Civility is for Everyone!

https://www.slideserve.com/gaia/the-source-of-lake-wobegon

Critics of Civility

As Civility begins to be embraced as a vital answer to our challenges, we’re starting to hear from the skeptics, the professional critics, the haters, the perpetually ironic, special interests, politicians, media interests, fundraisers, political consultants, the powerful, influencers, extremists, technologists, literalists, nativists, nationalists, environmentalists, talking heads, artists, postmodernists, materialists, therapists and humanists. Some struggle with Civility’s claim to represent everyone in addressing core human challenges. Instead, they say that the modern Civility project is really for elites only, too soft and emotional, too far left, too righteous, too far right, too simple/surface or too impractical/abstract.

Civility attempts to define a set of values, skills and behaviors that are “fully adequate” to support the required economic, social, religious and political needs of our society. Civility addresses the eternal conflict between the individual and “the other”; between the individual and communities considering the “common good”. It provides a subset of moral values adequate to support these dimensions of life while allowing individuals and groups to debate and negotiate the remaining political, social, personal, religious and economic options. As such, it is a “classical liberal” approach, embracing individual freedom while necessarily tolerating others and their opinions.

Just for Elites?

Civility has a long history in America of being embraced by all. City and country. North and South. East and West. Religious diversity was a key driver historically. The Catholic versus Protestant wars in Europe were seen as ridiculous for modern people. The great diversity of Protestant denominations promoted religious tolerance.

Civility applies to all domains. Family, neighbors, unions, civic clubs, not-for-profits, schools, universities, professions, religious organizations, interest groups, small businesses, big businesses, cooperatives, political parties, candidates and community groups. There is no “elite” preference here.

Civility begins at the local level. Family, neighbors, friends, local commerce, HOA’s, block watches, parishes, local schools, local sports, civic organizations, libraries, community centers, social welfare services, third meeting places, pubs, porching, volunteering, block parties, volunteer fire fighters and emergency services. Rural, agricultural, expanding America was founded on these voluntary organizations. It was re-founded around 1900 with political reforms, social services, scouts, civic organizations, YMCA’s, Chautauqua institutes, civil rights, labor unions, temperance, public libraries, public secondary education, etc.

Civility is an eternal challenge. The individual faces other individuals and other groups, communities and society. We’re each wired to be fully individual oriented. “It takes a village” to civilize us and make us productive members of society. Civility applies to all social classes and geographies.

Civility focuses on human dignity, respect and empathy. These are universal human values and experiences. They represent a radical view of human equality, indifferent to rank. These values are anti-elite and countercultural. They support the needs of all and constrain the [alleged] tendency of elites to construct exploitative structures and philosophies.

Civility focuses on practical skills for interacting with others, communicating and making good decisions. It is applicable for everyone.

The Civility Project is purposely taking a “bottoms up” approach to recapturing our institutions as responsible to the people.

The current social, political and economic institutions [often] primarily serve the interests of the privileged (the 1% and the 20% professional classes). The “tea party” was founded to challenge this situation. This wise populist insight has been captured by one political party for its sole benefit. Civility attempts to make clear the benefits to any political group of effective institutional structures.

Civility’s focus on human dignity ensures that individual freedom will be preserved. It is a “classical liberal” approach that recognizes that humans are imperfect and that many will attempt to capture political, social and economic institutions for strictly personal benefits. [In modern America, this is considered a “conservative” insight]. It accepts that some constraints must be placed upon individual “rights” to preserve the “common good”. There is often no obvious solution to these competing interests. Every society must find “reasonable” ways to protect both individual rights AND the common good, while allowing representative democracy to wrestle with the issues in the middle. We’re stuck with an uncomfortable “both/and” rather than a more satisfying “either/or”.

Civility is a “public good” which benefits everyone. The more that civility is practiced, the more that everyone benefits. Non-elites, who have lesser assets, benefit disproportionately from increased civility.

Investments in improving civility create a “virtuous cycle” which benefits everyone.

Elites have a much greater share of assets, so they have a greater interest in establishing and maintaining civility in any society. They need a supermajority of society to buy into “the rules of the game”. They could once rely upon ideas like divine providence, tradition, kings’ rights, land rights, the ancient regime, property rights, class rights, papal infallibility, social Darwinism, eugenics, racial supremacy, national rights, etc. Modern history and communications undermine these crude approaches. Elites need Civility to underpin support for representative democracy, regulated capitalism and international trade.

Too Soft?

Critics argue that “Civility” is based solely on feelings, weakness and conflict avoidance.

Civility encourages individuals to be “dead serious” about their political and religious views. It does not take a position. It encourages individuals to engage in the political process and to develop deeply felt religious beliefs and practices [without becoming righteous and rejecting others’ rights].

Civility requires the “hard” virtues of respect and responsibility.

Civility requires the development of mature character in adults.

Civility promotes positive and constructive approaches to interpersonal relations and problem solving.

Civility is focused on results, not just ideas.

Project Civility is focused on actionable steps, not just a belief system.

Too Left?

Civility embraces the “little platoons” of classic and modern conservative thought. High commitment local organizations are essential for social life and forming moral character.

Civility is actively non-partisan. It requires no position on the historical debates. Central/decentral. Tradition/innovation. Risk/safety. Religious/secular. Individual/community.

Civility requires a limited moral foundation to support society. It rejects a purely individualistic basis for society. It rejects a purely community, organic, spiritual, religious basis for society.

Civility embraces the role of institutions, trust, productivity and growth in society.

The 8 civility values are nonpartisan. Respect, acceptance, public spiritedness and interactive lean left. Responsibility, intentionality and constructiveness lean right. Human dignity is equally left and right.

Too Right?

Human dignity is a radical idea opposed to domination by elites and structures.

Civility is inherently open, liberal and tolerant.

Civility does not embrace any dominant religious or cultural view.

Civility embraces positivity. It does not prioritize “no”.

Civility acknowledges conflict as an inherent part of life and embraces modern technologies.

Civility acknowledges power as a real force in life. It believes that personal and community beliefs are equally important.

Too Righteous?

Civility attempts to find the “common ground” of political debate. It tries to find the “least common denominator” or values, practices, beliefs and habits necessary for society to succeed, or at least muddle through.

Like all political, social, religious or philosophical belief systems, it tries to find the essence, the most important beliefs or assumptions needed for success.

It focuses on communications and interpersonal skills that are neutral.

It focuses on conflict resolution skills.

It promotes organizations like the “braver angels” that encourage interaction between individuals with different views.

It embraces the problem solving and personal growth results of cognitive behavioral therapy and modern organizational development.

Civility promoters believe that tolerance is essential.

Too Simple?

Critics say that civility is too simple, too surface, too obvious. Civility is an approach based upon 500 years of the Western modern era.

Civility accepts the complex validity of modern politics and religion.

Civility embraces a required subset of values in the Western religious, philosophical, economic and social traditions. It requires respect, human dignity, acceptance, responsibility, public spirit, intention, interactivity and constructiveness.

Civility requires thinking, feeling and doing.

Civility accepts that individuals have deeply felt individual perspectives that do not align easily.

Civility promotes the development of individual character based upon philosophical, religious and political perspectives.

Civility combines a set of values with a set of practical skills to be applied in all domains of life.

Civility actively rejects oversimplified versions that are just politeness, magic wands to end disagreement, purely emotional, utopian, partisan, overreaching or merely supporting the status quo.

Too Impractical?

One definition is that “civility is a set of behaviors that recognize differences and build mutual respect.”

Behaviors are the primary focus, even though they are based upon widely agreed-upon values.

