'The two greatest threats to the Jewish people are persecution and prosperity' - Jewish aphorism
The aphorism of my Jewish friends seems to apply to everyone, at least insofar as prosperity goes, and it will, I believe, have significant and negative effects on all our lives in the future.
I recently read three completely separate media reports on clashes between groups. One was yet another rehash of the conflicts between smokers and non-smokers. The second was a description of the rising levels of conflicts in certain neighborhoods of Manhattan between people who have children, and take them everywhere they go, and people who don’t have children, and resent having to cope with kids who are noisy, badly behaved, or who take up adult space in buses, the subway, and public spaces. The third was a description of the rising resentment towards people who use cell phones in public places, or who raise the risks of driving by talking on their cell phones while driving with half their attention and half their hands.
To these three reports, I will add a fourth piece of the puzzle: the steadily rising conflicts between pet owners and people without pets. As the baby boomers age and become so-called 'empty nesters' as their kids leave home, more and more of them are filling the emotional void with pets. As a result, the pet population is skyrocketing. More pets mean more noise, more mess, and fewer song birds, all of which are being noticed and resented by people who do not have pets.
Each of these conflicts have caused me to scratch my head, and my training leads me to believe that they are not isolated conflicts, but part of a larger picture. So, if you step back from these seemingly petty conflicts, what kind of picture emerges?
Regardless of which side you might be on in each of these areas of conflict, two things seem clear: first, these are not earth-shaking issues. And second, they involve selfishness on both sides. People with dogs deem their needs to be more important, while people without dogs believe they are in the right. People with children want to take their children with them, and so are willing to inconvenience those without children, while people without children want kids kept at home.
To put it baldly, and at the risk of annoying people on all sides of these issues, these are issues where people want their rights respected without being willing to respect the rights of others. Eventually I expect to see all of these issues wind up in court, further clogging our legal system, and creating insoluble conundrums for our courts. I believe this is symptomatic of a fundamental change in society.
These changes are coming from the confluence of social forces, and are producing, in turn, many consequences. Some of the causes include: widespread prosperity; the myth of human rights; the increasing isolation of individuals due to technology; the rising popularity of the Eleventh Commandment; and the decline in general civility.
Widespread prosperity is spoiling us, much as overindulgence produces spoiled children. As we get more and more of what we want, we begin to take it for granted that we should get what we want, that it is, indeed, our right to have our own way all the time. People who can pay for service, come to expect to be served by others, and become less willing to accept that there are times when it’s not their turn to be served.
When I talk about the myth of human rights, I get a lot of static from people who believe that human rights are holy, and the equivalent of natural law. They may be holy (if we agree to imbue them with holiness), but they are neither natural, nor an embodiment of the workings of the universe. The long, sorry history of humanity shows quite clearly that what we call human rights are rare and fragile things, more notable by their absence than their presence. And they clearly do not have the force of natural law. Nobody goes to court to have the law of gravity enforced. It’s unnecessary because it enforces itself. This is not true of human rights.
Human rights are conventions, agreements we make with each other that only work in a tit-for-tat manner: I’ll respect and protect your rights if you respect and protect mine. This used to be called the social compact, and it was the philosophy that underpinned the American Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution. However, present society seems to be saying, 'I demand that you respect and protect my rights, but I feel no compulsion to respect and protect yours – that’s your problem.' Clearly, this doesn’t work, and it spells problems for our society and for human rights in general.
The steady advance of technology, and our increasing reliance on it, means that more and more of our communications is happening electronically, and less and less in person, or even over the phone. It is always easier to be indifferent, rude, or thoughtless to people whom you never see or speak to, and this is leading us to become a disconnected society. As we interact less and less directly with people, we care less about them and the people around us.
This indifference also leads us to be indifferent to the opinions of other people. If we don’t care what our neighbors, peers, or society think or feel about us, then the only brake on our behavior is the Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not get caught. Increasingly, people seem to be feel that anything they can get away with is okay, and to hell with what it does to society or other people. This applies to business decisions, to traffic laws, or even to the way we behave towards other parents and children in our child’s soccer league.
The decline in general civility is an outgrowth of these other forces, but also creates an environment of confrontation. The more abrupt and confrontational people behave, the more they feel justified in behaving rudely. It becomes a self-stoking cycle.
This is by no means an exhaustive list, nor have I exhausted any of the causes I’ve identified. Each could probably lead to a major debate. However, as a futurist, my interest lies in the future. Accordingly, my concern in making these points is: where does this lead us? What’s the significance in these symptoms?
I believe there are two major outcomes of these developments in our society. First, it means that our social institutions won’t function as well. In a society where there’s no give and take, where people behave confrontationally, and don’t give a damn about the broader consequences of their actions, the concept of enlightened self-interest disappears. We become ungovernable. Our courts become the principal means of anything but casual social intercourse. We do, in short, put sand into the workings of governance and society. This leads to declining effectiveness of social institutions as civil servants spend ever more time trying to protect themselves from the people they are supposed to serve rather than trying to accomplish anything. It leads to a selfish society that steadily descends into chaos and decadence.
Indeed, the second effect not only echoes this, but emphasizes, and eventually accelerates it. The children of this kind of society grow up either with no concept of civic virtue, having learned from the example of their selfish parents, or they grow up with no example at all, having been left to their own devices by self-absorbed parents. Since children are born savages, and have to be civilized by consistent teaching and example, such children grow into savages with the facade of civilization. It’s not hard to see that civilization cannot survive without civilized people. If this view of the future is correct, we are entering a period of decline and eventual fall.
Surely, though, this is an awful lot to read into a few pet owners that don’t clean up after their pets. But recall that this hypothesis (which is what it is, and not a statement of fact) is based on four separate sets of observations, all of which seem to point to the same conclusions. It could be I’m reading the signs wrong – so what’s you’re conclusion?
Meanwhile, there is also hope. I also see signs that people are taking our predicament seriously. There are groups mobilizing for the commonweal, rather than for narrow, selfish interest. Homes are being built for the homeless, soup kitchens being run for the same, environmental issues are being pursued and solutions to garbage and air pollution being proposed. The quality of community life is being considered and studied seriously, with more than merely economic success being weighed in the balance. The AIDS epidemic in Africa, as well as its counterpart here are being studied, and plans are being made to fight back.
All of these are hopeful signs. So, as always, the future is uncertain. How, then, should an individual cope with this uncertainty? I offer two suggestions. First, watch for tell-tales, distant early warning signs that indicate which direction we are headed. Look for widespread signs of both selfishness, and selflessness, then gauge which you are seeing more frequently. Perhaps the best early warning signs are to follow what kinds of children teachers are facing in the school systems. If you hear of rising violence in the schools, that is a very bad sign. If you hear of a rising level of concern for others in our schools, that’s a hopeful sign.
But second, work for your own enlightened self interest. If you pollute the environment in which you live, that pollution will come back to harm you, whether it is physical or emotional. Practice civic virtue and be involved in your community. Be courteous and polite, even in the face of rudeness. Though it sounds corny in this day and age, become a good example. I believe the future will be won by individual action, not by governments of institutions. It will be won – or lost – one person at a time.
Good luck.
by Richard Worzel, futurist
© Copyright, IF Research, September 13, 2000.
|
|