Are issues like poverty/violence byproducts of modernizing?

  • 53 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Treflis
Treflis

13757

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#51 Treflis
Member since 2004 • 13757 Posts

I'd say that modernization and technological advances as a whole has actually made us less violent and poor compared to the past.

We will always have poverty and violence, perhaps it'll increase or decrease in the near future depending on what kind of situation the world ends up in. But as a whole we have progressed if you look at the rates inwhich violence has decreased despite much news seemingly showing otherwise. But even that helps to illustrate the point in how much violence has decreased in society. News of the murder of multiple people by one person, beheadings, domestic abuse turning to murder and so forth does bring about some shock to us. Many of us sit and wonder how someone could do such a thing.
Take a leap back 200 years or even further and such violence was more common and didn't shock people as much as it does today.

With poverty, that too has improved over time if one look back into history. The gap between the wealthy and poor was much larger then it is today. Of course that doesn't mean it is adequate as it is, but in context it's a positive development.

How things will be in the future we don't know, it depends on which way the world moves. Perhaps we'll further the positive move onwards, or we'll suffer a decline. Who knows?

Avatar image for raugutcon
raugutcon

5576

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#52  Edited By raugutcon
Member since 2014 • 5576 Posts

@mattbbpl said:
@garywood69 said:
@mattbbpl said:

I'm pretty sure a king 2000 years ago would be able to house and feed himself.

You're making the exact mistake I was trying to warn about. You're using concepts that contain social assumptions and aren't simply a matter of total material wealth. Any time you bring a social aspect into it as well, well then yes it becomes hugely relative to the society you're in and it's probably going to be better as a king. That's why I was trying to stress the importance of defining it in terms of total material wealth. In that sense, yes I think the modern "poor" person is definitely better off. But you'd have to unpack the concepts of "house" and "feed" and redefinine in the proper ways in order to gauge that. But you also have to keep in mind that poverty isn't just defined in terms of those 2 things. You'd also have to include all of the other things that a modern poor person has that a king did not. All of the technology on offer to them, the healthcare etc etc.

OK, please enlighten me. How are the following people more wealthy than a king 2000 ago?

A person sleeping under the boardwalk in Miami

People sharing tents on public land who now have to relocate because the city kicked them off that land

People sleeping in the lobby of the public library during the winter so they don't freeze to death (a friend of mine risked his job to make that happen - really good guy)

A child who insists on taking half of her school lunch home with her to her mother so she can eat

While that person sleeps under the boardwalk in Miami and people share tents on public land and people sleep in the lobby of the public library hundreds of illegal aliens cross ´Murica´s borders every single day looking for jobs and opportunities which they find like flipping burgers at MacDonald´s, picking lettuces on the fields of Cali ( job that´s done crawling on your knees ) or mowing lawns. Oh yeah, living in a rich country and not finding a job must be a real bitch ..... wait ! illegal aliens do find jobs, lots of them.

Avatar image for mattbbpl
mattbbpl

23336

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#53 mattbbpl
Member since 2006 • 23336 Posts

@garywood69 said:
@mattbbpl said:

OK, please enlighten me. How are the following people more wealthy than a king 2000 ago?

A person sleeping under the boardwalk in Miami

People sharing tents on public land who now have to relocate because the city kicked them off that land

People sleeping in the lobby of the public library during the winter so they don't freeze to death (a friend of mine risked his job to make that happen - really good guy)

A child who insists on taking half of her school lunch home with her to her mother so she can eat

Well some of those might be more wealthy, I have no idea because once again you've defined them in terms of just 1 or 2 aspects instead of their total wealth.

But you're changing what I was saying. I never said the very bottom of modern society was wealthier than a king. I said what's often meant by left-wing poverty in the west is wealthier than a king. In europe, the left-wing definition of poverty is something like "Less than 50% of the median income". Which is the whole point I was trying to get at that you really need to unpack these concepts so you're not just pulled into political agendas based on confusion with words.

@garywood69 said:

Someone born into modern day left-wing poverty is richer than a king was 2000 years ago by the right wing definition.

Perhaps I misunderstand this statement. Maybe you meant, "Those born at or near the poverty line," or something similar, and you didn't actually mean to refer to the poor in entirety, I don't know. But we definitely have real, true poverty these days as well, including in the US.

Avatar image for mattbbpl
mattbbpl

23336

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#54 mattbbpl
Member since 2006 • 23336 Posts

@Jaysonguy said:

They get medical attention, they have protection under the government and basic laws of the society.

I grant you that now the medical care is better (although up until very recently these people only received that in emergency situations). But I'm pretty sure the kings of 2000 years ago benefited from their governments and basic laws of society as well. And most of the kings had shelter, clothing, and food.