Individuals recognize differences between individuals and groups, and seek to understand and bridge them. This is a level-headed approach to recognizing and managing reality.

Individuals constructively take actions to build mutual respect. They work in the right direction, even though the steps don’t always work to resolve differences, solve problems or build relationships. They take steps forward because this is hard, necessary work, not because it is destined to succeed.

The communications, problem-solving, interpersonal, change and personal management tools used in implementing civility are practical insights, techniques and habits that can be taught to everyone.

The Civility Project roll-out strategy is “bottoms-up”, relying upon a broad cross-section of our nation learning, perfecting, applying and sharing these tools and values.

The Civility Project emphasizes actionable steps: education, interactions, commitments, teaching, porching, greeting, encouraging, joining, volunteering and engaging politically.

Civility offers personal benefits such as conflict management, stress reduction, self-management, better relationships, improved image, influence, acceptance and productivity.

Civility undermines the attraction of extreme individualism by emphasizing the shared humanity of all individuals and the necessity of constructive interactions. It helps individuals to find a balanced perspective that includes others, communities and values as complements to the individual alone.

Civility is similar to approaches like the “golden mean” and the “golden rule”. It attempts to combine a small number of values and skills into a practical tool kit that can be used and improved.

Summary

Civility is easy to caricature and dismiss. Simplistic “straw man” versions are easy to attack. They are inadequate to be helpful or embraced as a shared community asset. But Civility defined as a set of behaviors that combines values and tools and strives to both build relationships and manage differences is not simplistic or ineffective. It is a critical set of habits needed to promote effective interactions, engagement, trust and results in a complex society.

It is a moderate and moderating approach, so some might call it conservative. It values interactions, feedback, process, learning and growth, so some might label it liberal. We think that the Civility values are nonpartisan and that the tools are clearly neutral ones that can be used to be more effective in all walks of life, irrespective of politics or values.

Civility can overpromise and become righteous. We think that these values and tools are a solid combination for delivering personal, interpersonal, process and community results. But they don’t work miracles. We have different sets of values, perspectives, experiences, habits, talents, personalities and expectations. We can learn to listen, empathize, seek the common good and compromise effectively. This will help, but it won’t make any of us perfect people or negotiators.

Our goal in the Civility Project is to re-establish community expectations that promote these kinds of interactions and personal growth. We are confident that creating new norms of expected and taboo behaviors will help individual lives and our communities. In the modern world of complexity, uncertainty, insecurity and skepticism we need some help. Civility offers a nonpartisan common framework to rebuild a constructive, trusting, productive background for all of our interactions. Imperfect, but very powerful.

Cross-References

Civility is Nonpartisan

Our preferred definition of Civility is “a common values-based problem-solving process to make group decisions when individuals have differences”. A review of 5 dimensions indicates that Civility has no bias towards or against the left or the right.

Philosophically

Conservatism “conserves” history, culture, religion, norms, land, assets, classes, privileges, religion, power and institutions. It opposes risk-taking, conflict, rapid change and revolution. Civility is rooted in human dignity and concern for the “public good”.

Liberalism elevates the individual, rationality, progress, liberty, science and rights. It opposes unjustified power, wealth and cultural claims on the individual. Liberal political systems seek to balance individual rights with the “public good”.

Technically

Civility based problem-solving and relationship management emphasize the use of modern business, education and counseling techniques such as active listening, dialogue, objective evidence, separation of facts and values, common interests, devil’s advocate, process review, independent facilitators, strategic planning, values clarification, I/you statements, cognitive behavioral therapy, crucial conversations, shared accountability, win/win options, disclosed preferences, long-term perspective, walk-away option, rational incentives, aligned incentives, multiple rounds of negotiation, I’m OK/You’re OK, brainstorming, multiple intelligences, 6 thinking hats, supplier partnerships, shared administrative services, outsourced services, specific corporate culture, mission, vision and values. Corporate, not-for-profit, educational, counselling, government, religious and privately owned organizations have adopted these social science techniques because they are effective tools for translating resources into outputs in support of goals.

Different organizations emphasize different tools that best match their values, history and objectives. There is no clear left versus right emphasis. Solid tools help organizations manage their planning, workforce, resources, suppliers, customers and beneficiaries.

Values

  1. Respecting each other and our views. Respect for position and roles is a core conservative principle. Respect for individual freedom and agency has been a core conservative principle since the American Revolution. Liberals emphasize human rights, caring and fairness. Respect for each individual is central.
  2. Human dignity. Christian theology emphasizes the value of each person created by God in his image and called by name. Secular humanist philosophy takes a similarly very high view of the importance of each individual.
  3. Being open to understanding differences. Liberals have emphasized human rights, equality, care, progress and “others”. Religious conservatives embrace the Judeo-Christian call to protect the poor, the widow, the orphan and the alien. Most Americans support the American political system that limits centralized power and protects minority rights. Many conservatives recognize the diversity of religious denominations. Most Americans have learned to accept the legal and social rights of different groups, including many that were not accepted before. We have arguments about DEI today because it can be used as a political tool by the far left, even though large corporations have effectively used the nonpartisan core of DEI to be more effective firms for 25 years.
  4. Each individual’s choices matter. Liberals and conservatives in individualist America agree.
  5. We’re responsible for our choices and interactions. Conservatives emphasize responsibility, including responsibility to social groups and the state. Liberals focus on the individual, per se, and highlight their responsibility to society as essential for the public good determined by the political process.
  6. We consider the public good in our choices. Liberals tend to take the broader perspective today, sometimes to a fault. Classical conservatives naturally focus on the overall public good as the end goal of society, perhaps emphasizing the existing interests. As representatives of the wealthier and more powerful groups, conservatives look to the overall health of society, politics and the economy as vital.
  7. We share responsibility for our choices. Conservatives naturally see an organic society, based on tradition, norms, institutions and trust. Although elites influence decisions, true support from all of society is essential. All sectors must support the legitimacy of big choices. Liberals promote shared power as the fair way, in principle. They sometimes criticize decisions and processes when they don’t win.
  8. We think and act constructively. Liberals embrace modernity, science, progress, education and rationality. Conservatives embrace hard choices, reality, real politic, trade-offs, common sense, business methods, and balanced budgets.

Issues

19 issues have appeared in the “top 10” most important issues lists since 1948. Civility can be neutral on all of these issues.

  1. Inflation. Republicans emphasize this. OK.
  2. Jobs. Democrats emphasize this.
  3. Balanced budget. Republicans promote this. Democrats pursue this.
  4. The economy. Everyone favors expansion and growth.
  5. International aid/UN/global organizations. Democrats support this.
  6. Hot wars. Republicans favor more active strategies.
  7. War on terror. Republicans favor more active policies.
  8. Crime. Republicans favor greater investments.
  9. Gun rights. Republicans favor greater rights.
  10. Traditional culture. Republicans favor tradition.
  11. Drugs. Republicans favor greater enforcement and consequences.
  12. Education. Republicans favor local control and greater traditional values.
  13. Immigration. Republicans favor less legal and illegal immigration.
  14. Poverty. Democrats favor greater support.
  15. Health care. Democrats favor greater public support.
  16. Racial rights. Democrats favor greater actions for minority groups.
  17. Environment. Democrats favor greater public investment and regulation.
  18. Unifying the country/rule of law. Historically, Republicans emphasized this. In the Trump era, Democrats are more concerned.
  19. Role of government. Republicans favor less government, until recent Trump changes.

