendall 6y ago
I really think you should chalk a lot of it up to media sensationalism. The Soviet Union collapsed around the time you were born, and that was a massive reduction in authoritarianism across the globe. By nearly all measures, things are better for everyone: poverty, child mortality, easily curable disease, access to education, to clean water, are all dramatically better since then. Media sensationalism and bubbles are driven by several cooperating incentives: consolidation of traditional media ownership into fewer and fewer corporations all which have similar goals; more competition from non traditional outlets; suspension of traditional journalistic principles; cozy relationships among journalists, politicians and academics that tend to a very narrow Overton Window; a climate of fear regarding cancel culture. Fortunately, alternative perspectives are easier to find than ever before.
pjc50 6y ago
> am I just becoming more aware of how the world has always been Bit of both really. I'm a decade older and therefore able to remember both the sense of imminent doom that hung over the Cold War - the risk that the two world powers might just obliterate each other with an hour's notice and billions dead - and also the "end of history" period in the 90s. The optimism after the Soviet Union collapsed ... ... and then the gradual back-filling of everywhere east of the Iron Curtain with capitalist corrupt states. 9/11 happened, and the world went mad with vengeance in ways that it hasn't really recovered from. Even in the past decade we've gone from "social media and the internet enables revolutions and democracy" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_revolution_of_2011 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_revolution_of_2011 , almost exactly a decade ago), to "you get a revolution whether you want it or not, and revolutionaries are often terrifyingly illiberal". The big one is of course China, which has seen a complete transformation in material conditions without transitioning to even the slightest bit of liberal democracy.

axguscbklp 6y ago

For most of the second half of the 20th century, the USSR existed, China was (as it still is) authoritarian, and the US supported authoritarian regimes in places like South Korea, Indonesia, Iran, and Chile. US-supported regimes killed something like a million people between 1950-1990. Then the 1990s came and the USSR collapsed, liberating Eastern Europe. Also, the US pulled back a bit from its support of the worst sort of authoritarians. So there were reasons to be hopeful during the 1990s. I'd say that on the whole, if there was an anomaly it was more the 1990s specifically than any of the time from 1950-1990. I think the world in general is still less authoritarian on average than it was between 1950-1990.

brundolf 6y ago
I have a similar impression of the 90s, though I've been skeptical of it since that happened to also be my childhood
- alisonatwork 6y ago
  The 90s weren't great. We had wars in Yugoslavia, Chechnya, and more. But, in general, I do have a sense it was a uniquely optimistic decade for many people in the former First World, mainly because the Cold War ended and there was a sense that we had "won". Western Europe in particular demilitarized a lot as a result, the EU was formalized, the Good Friday Agreement was signed, Oslo Accords happened, end of apartheid etc. For Americans I think 9/11 derailed things again. Outside of the former First World, I'm not sure they'd see the 90s the same way.
  - KLexpat 6y ago
    It was nearly a golden age in indochina. People in countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, (South) Korea, Thailand, Taiwan, etc experienced incredible and permanent improvement in living standards but yeah it wasn't that great anywhere south of cancun or cairo
KLexpat 6y ago
>US-supported regimes killed something like a million people between 1950-1990. They killed far more than that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_1965%E2%80%9366 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_19... 1965–1966, 500k - 1m https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Laos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Laos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Cambodia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Cambodia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Myanmar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Myanmar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_squads_in_El_Salvador https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_squads_in_El_Salvador "The paramilitaries committed the vast majority of murders and massacres during the civil war and were heavily aligned with the United States-backed government"
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

lukestevens 6y ago

I don't know, but listening to Dan Carlin discuss the Nuclear Age made me think in some ways we're beyond all of that -- it's both already far worse than we imagine, and kind of amazing we're alive at all: https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-59-the-destroyer-of-worlds/ https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-59-the-de...

Gravityloss 6y ago

You should look at Hans Rosling's videos online. He actually looks at the stats. On average we have positive human development. The long steady progress happening in many countries just doesn't provide any headlines.

rendall 6y ago

I really think you should chalk a lot of it up to media sensationalism. The Soviet Union collapsed around the time you were born, and that was a massive reduction in authoritarianism across the globe. By nearly all measures, things are better for everyone: poverty, child mortality, easily curable disease, access to education, to clean water, are all dramatically better since then. Media sensationalism and bubbles are driven by several cooperating incentives: consolidation of traditional media ownership into fewer and fewer corporations all which have similar goals; more competition from non traditional outlets; suspension of traditional journalistic principles; cozy relationships among journalists, politicians and academics that tend to a very narrow Overton Window; a climate of fear regarding cancel culture. Fortunately, alternative perspectives are easier to find than ever before.

pjc50 6y ago

> am I just becoming more aware of how the world has always been Bit of both really. I'm a decade older and therefore able to remember both the sense of imminent doom that hung over the Cold War - the risk that the two world powers might just obliterate each other with an hour's notice and billions dead - and also the "end of history" period in the 90s. The optimism after the Soviet Union collapsed ... ... and then the gradual back-filling of everywhere east of the Iron Curtain with capitalist corrupt states. 9/11 happened, and the world went mad with vengeance in ways that it hasn't really recovered from. Even in the past decade we've gone from "social media and the internet enables revolutions and democracy" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_revolution_of_2011 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_revolution_of_2011 , almost exactly a decade ago), to "you get a revolution whether you want it or not, and revolutionaries are often terrifyingly illiberal". The big one is of course China, which has seen a complete transformation in material conditions without transitioning to even the slightest bit of liberal democracy.