3 ms·

Although Crime plummets... the interesting thing is, our perception of danger and our general sense of fear has increased by significant margin. We're more scar

Although Crime plummets... the interesting thing is, our perception of danger and our general sense of fear has increased by significant margin. We're more scared of things that have have an even less chance of affecting us than ever before.

pixelcort 11y ago
Are there any other countries/cultures around the world that are as fearful as modern U.S.?
- crimsonalucard 11y ago
  The fear is an illusion. Our perception of the world is largely shaped by the media. The media magnifies dangers that are otherwise relatively improbable. The logical conclusion from this fact is this: To find a culture that has no fear, look for cultures that are technologically backwards. Cultures that have very limited access to media and thus a more realistic perception of fear should be your chosen targets. In these settings, you will find entire societies where doors are left unlocked, children are allowed to roam the entire town unsupervised, and places where the concept of "abduction" is relatively unknown. Or go back to the US in the 1980s. You will find the exact same society. Listen to this podcast to learn more about the United States during this time and the nature of fear: http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=377517810&m=377521165&live=1 http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&i...
  - aswanson 11y ago
    Yeah, sounds just like my old neighborhood, and I grew up in the 80s.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- saiya-jin 11y ago
  most probably and unfortunately, no. consequences can be felt in many places around the world. Yes, I mean those frikkin' wars they wage here & there. From what I see, correct me if I'm wrong, many people in US still believe those wars are justified, soldiers are defending their homeland (in foreign countries half across the globe that didn't attack US anyhow imaginable), killing just few bad guys (and not creating many more by behaving like that-heck, if they would be killing my family and friends back home because of nothing, it would be hard to resist temptation to strike back somehow). And I could go on and on, you know the drill. All this possible because of 9/11, relatively minor incident in terms of life loss/damage, but made look like Armageddon day by media. Not only, but mainly US residents scaremonged beyond belief my mass media (and I presume not many stood against it). Well, looking back, you were played damn well. Terrorist won by radicalizing you, all army-related companies won, and anybody who is on their payroll. It's so much easier to control somebody who has fear, since they are already in irrational place to begin with. I am 34, and I don't think I'll live long enough to see US to become again "land of the free". From west european perspective, it's a sad joke for a long time.
  - Jtsummers 11y ago
    > From what I see, correct me if I'm wrong, many people in US still believe those wars are justified, soldiers are defending their homeland (in foreign countries half across the globe that didn't attack US anyhow imaginable), killing just few bad guys (and not creating many more by behaving like that-heck, if they would be killing my family and friends back home because of nothing, it would be hard to resist temptation to strike back somehow). And I could go on and on, you know the drill. Many people definitely still hold these views. It's actually kind of tragic, the impact it's had on the younger generation. I was 19 when 9/11 happened, but my ex was only 12. It, and her parents' reactions, have completely warped her understanding of the dangers in this world and the value/merit of the wars that followed. It doesn't help that she's a military brat (so am I, but my father, despite being in the military, was actually a pacifist; this has had a major influence on my view of things) who saw her neighbors going off to fight the wars. It had to be justified, otherwise she couldn't come to terms with the men and women that didn't come home, or didn't come home whole. If she'd been older, perhaps, she could've viewed it more critically and less emotionally. I point to her as an example, but her stances and views on war and foreign policy, even for someone who's liberal [0], aren't that out of the ordinary. We've got a whole generation now that came of age in a period of (largely) media induced fear. As I said, tragic, and terrifying. [0] US sense, not that liberal in the global sense.
rayiner 11y ago
The amount of fear is a function of risk * significance of loss. Crime is down, but we have more than ever to lose. That's why millennial parents are so fucking crazy. Much more to fear when you're investing a million into each of two kids than back when you invested a fraction of that over five kids.
- crimsonalucard 11y ago
  Fear is less of a function of risk or loss and more of a function of the perception of risk. IMO what has been magnified is not the significance of loss, but our perception of risk. If we perceive the world as a place constantly under threat by kidnappers, international terrorists, and criminals then we will be in fear. Who informs us about these threats? The media. It is the media that over reports and over-exaggerates danger, and this is what has changed over the past decades.
- __z 11y ago
  The birth rate in the US isn't any higher than it was when I was born (and until 2008 it was higher than when I was born). During the height of the baby boom it was only a tad over 3.5 - which is significantly less than your five children example. (http://www.prb.org/Publications/Datasheets/2012/world-population-data-sheet/fact-sheet-us-population.aspx http://www.prb.org/Publications/Datasheets/2012/world-popula...) What has changed is 24/7 news. That makes the perception of danger all out of wack with actual danger. Media.
- jcranmer 11y ago
  Fear is not rational. In general, people overestimate the risk of unlikely events and underestimate the risk of likely events. Case in point: nuclear power has killed less than 1 million people in all of human history (including the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan, which accounts for 90-99% of all deaths due to nuclear power), while the number of people killed in an automobile accident in a single year is about 1-1.5 million. Clearly, we should be more terrified of cars than we should be of nuclear power, but it is very much the other way around.
  - pingou 11y ago

pixelcort 11y ago

Are there any other countries/cultures around the world that are as fearful as modern U.S.?