Moral Foundations Theory

  1. Care. Primary liberal value. Conservatives rate it highly too.
  2. Fairness. Primary liberal value, focusing on results. Conservatives emphasize process fairness.
  3. Loyalty. Conservative priority. Secondary liberal value. Civility emphasizes loyalty to society, the political system and the common good.
  4. Authority. Conservative priority. Liberals accept “legitimate” authority. Civility emphasizes the importance of each individual.
  5. Purity. Conservative priority supporting traditional values. Liberals emphasize different dimensions emphasizing individual rights.
  6. Equality. Equal treatment of individuals. Left and right agree.
  7. Proportionality. Conservatives emphasize proper rewards for efforts and results. Liberals accept this principle but give it lesser emphasis. Civility does not take a stance.

Summary

Civility is supported by left and right in America’s political history. Modern techniques for most effective group interactions and negotiations are neutral. The values that support Civility are neutral. Civility takes no stand on modern political issues. The latest attempt to define the “righteous” bases for politics provides no dimension opposed to civility. Civility can be used as a bipartisan base for our democracy and our day-to-day interactions.

Causes of Increased Political Polarization

Political polarization is one of the main causes of the decline in civility. There are structural and historical causes for the tremendous decline in civility from 1960 to 2025.

High Level Changes

  1. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 obliterated the Democratic party and provided the Republican party with a growth strategy.
  2. The “cultural revolution” of the 1960’s contrasted traditional social practices with a tolerance or embrace of “anything goes” behavior. Politicians have continued to exploit these deeply felt divisions.
  3. Political parties embraced a single, simple right versus left, conservative versus liberal, framework as Ronald Reagan skillfully knit together the various “conservative” factions between 1968 and 1980. Republicans began to embrace the virtues of a “big tent” through the end of the century.
  4. The Republican party embraced fundamentalist Christians, and religion was merged with politics. Democrats increasingly became home for the secular, agnostic and “none of the above” religious affiliations.
  5. Ideology based parties are inherently more righteous, adopting right/wrong, good/evil views of the world.
  6. The American economy has continued to grow throughout the post WWII era, greatly increasing the value of politics for those with economic interests to protect.
  7. Americans have increasingly sorted by “rural versus urban” and “left versus right” residences. The rural counties are right, the urban counties are left, the suburban counties are mixed.
  8. The rise of individual expression as the premier life goal highlight’s individual identity. Political views reflect a person’s identity. There is pressure to “be” left or right.
  9. Structural changes like gerrymandering or restrictive changes in voting rules are used to control political power at the state level.
  10. Political parties have lost power. Historically, they were able to filter out extreme or risky candidates or issues. Voters, candidates and special interest groups have more power today.
  11. Our two-party system incentivizes extreme candidates, supporters and views on issues. This is a self-reinforcing tendency.
  12. Once individuals see the world as political, in a single ideological dimension, as right versus wrong, human nature reinforces the polarized views. Dislike of the other party becomes highly motivating. In-group biases grow. Fear of the “other” grows. Perceived harmful, unfair, disloyal, unspeakable, sacrilegious actions by the “other” party assume mythic evil status. This is also a self-reinforcing tendency.
  13. Experience with civil, constructive, problem-solving politicians and parties has declined, lowering expectations. This is also a self-reinforcing tendency.
  14. Polarization is in the interests of some politicians and the industries supported by political spending. It acts as an ethical and communications skills barrier to entry.

Media Changes

  1. Technological changes allowed journalism and opinion expression to be economically viable at the part-time individual level, down from financially stable organizations of at least 100 people.
  2. The “Fairness Doctrine” of 1949 was effectively ended in 1987, allowing political media to flourish.
  3. The merger of individual identity with politics and religion with politics created greater demand for political journalism.
  4. With television, perceptions of “presidential”, powerful, honest, effective, charismatic, leadership, common sense, relatability, etc. made media image more important than content, knowledge, experience or character.
  5. The internet allowed previously fringe groups to effectively organize and communicate.
  6. Cable TV and the internet created hundreds and thousands of broadcasting options, encouraging individuals to find exactly the content that they desire.
  7. Highly partisan commentators/entertainers began to provide the people with what they want. A simple reinforcement of their existing beliefs.
  8. The internet and social media provided the tools for content providers to find and feed their customers, even at very small scales.
  9. The loss of classified ads to the internet undermined local newspapers and radio. They lost their ability to effectively cover local news. This reinforced the trend to embracing partisan sources for all news and opinion.
  10. The growth of effective communications sources allowed national politicians to move the “center of gravity” in politics from “state and local” to the national level. All issues are now seen through the lens of ideological national politics.
  11. The increased number of channels on cable TV provided room for outlets that appealed to small fractions of the viewing audience. There was room for partisanship. There was room for sensationalism.
  12. Television and radio networks found ways to attract, reinforce and monetize polarization.
  13. In a world of hundreds or thousands of news and opinion sources, clear, consistent, emotional, effective branding became necessary for survival. Everyone is competing for clicks and eyeballs. Only the winners survive. Sources increasingly cater to the “least common denominator” of human interests.
  14. The internet and social media provide confidential cover for individuals to share their most negative thoughts without fear of being held accountable.
  15. The internet and social media avoid any filters for accuracy or legitimacy. Fake news spreads quickly.
  16. The “viral” nature of the internet and social media undercut traditional sources and views of objective, scientific, professional, mainstream legitimacy. Every fact becomes an opinion.
  17. Trust in objective journalism is undermined by the politically informed options, even as bias evaluators improve their effectiveness.
  18. The repeated claim of “fake news” undermines trust in any objective journalism.
  19. In a highly competitive media market, sensationalism wins. In-depth stories, human interest stories, good news, analysis and education lose.
  20. https://sites.bu.edu/pardeeatlas/research-and-policy/back2school/how-the-american-media-landscape-is-polarizing-the-country/#:~:text=The%20divisive%20tone%20of%20cable,in%20a%20less%20outrageous%20manner
  21. https://tomkapostasy.com/2023/07/15/one-page-why-were-polarized-klein-2020/
  22. https://tomkapostasy.com/2023/04/10/why-were-polarized-2020/

The Republican Party Moved Far Right

  1. Reagan provided “conservative” as a respectable term for a variety of political subgroups, ranging from moderate to extreme.
  2. Fundamentalist Christians, southerners and rural residents joined the party, angry about social and cultural changes.
  3. Buckley and Goldwater legitimized philosophical conservatives, including the extreme versions.
  4. Economic libertarians found a home in the party, as Austrian and supply side economics were adopted. Innovations like the Laffer Curve, monetarism and “rational expectations” were digested.
  5. “Free market” economics, descended from laissez faire, is intrinsically extreme, elevating markets as morally “good” and any opposition as “bad”. Analysis, judgment and compromise are discouraged.
  6. Economic growth is good. “Small is beautiful” is mere virtue signalling.
  7. Taxation is theft. Drown the government in a bathtub.
  8. Gun rights, taking your guns, weak on crime.
  9. Woke mob, cancel culture, fake news.
  10. Global warming is “fake news”; drill baby, drill.
  11. Communist, pink, socialist agenda, radical left.
  12. Christian nationalism; not separation of church and state.
  13. Anti-race, nationality, immigrant, religion, sexual orientation.
  14. Racial “dog whistles”, crime, security, welfare queens.
  15. Gingrich strategy of polarization, extreme positioning, framing, ends justifies the means.
  16. Patriotism, national purity, open borders, rapists and muggers, terrorists.
  17. RINO’s ejected from the party.
  18. Funding for more “conservative” candidates to challenge incumbents in primaries.
  19. Acceptance of extremist, militant, subversive, racist, conspiracist, radical supporters.

The Democratic Party Responded and Became Righteous

  1. Per Johnathan Haidt, only care and fairness matter to Democratic politicians. They disregard or criticize loyalty, authority, purity and liberty. Ouch.
  2. https://righteousmind.com/liberals-are-weirder-than-conservatives/
  3. Western culture is imperfect, maybe oppressive. Pure secularism is best.
  4. Religion is the opiate of the masses. Religious organizations are politically suspect.
  5. Affirmative action is more important than individual rights.
  6. Abortion rights are basic; no limits or compromises.
  7. Sexual orientation is personally defined aside from biological or cultural influences.
  8. Free speech is not as important as protecting feelings. Cancel culture.
  9. Environmental goals and policies disregard cost/benefit analyses.
  10. “Defund the police” because they are an illegitimate institution.
  11. Government employees, teachers, professors, media and artists leaned further left and lost the ability and interest to transmit neutral, broadly held social values.
  12. Extreme positions on free speech, assembly, press, religion, human rights and globalism.
  13. Oppressed group interests are primary. Not equal opportunity, safety net, fair taxes.
  14. Complete individual choice in consumption, production, expression, and relations.
  15. Opposition to school vouchers as an inherently unfair threat to public education.
  16. Reparations for historical injustices.
  17. Strictly global solutions without respect for national interests.
  18. Global warming is an immediate threat to the survival of humanity.
  19. Disregard of the “deplorables”.
  20. Loyalty oaths to institutional values.
  21. Virtue signaling as an art form.
  22. Postmodernist elevation of “powerful oppressors” as the only framework.
  23. Pure, certain support of John Rawls’ theory of justice, economic redistribution.
  24. Library rights to all books and programs for all ages.
  25. Superiority of abstract, global principles versus local interests.
  26. Individual creative expression as the supreme value; and tolerance; except for some views!
  27. Superiority of coastal culture, economics and politics versus sunbelt or “flyover country”.
  28. Protection of upper middle-class housing, education, safety, travel, professional, tax, networking, investment, trust, and administrative interests.
  29. Welcoming socialists, globalists, and intolerant interest groups in the party.
  30. The centrist pragmatism of FDR, Truman, Kennedy, LBJ, Clinton and Obama are dominated by the “far left” in the Democratic Party at the national level today. Partly by party programs and presidential positions (Biden), but mostly by “safe seat” politicians and the university, media and cultural influencers and thought leaders.
  31. These extreme left positions serve some Democratic politicians, their Republican opponents, and the globally dominant metro areas.
  32. Even though a majority of Democrats and Democratic leaning independents don’t support these “far left” positions or the caricatures wisely promoted by Republicans, the support by some Democrats and clever Republicans helps to position the Democratic party as much further left in the public mind. This reinforces the idea of a single ideological dimension for all issues and polarized yes/no, right/wrong. good/evil, win/loss positions by both parties.
  33. “The Squad” of far-left congresswomen is a convenient foil for the Republicans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squad_(U.S._Congress)
  34. The lack of highly effective Democratic national leadership for 50 years has encouraged leftward leaning Gen X, millennials and Gen Z to adopt further left positions because the center-left version is apparently ineffective..

Summary

  1. A single ideological “left versus right” politics frame emerged after 1964.
  2. In 1995 Gingrich demonstrated that polarization is effective and good for incumbent politicians.
  3. Polarization is a self-reinforcing process. Consider the Irish Troubles or the Middle East.
  4. Politics, media and society also interact to grow polarization.
  5. Religion and identity have merged with politics, making it more ideological and polarized.
  6. The historical countervailing forces of the mainstream media, self-interested political parties, regional elites, the responsibility of noblesse oblige, business elites, religious elites, intellectuals, thought leaders, university presidents, military leaders, state leaders, global leaders, local politicians, civic group leaders, teachers’ unions, League of Women Voters, ABA and scouts have not found their moderating voice in the current media environment.
  7. The media facilitates polarization for profit.
  8. The Republican party moved right and then further right.
  9. The Democratic party “occupied the center” with Clinton and Obama, but this did not satisfy its further left supporters, and it convinced many Republicans that all Democrats are really “radical socialists”. The party has not found a new framework to effectively compete with Trump’s hybrid conservative/populist frame and policies.
  10. A wide variety of groups have attempted to reframe the center as a good political place to live. None have yet succeeded. Perhaps the Carmel civility project will win. https://www.projectcivility.com/

Reasons for Hope

https://www.projectcivility.com/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Better_Angels_of_Our_Nature

https://www.jimmycartertribute.org/index.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_optimism

https://www.amazon.com/The-Rational-Optimist-audiobook/dp/B003MY7RGG/?encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_w=lrR8k&content-id=amzn1.sym.a7785aa2-ac28-4769-b3eb-cff7b9738627&pf_rd_p=a7785aa2-ac28-4769-b3eb-cff7b9738627&pf_rd_r=140-0488079-4728935&pd_rd_wg=wdYs0&pd_rd_r=daf5c4ba-0e70-4878-9189-99eec5a73f79&ref=aufs_ap_sc_dsk

Causes of the Decline in Civility #2

In April, I summarized everything “I knew” about the causes of the decline in civility. Things have not improved in 4 months. I will try again.

Google AI says:

There’s a widespread belief that civility in the U.S. is declining, and several factors are frequently cited as contributing to this trend: 

Social media and the internet: Many Americans point to social media and the internet as primary drivers of eroding civility. The rapid spread of information, and the anonymity afforded by online interactions, can contribute to disrespectful behavior, according to Agility PR Solutions.

  • Media in general: The broader media landscape, encompassing traditional and online news sources, is also often blamed for contributing to incivility.
  • Public officials and political leaders: The behavior of public officials and political leaders is seen by many as influencing the overall level of civility in society. Incivility among elites can potentially trickle down and impact how citizens interact with one another.
  • Political polarization and partisan divides: The increasing polarization of political views and the tendency to demonize opposing viewpoints can foster an environment where civility is eroded. Focusing on judgment over curiosity in discourse can be particularly harmful.
  • Changes in societal values: Some suggest that a shift in values, emphasizing individualism and authentic self-expression over social conventions, may contribute to a decline in traditional politeness norms.
  • Weakening social norms and lack of education: A lack of emphasis on teaching and upholding civility, both within families and educational institutions, might contribute to its decline. 

Tom’s 6 Root Causes:

  1. Radical individualism

2. Human nature

3. Skepticism

4. Imperfect myths

5. Our secular age

6. Insecurity

Social media and the internet

2. Human nature is imperfect and selfish. Given anonymity, many individuals take advantage of that power to criticize others. Individuals seeking affirmation re-orient their lives to garner external praise, using all possible means. They seek groups and media to reinforce their views rather than promote true personal growth, which can be painful. Media organizations have an incentive to reinforce these behaviors in order to monetize them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_of_Gyges

The Media’s Role in Increased Polarization: Google AI Summary

In the mid-20th century (approximately 1930s-1980s), a combination of factors encouraged media outlets, particularly newspapers and broadcast media, to adopt more centrist positions:

  • Professionalization of Journalism: The rise of journalism schools and the increasing emphasis on journalistic professionalism fostered a belief in objectivity and impartiality, according to In These Times. This meant a conscious effort to present news without overt partisan bias. The City University of New York notes that newspapers became gradually less partisan over this period, a trend that continued after the 1910s and through 1980.
  • The Fairness Doctrine: Enforced by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from 1949 to 1987, the Fairness Doctrine mandated that broadcast networks devote time to contrasting views on issues of public importance. Britannica adds that this required stations to provide adequate opportunities for opposing perspectives, particularly in news and public affairs programming, although it didn’t necessitate balance within individual programs. This forced broadcasters to consider a broader range of viewpoints than they might have otherwise.
  • Shifting Advertising Landscape and Commercial Interests: As the cost of publishing newspapers increased, they became less reliant on party subsidies and more dependent on advertising revenue, particularly from department stores and other retailers. These advertisers often preferred a less partisan approach to reach a wider audience, contributing to a move towards centrism in news coverage, according to the Center for Journalism Ethics.