crimsonalucard 11y ago
The fear is an illusion. Our perception of the world is largely shaped by the media. The media magnifies dangers that are otherwise relatively improbable. The logical conclusion from this fact is this: To find a culture that has no fear, look for cultures that are technologically backwards. Cultures that have very limited access to media and thus a more realistic perception of fear should be your chosen targets. In these settings, you will find entire societies where doors are left unlocked, children are allowed to roam the entire town unsupervised, and places where the concept of "abduction" is relatively unknown. Or go back to the US in the 1980s. You will find the exact same society. Listen to this podcast to learn more about the United States during this time and the nature of fear: http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=377517810&m=377521165&live=1 http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&i...
- aswanson 11y ago
  Yeah, sounds just like my old neighborhood, and I grew up in the 80s.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
saiya-jin 11y ago
most probably and unfortunately, no. consequences can be felt in many places around the world. Yes, I mean those frikkin' wars they wage here & there. From what I see, correct me if I'm wrong, many people in US still believe those wars are justified, soldiers are defending their homeland (in foreign countries half across the globe that didn't attack US anyhow imaginable), killing just few bad guys (and not creating many more by behaving like that-heck, if they would be killing my family and friends back home because of nothing, it would be hard to resist temptation to strike back somehow). And I could go on and on, you know the drill. All this possible because of 9/11, relatively minor incident in terms of life loss/damage, but made look like Armageddon day by media. Not only, but mainly US residents scaremonged beyond belief my mass media (and I presume not many stood against it). Well, looking back, you were played damn well. Terrorist won by radicalizing you, all army-related companies won, and anybody who is on their payroll. It's so much easier to control somebody who has fear, since they are already in irrational place to begin with. I am 34, and I don't think I'll live long enough to see US to become again "land of the free". From west european perspective, it's a sad joke for a long time.
- Jtsummers 11y ago
  > From what I see, correct me if I'm wrong, many people in US still believe those wars are justified, soldiers are defending their homeland (in foreign countries half across the globe that didn't attack US anyhow imaginable), killing just few bad guys (and not creating many more by behaving like that-heck, if they would be killing my family and friends back home because of nothing, it would be hard to resist temptation to strike back somehow). And I could go on and on, you know the drill. Many people definitely still hold these views. It's actually kind of tragic, the impact it's had on the younger generation. I was 19 when 9/11 happened, but my ex was only 12. It, and her parents' reactions, have completely warped her understanding of the dangers in this world and the value/merit of the wars that followed. It doesn't help that she's a military brat (so am I, but my father, despite being in the military, was actually a pacifist; this has had a major influence on my view of things) who saw her neighbors going off to fight the wars. It had to be justified, otherwise she couldn't come to terms with the men and women that didn't come home, or didn't come home whole. If she'd been older, perhaps, she could've viewed it more critically and less emotionally. I point to her as an example, but her stances and views on war and foreign policy, even for someone who's liberal [0], aren't that out of the ordinary. We've got a whole generation now that came of age in a period of (largely) media induced fear. As I said, tragic, and terrifying. [0] US sense, not that liberal in the global sense.

rayiner 11y ago

The amount of fear is a function of risk * significance of loss. Crime is down, but we have more than ever to lose. That's why millennial parents are so fucking crazy. Much more to fear when you're investing a million into each of two kids than back when you invested a fraction of that over five kids.

crimsonalucard 11y ago
Fear is less of a function of risk or loss and more of a function of the perception of risk. IMO what has been magnified is not the significance of loss, but our perception of risk. If we perceive the world as a place constantly under threat by kidnappers, international terrorists, and criminals then we will be in fear. Who informs us about these threats? The media. It is the media that over reports and over-exaggerates danger, and this is what has changed over the past decades.
__z 11y ago
The birth rate in the US isn't any higher than it was when I was born (and until 2008 it was higher than when I was born). During the height of the baby boom it was only a tad over 3.5 - which is significantly less than your five children example. (http://www.prb.org/Publications/Datasheets/2012/world-population-data-sheet/fact-sheet-us-population.aspx http://www.prb.org/Publications/Datasheets/2012/world-popula...) What has changed is 24/7 news. That makes the perception of danger all out of wack with actual danger. Media.
jcranmer 11y ago
Fear is not rational. In general, people overestimate the risk of unlikely events and underestimate the risk of likely events. Case in point: nuclear power has killed less than 1 million people in all of human history (including the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan, which accounts for 90-99% of all deaths due to nuclear power), while the number of people killed in an automobile accident in a single year is about 1-1.5 million. Clearly, we should be more terrified of cars than we should be of nuclear power, but it is very much the other way around.
- pingou 11y ago