Media Concentration: While media ownership consolidated during this period, particularly after World War II, the drive for broader audiences to attract advertisers also played a role in the push for more middle-of-the-road content, according to The Business History Conference

TK: We have returned to the more normal situation with highly partisan news media and opinion sources. Combined with the internet, individuals can tailor their media consumption.

Public officials and political leaders

Political polarization and partisan divides

From 1870-1970, America was largely run by a Republican, WASP, New England, Middle Atlantic and Midwest elite. They were very confident that their views were correct: religiously, socially, politically and economically. FDR was considered “a traitor to his class”. There were populist and reformer challenges, but the leaders knew they should and would lead (Bush, Sr.). The cultural revolution of the 1960’s, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Vietnam War, Watergate and the economic and population explosion of the Sunbelt upended the two parties. Republicans became conservative and Democrats became liberal. In a two-party system, this resulted in a simplistic “left versus right”, “red versus blue” framing and polarization.

The challenges of minority groups, women’s rights, environmental rights, human rights, international relations, individual rights, multiculturalism, immigrants, abortion rights, gay rights, crime, secularism, atheism, students’ rights, popular music, sexual freedom, international trade, foreign languages, new religions, urbanization, radical wealth, and pleasure on demand created a social and cultural polarization that eventually became much more important than the traditional (Marxist) class/economics division. Goldwater, Agnew, Nixon and Reagan saw the opportunities for political advantage. Democrats, guided by 4 mostly winning economic decades of FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ and Carter, were slow to adjust to this reframing of political dimensions. Even Clinton, who successfully triangulated an economic “third way”, did not fully recognize this critical shift.

Weakening social norms and lack of education

5. our secular age and 4 imperfect myths. Secularization theory asserts that as societies become more advanced economically, scientifically and educationally they will naturally become less religious and more secular. The evidence does not support this theory at the society level. Societies become less or more “religious” at quite different rates. However, as societies become wealthier, they do have influential intellectuals who conclude that science, philosophy, art, creativity, economics, business, trade, politics and culture can advance more effectively without religion. This creates our “secular age”, where religious belief is merely one option among many that are socially acceptable.

This questioning, criticism, and destruction of the received Christian and Western Civilization values came late to the US. The 1950’s and first half of the 1960’s were a period of cultural conservatism and increased religious belief and participation. The US experienced very radical change in all dimensions from 1965-1970. Social norms were disrupted or destroyed for many.

In a world of “anything goes”, individuals choose their religion. They choose which religious, cultural and political beliefs to hold. They are not philosophers or scientists, so their beliefs are often polyglot, amalgams, pluralistic, hodge podge, syncretized, and logically inconsistent. They are often “least common denominator” views asking little from the individual. Hence, the weakening of social norms leads to a wide variety of informal social beliefs.

The 1950’s, following WWII, naturally reinforced an “America is best” history in schools. History classes, western civilization and American civics were very important. These subjects lost favor in the 1970’s and forward. Schools struggled to clearly define and teach the core lessons of the American and Western experience. Social responsibilities and civility lost ground.

Changes in societal values

For me, this is the most important category.

Classic Liberal Individualism/Democrats

Classical liberals emphasize the individual above the community or society. They value logic above tradition. They emphasize individual social rights. Utilitarianism, the greatest good for the greatest number, is always nearby. Systems and structures are most important to ensuring a fair society without oppression by the powerful. John Rawls’ “A Theory of Justice” is important. It philosophically justifies a “fair” redistribution of resources. This group is deeply suspicious of the power of the wealthy to rule society. It is willing to have weaker overall results in order to minimize the chance of dominance by the ruling class or elites. Hence, the emphasis is on structures and legal rights. Not on responsibilities, opportunities, communities, or society, per se. This group values tolerance highly and is sometimes unwilling to impose its views on others. Critics argue that political structures and legal rights are not enough to support a real society. By this logic, Democrats as classical liberals simply don’t satisfy the human need for transcendence. They only offer “good enough”.

They offer only a “thin” philosophy that may be adequate for the political dimension but does not address other human claims. Professor Haidt calls this a historically unusual WEIRD view – Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic. He notes that liberals typically emphasize just care and fairness as moral, political, and religious values.

Conservatives/Republicans

Modern Republicans support individual freedom in some cultural dimensions, but mostly economically. Republicans embrace the radical individualism of libertarians within their coalition. But mostly, they embrace the “free market” as a philosophical ally of their emphasis on personal liberty of commerce and the rights of property.

President Trump does not align with this tradition. He does not adopt their philosophical principles. He believes in “instrumental” negotiations, power, leverage and deals.

There is a risk that the Republican emphasis on “free markets” will result in the misapplication of economic principles to politics, ethics, commerce and society.

Daniel Bell argued in 1976 that free market extremism is inherently inconsistent with conservative cultural beliefs.

Michael Sandel offers case studies that show how “market thinking” expands into other areas where it is philosophically less relevant but still popular.

Charles Taylor argues that the “instrumental reasoning” of economics, business and science threatens to obliterate all other thinking approaches.

Catholic Church

The Roman Catholic Church has a long history of supporting the preservation of historical powers or national leaders. It also has a history of criticizing the emerging secular options, Protestants, scientists and secularists for replacing God with some other human constructed principles. It developed liberation theology and currently advocates for democratic socialism.

Extremism

2. Human nature is simplistic. It does not support complicated win/win positions. 6. Insecurity. Fear leads to simplistic and highly righteous positions from left and right.

The Therapeutic Society

Constructively, modern upper middle-class society embraces secularism, stages of growth, individual growth, individual expression, self-actualization, creativity, possibilities, personal growth, arts, authenticity, depth psychology, psychoanalysis, myth, possibilities, Maslow, Montessori, Freud, Jung, Spock, Carnegie, Rogers, Rousseau, etc. The individual has unlimited potential and is encouraged to seek this potential. Philip Rieff cogently argues that man requires a connection to the transcendent to provide meaning. He says that modern secular society provides substitutes (therapists, self-help, self-expression) that simply don’t work.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/a-theological-sickness-unto-death-philip-rieff-prophetic-analysis/

The Culture of Narcissism

Christopher Lasch says that we have lost our connection with reality. Our soul requires validation. It seeks it but does not find it. This is a very convincing description of our current situation. Google AI summary follows:

Christopher Lasch’s The Culture of Narcissism (1979) argues that American society in the latter half of the 20th century was undergoing a shift from a character emphasizing individualism and contribution, to a more self-absorbed, narcissistic personality. This shift, he argued, was driven by a complex interplay of social, economic, and psychological factors

Key arguments and characteristics of the culture of narcissism

  • Reliance on external validation: The narcissistic individual, according to Lasch, craves admiration and approval from others to fuel their self-esteem, according to EBSCO. This dependence on external validation can lead to insecurity and a fear of not measuring up.
  • Emphasis on image and superficiality: Lasch observed a cultural preoccupation with appearances, image, and a focus on fleeting trends and celebrity, often prioritizing presentation over substance and achievement. The media plays a role in fostering this, according to Lasch, by promoting unrealistic images and fostering a desire for fame and celebrity.
  • Erosion of Traditional Authority Structures: Lasch argued that the decline of institutions like the family and community, coupled with the rising influence of external agencies and expert advice, weakened traditional sources of authority and guidance. This can leave individuals feeling disconnected and reliant on external sources for personal and societal guidance.
  • Impact of Consumer Culture: Consumerism plays a role in shaping narcissistic tendencies by creating an emphasis on instant gratification, personal desires, and the construction of identity through consumption, undermining community and social responsibility. Advertising, Lasch suggested, encourages insatiable appetites for both goods and personal fulfillment, ultimately leading to feelings of emptiness and dissatisfaction.
  • Decline of Political Engagement: The focus on personal fulfillment, according to Lasch, resulted in a neglect of broader social and political issues, leading to feelings of powerlessness and alienation. 

Impact and significance

The Culture of Narcissism became a bestseller and has had a lasting impact on American cultural criticism, according to SuperSummary. While some found his analysis insightful, highlighting the psychological impact of consumerism and social changes, others criticized his pessimism or disagreed with his interpretation of social trends. Some critics found his use of Freudian psychoanalysis outdated and viewed his arguments as potentially promoting patriarchal values. Despite the varied reception, Lasch’s work continues to be a point of discussion and reflection on American culture. 

Counterfactuals: Civility Should be Much Better Today

Many of the developments of the last 50, 100 or 500 years would lead one to predict that “civility” would be much better today than 50 years ago.

Measured IQ’s have improved by 10+ points.

Workers are 4-5 times more productive than they were in the WWII era.

Americans nearly all live in metropolitan areas where they interact with other races, ethnicities, classes, nationalities, religions and political views.

People make more choices and experience natural consequences of their decisions. Modern markets and society push individuals to interact in all dimensions of life.

More Americans work in large enterprises where they are required to interact with “others” effectively.

Human rights have been adopted for all. Nationalities, races, religions, genders, sexual preferences and abilities are protected and celebrated.

Regional, national and global trade, travel, sports teams and media are available to all.

Ecumenical religious groups thrive. Christian denominations work with each other and “world religions” in ways unimaginable in 1929.

“Tolerance” is elevated as an important cultural and moral value by liberals, Democrats, cultural elites, and business leaders.

Personality profiles, talents, multiple intelligences, gender differences, emotional intelligences, team building, toxic personalities, autism spectrum and other insights highlight the important differences between people and the need for those who wish to succeed to understand them and adapt appropriately.

The percentage of Americans who have completed a college degree has increased from 5% to 40% since WWII. The educational experience, social expectations and interactions all promote civility, seriously considered responses to life and people.

The data is sparse, but it looks like 15% of Americans today visit mental health professionals each year to deal with the challenges of life, up from 3-5% in the WWII era. Neighbors, elders, medical professionals, educators and religious leaders have always helped.

The information required to make decisions is easily available.

European nations (and Japan) were able to move past the horrors of the two world wars and establish tolerance for neighboring states as essential principles of modern democracies.

Global institutions were built from the experiences of the Great Depression and WWII. Other nations have rights, responsibilities and things to offer the world.

The colonial, imperial models were discredited along with fascism, Marxism and totalitarianism. The tolerant, “middle way” Western model of mixed capitalist economies, democracies and international trade and cooperation were validated in the 1992 “end of history” per Francis Fukuyama.

Artists and events have destroyed the notion that cultural, social, religious, political, and business leaders are somehow superior and worthy of unquestioning loyalty to single groups, institutions, parties or leaders. We are now all deeply and inherently skeptical.

These historical, social, economic, political, family, educational, and cultural forces say things should be getting better; much better. The forces against civility must be very strong. This points towards “human nature” as the most important factor.

Summary

The media is commercially incentivized to tear us apart. We are obligated to make wise choices for our media consumption. Political parties prefer to have simple, extreme contrasts. We can reject these nonproductive views. Political parties are often captured by their extreme supporters. We need to participate.

The choice of media sources for news and opinion is critical. We have an obligation to help our fellow citizens see that it is in their own best interest to separate news from opinion, to critically evaluate all messages, to value feedback and to seek personal growth.

Politics is a mess. “The inmates are running the asylum”. Individual politicians optimize their own results. Polarization. Communications. Brands. Techniques. Fundraising. Gerrymandering. We have to re-establish a level playing field, increase political participation, hold officials accountable, set character screens, etc.

Our culture is a mess. It is truly bipolar. Purely secular, scientific, utilitarian, classical liberal on one side. Fundamentalist religious and cultural certainty on the other side. Either/or. Win/lose. Political polarization has infected the culture. In a scientific, secular age we all demand certainty. Unfortunately, scientists, philosophers, political and religious leaders cannot deliver “certainty”. They can only provide useful tools, frameworks, paradigms, myths, stories, histories, prophets, songs, art, insights, components, and limits.

We deeply fear total relativism and pure subjectivity. This pushes us to “certainty” extremisms.

“Anything goes” in 1934 shocks the world. Cole Porter, Indiana legend.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7NJ9ylAhos&list=RDr7NJ9ylAhos&start_radio=1

“is that all there is my friend, then let’s keep dancing”.

Things fall apart; the center cannot hold. A fear in all cultures. The great 1958 modern African novel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Things_Fall_Apart

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43290/the-second-coming

The 1970 “scientist priests all think” critique.

Soren Kierkegaard founded existentialism in 1843 by positing the “leap of faith”. Certainty, in classical logical terms, was impossible. The big questions could not be reduced to pure logic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_of_faith

In Exodus 3:14 God tells Moses: “I am who I am”. Eternity, infinity, wisdom, pure light, spirit, truth, insight, goodness, righteousness, greatness, sovereignty, combination, sets, groups, ideal types, templates, harmony, forms, abstraction. We struggle to digest this, of course.

Civility is only possible when individuals are secure in their perceived existential situation.

Historical Events; Fear and Insecurity

Fear is not a modern invention. Dante fully captured the very fearful medieval worldview.

The 6th of 6 Root Causes of Our Situation: Insecurity

I believe that fear and insecurity run rampant in the American mind today, undercutting our peace of mind, trust, community and politics.

The Impact of Major Modern Events and Ideas

I believe that Charles Taylor is correct about the critical role which our background worldview plays in shaping our lives. Our unconscious mind has views of the world and uses them to influence us “all night and all day”. I think that major events and ideas find their way into our paradigms about life, science, religion, philosophy, politics, morality, character, careers, recreation, and communities. Maslow argued that safety and security are at the base of our pyramid of psychological needs. If fear and insecurity is a main feature of modern life, we need to understand why this is so. In a world of educated/acculturated individuals and mass media communications, the abbreviated “history of the world” drills deeply into our minds, shaping its categories, structure and evaluations.

I’ve reviewed dozens of lists about the most important events overall and within various categories of modern (post 1400’s) life. I documented 257 (!) greatest events with Wikipedia references. I’ll use this database to analyze their impact on fear/insecurity today.

Overall

The events are roughly equally divided between those which make the world riskier (92), safer (83) or do not have a clear, significant impact (82)

Using 40-year periods to summarize the events, there is no clear trend toward riskier or safer events. From a current perspective, the 1820-1859 period was negative with 7 riskier to 4 safer events. The 1848 revolutions threatened the integrated worldview. Spencerian Social Darwinism, even before Darwin, pointed to “scientific” national, racial and class divides. The “dismal Dane” Kierkegaard defined an existential perspective as an alternative to a confident belief in God. The western powers essentially conquered proud China in the “Opium wars”. Lyell summarized geology as the scientific study of changes in the earth, itself. Marx invoked a Hegelian, materialistic, historical, “scientific” philosophy of class division and revolution required by capitalist ownership of the means of production. Darwin’s “theory of evolution” rocked a world that was deeply invested in a deterministic, structured, certain, law based, deeply unchanging, yet socially, politically and economically changing world, philosophy and religion.

The next 1860-1899 period was also negative with 13 riskier to 9 safer events. Nietzsche’s “God is dead” and William Jennings Bryan’s populist “crucified on a cross of Gold” confronted the progressive spirit of the age. The US Civil War showcased the terrors of modern military technology. Famines, urbanization, agricultural productivity improvements, and religious wars drove millions of young Europeans to leave home for other nations like the USA. Art became abstract and individualistic, disconnected from citizens. New forms of popular music arose from the cultural melting pot of the USA. Nationalism grew. The US became an imperial power. Japan engaged with the West and decided to imitate it. The European powers discovered Africa as a new continent to colonize. These events impacted the nineteenth century and still impact all of us today.

The period from 1980 to today is also more negative, with 15 riskier events to 11 safer events. Populist politicians, including far-right partners and supporters are succeeding. Greater legal and illegal immigration from non-European countries to the US concern many citizens. The economic growth of Asia threatened American factories and workers. The transition from European to local power in South Africa raised concerns. The 9/11 terrorist attacks frightened Westerners. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine threatened the modern military world order. Innovations like “junk bonds” increased the risks in the increasingly integrated global financial system. The Great Recession was triggered by “financial innovations”. Michael Porter’s “competitive advantage” theories caused the most powerful corporations to more ruthlessly pursue success. The Reagan/Thatcher revolution undercut unions as a counterbalance for workers versus owners. ChatGPT passed the “Turing test”, indicating that computers are indistinguishable from men.

By Category

Philosophy/Politics riskier 16, safer 13, neutral 9. The breakdown of the nicely integrated “ancien regime” with certain answers for everything is a major and an ongoing source of insecurity. You either have total belief, or you don’t. Kierkegaard defined the need for a “leap of faith” in the modern world. Fundamentalist Christians redefined a world that maintains the historical certainty.

Society/Religion riskier 14, safer 9, neutral 7. Change is the dominant theme.

International relations riskier 27, safer 7 and neutral 2. WWI, WWII, Cold War dominate.

Business/economics riskier 12, safer 13, neutral 15. Process and efficiency make the world safer, while the unequal distribution of income and wealth drive political conflicts.

Physics/Mathematics riskier 9, safer 7, neutral 8. Scientific rules can be defined numerically. But they change!

Technology riskier 2, safer 12, neutral 15. The world benefits from a series of energy and agricultural revolutions.

Computers/Communications riskier 1, safer 6, neutral 24. Tools are mostly neutral, able to be used for good or bad.

Biology/health riskier 11, safer 16, neutral 2. Medical advances accumulate and promise more in the future. We better understand the concerning true risks of microorganisms, evolution, public health, adaptive threats, pandemics, human changes to genetics, and human impacts on the environment.

Science and technology have a very nice 41 safer to 23 riskier ratio. The social areas unfortunately show a 69 riskier to 42 safer profile. The social sciences, arts, philosophy and religion are not winning the war.

Highest Priorities

Ignoring the 82 neutral events, there are 36 items that are most influential/important within the 92 riskier and 83 safer events.

The 16 most important “riskier” items are not evenly distributed among the 8 categories. 4 philosophical items. Rene Descartes’s radical doubt opened the way to complete skepticism. Karl Marx defined a necessary utopian solution to class conflict. The Russian revolution and Chinese Mao revolution followed. Friedrich Nietzsche explored the logical possibilities of “God is dead”. Fascism was defined as a reasonable form of nationalism. The western cultural revolution of the 1960’s provided a fully secular option where religion and culture do not control the individual. WWI, WWII, the cold war, the atomic bomb, Nazism, and the holocaust. The Great Depression. Darwin’s theory of evolution. The Spanish flu and the 2019 global pandemic. “Things fall apart, the center cannot hold”. These important events point toward a meaningless, self-destructive world.

On the other hand, there are 20 much more positive events in the modern world that surely shape our subconscious thoughts. The progressive era of 1880-1920 created governmental reforms and new non-governmental organizations to meet human needs. The post-WWII set of international institutions thrived for 80 years growing global real dollar GDP 40-fold and preventing WW III. The Cold War ended without a hot war! John Maynard Keynes invented the effective discipline of macroeconomics, allowing nations to roughly control their economies and minimize the damages of the business cycle. Scientists demonstrated that the universe is “regular”. Newton, Pascal and von Neumann defined definite, probabilistic and dynamic laws. Edison made commercial electricity practical. The second and third agricultural revolutions transformed production, society and trade. The internet and Google’s search engine made all information easily accessible. Modern surgery, pharmaceuticals, public health, DNA insights, vaccines and social medical insurance have boosted life expectancies far above 70 years.

Summary

Why do we live in such a fearful, insecure time, despite the 83 big events that make our world permanently safer?

The mass media highlights negative, emotional stories.

Politicians use negative, emotional stories to gain and retain support.

Human nature discounts solved problems and historical events. It focuses on today’s challenges. In a sense, we’re always on a treadmill.

The meritocratic, late capitalist, Schumpeterian “creative destruction” economic system leaves everyone without true financial security.

Individualistic Americans don’t really believe in a safety net or welfare state. Politicians have destroyed rather than upgraded or enhanced the welfare System to deal with the modern challenges.

Religion, a critical source of understanding reality, is losing the war against secularism. It has not found a new structure, motif, concept, killer app, theme, bridge, attraction, rationale, argument, or appeal.

Skepticism is a very powerful worldview. It feeds on the human desire for certainty, authenticity, rationality, explanation, and perfection. It celebrates superior knowledge, history, logic, insights, contrarianism, irony, modernity, and progress.

I think that the misguided belief in scientific certainty in all arenas is also to blame. People misunderstand Newton. He discovered physical laws and mathematics that described the world like no one had done before. Yet, he did not abandon the gods, Christianity or alchemy. He was not a materialist reductionist. He knew better. He recognized Aristotle’s “final causes” as deeply important and accepted that he had no idea how or why gravity functioned.

Modern History Index

257 items pulled from all arenas of life. Technology dominates, especially in the last century.

Grouping events into 40-year blocks shows 1940-79 as twice as dynamic as other eras.

1450 – 1779 20

1780 – 1819 12

1820 – 1859 16

1860 – 1899 31

1900 – 1939 47

1940 – 1979 99

1980 – 2025 32

Modern History: Biology and Life

1676 – Microscopic World

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonie_van_Leeuwenhoek

1846 – Anesthesia / Modern Surgery

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anesthesia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surgery

1859 – Darwin’s Theory of Evolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Origin_of_Species

1865 – Germ Theory of Disease / Public Health

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germ_theory_of_disease

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Pasteur

1896 – Psychoanalysis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Pasteur

1918 – Spanish Flu

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu

1928 – Penicillin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penicillin

1943 – Modern Drug Development

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streptomycin

1953 – Structure of DNA – Watson & Crick

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_molecular_biology

1956 – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemotherapy

1959 – Horizontal Gene Transfer described as complement to evolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer

1959 – Modern Synthesis of Evolution and Genetics – Mayr

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_synthesis_(20th_century)

1960 – Oral Contraceptive Pill

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_contraceptive_pill

1961 – Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria – public health concern

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methicillin-resistant_Staphylococcus_aureus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimicrobial_resistance

1963 – Mood Altering Drugs (legal)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diazepam

1965 – Medicare Program

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_(United_States)

1965 – US Life Expectancy Reaches 70

https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR02/lr5A3-h.html

1967 – Heart Transplant

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_transplantation

1970 – Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scanner

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging

1973 – Biotechnology / Recombinant DNA

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombinant_DNA

1978 – IVF conception

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_fertilisation

1980 – Smallpox Eradicated

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox

1981 – HIV/AIDS new disease and treatments

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV/AIDS

1996 – Cloned Mammal

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_(sheep)

1997 – Global Warming

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol

2003 – Human Genome Project

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Genome_Project

2010 – Affordable Care Act

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordable_Care_Act

2012 – Designer Genes Possible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRISPR_gene_editing

2019 – Covid Pandemic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic

Summary

Microbiology, DNA, biochemistry. Miracles.

Modern History: Communications and Computers

1455 – Printing Press

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printing_press

1826 – Camera and Photography

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_camera

1844 – Telegraph and Morse Code

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegraphy

1876 – Telephone

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_telephone

1886 – Radio Waves

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_wave

1896 – Motion Pictures

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_film

1920 – Commercial Radio Broadcasting

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_broadcasting

1936 – Universal Computing Machine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine

1939 – Commercial Television Broadcasting

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_television

1945 – Programmable Computer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENIAC

1947 – Transistor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor

1948 – Communications Theory – Shannon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication_theory

1951 – Commercial Computer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIVAC

1954 – Personal Entertainment Device

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_radio

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walkman

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handheld_game_console

1959 – Integrated Circuit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit

1962 – Communications Satellite

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telstar

1965 – Computer Hardware Costs Decline

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law

1970 – Email

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email

1971 – Microprocessor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microprocessor

1973 – Cellular Phone

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone

1974 – Internet

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet

1974 – Personal Computer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_computer

1977 – PC User Interface

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_II

1979 – Spreadsheet Killer App VisiCalc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spreadsheet

1981 – MS DOS operating system for IBM compatible microcomputers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-DOS

1981 – Microsoft Windows

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows

1990 – Web Browser

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_browser

1998 – Search Engine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Search

2004 – Social Media

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media

2007 – Smart Phone

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone

2022 – Artificial Intelligence

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChatGPT

Summary

Electronic, semiconductors and digital. Networked. Integrated. Powerful. Personal.

Modern History: Technology

1760 – Industrial Revolution – Power Loom

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_loom

1765 – Watt’s Steam Engine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_engine

1800 – Second Agricultural Revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Agricultural_Revolution

1802 – Steam-powered Locomotive

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_locomotive

1821 – Electromagnetic induction – Electric Motor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor

1859 – Pennsylvania Oil Rush

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_oil_rush

1869 – Transcontinental Railroad

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_transcontinental_railroad

1869 – Suez Canal

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Canal

1879 – Edison’s Practical Electric Light Bulb

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_light

1882 – Commercial Electricity Generation and Distribution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_generation

1886 – Alternating Current Distribution and Motors

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternating_current

1886 – Internal Combustion Engine – Benz

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_combustion_engine

1902 – Air Conditioning – Carrier

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_conditioning

1903 – Wright Brothers’ Airplane

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_brothers

1905 – Electric Home Appliances

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_appliance

1907 – Synthetic Plastics / Bakelite

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic

1914 – Panama Canal

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Canal

1915 – Home Refrigerators

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refrigerator

1927 – Nonstop Transatlantic Flight

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_flight

1935 – Commercial Air Travel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_DC-3

1956 – Interstate Highway System

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System

1958 – Commercial Nuclear Power

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_States

1960 – Laser

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser

1960 – Third Agricultural Revolution (Green)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution

1961 – Manned Space Flight

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Gagarin

1968 – Boeing 747

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747

1969 – Moon Landing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_11

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Race

2012 – Wind Energy – largest US new power source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power

2020 – Solar Energy – cheapest power source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy

Summary

Energy, transportation and manufacturing continue to advance. See separate posts for communication, computers and biology.

Modern History: Society and Religion

1492 – Columbus reaches the new world. The Columbian exchange begins. The old world has much to reconsider.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbian_exchange

1517 – Martin Luther starts the Protestant Reformation. The Church’s authority is challenged.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther

1545 – The Catholic Reformation addresses challenges to the Church.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-Reformation

1738 – Methodism offers a new relationship to God.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodism

1807 – Britain ends its slave trade after 3 centuries. The abolitionist movements create new views of societal change.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade

1821 – Liberal Christianity adapts to the Enlightenment, the Scientific Revolution, Critical Analysis and Darwin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Christianity

1865 – The American Civil War. Federalism, abolitionists, slavery, Lincoln, warfare, transport, industrialization, government growth, reconstruction, economic recovery, “Lost Cause”, Jim Crow. “A nation divided cannot stand”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War

1880 – Community organizations of many kinds are created to manage immigrants, urbanization, industrialization, growth, mobility, diversity, poverty and public health.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_organization

1880 – Peak level migration from Europe to the United States begins.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_immigration_to_the_Americas

1886 – Post-impressionism leads to modern art, distanced from the public.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-Impressionism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_art

1893 – The American Frontier era closes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontier_Thesis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_frontier

1899 – American Popular Music emerges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_popular_music

1910 – The “Great Migration” from the South to the North.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Migration_(African_American)

1910 – Christian fundamentalism is defined as a real alternative to “liberal Christianity”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_fundamentalism

1920 – A majority of Americans live in urban areas. 76% in Northeast, 28% in the South.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_in_the_United_States

1922 – Protestant neo-orthodox theology is defined.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Barth

1922 – Personal psychology, “stream of consciousness” writing joins modern art to insert psychology and philosophy into popular arts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_(novel)

1936 – Self-help books, seminars, programs and counseling blossom, providing an individual, transactional, psychological, positive alternative to religion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-help

1940 – US high school attendance reaches 80%, up from 40% in the 1920’s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_school_movement

1944 – American soldiers enroll in higher education at record rates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.I._Bill

1946 – Returning soldiers also make up for lost time in forming families and having children.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-20th_century_baby_boom

1946 – New families needed new housing, leading to suburban real estate development.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suburbanization

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levittown

1949 – Dystopian fiction packs a much greater punch in the post-war era.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopian_and_dystopian_fiction#Dystopian_fiction

1965 – The Roman Catholic Church addresses modernity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Vatican_Council

1965 – Urban riots erupt in major US cities for several summers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watts_riots

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_riot

1965 – University students rebel against the expected cultural conformity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterculture_of_the_1960s

1965 – Legal and illegal immigration to the United States grows.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_immigration_to_the_United_States

1969 – Divorce started to become a more personal, transactional event rather than a social or religious one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-fault_divorce

1969 – LGBTQ groups and supporters advocated for legal and social rights.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBTQ_history_in_the_United_States

1970 – English becomes the global language for trade, diplomacy and science.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_as_a_lingua_franca

1976 – The US birth rate drops by half. World rate is cut in half by 2014.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_rate

Summary

The movement from one Church to many Christian denominations to “A Secular Age” is the largest change. The growth of the US from a small colony to a world power and then to an economic, military and cultural superpower is of equal magnitude. Migration westward, northward, inward and to the cities has reshaped American culture. Individualism has grown to become the dominant cultural perspective. The role of laws and social norms in shaping personal behavior has dropped.

Americans have been extraordinarily mobile, joiners, religious, productive, creative, patriotic, pragmatic, skeptical and independent. The country has succeeded as a multi-cultural nation and been a successful exporter of its culture around the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_power