Utopia

In the last chapter of my book, 2012: Extinction or Utopia, I make the case that instead of the world hurtling towards destruction, we actually have reason to be optimistic. In fact, I suggest that we actually could be heading into a golden age of mankind—not in some New Age spiritual enlightenment sort of way, but in a political, economic and social way. This has naturally led some people to ask me if I believe that a utopian world is really possible, and whether I'm not just living in some sort of delusional pie-in-the-sky world of sunshine and lollipops.

It's not an unreasonable question, especially considering all the problems on our planet. After all, we do have quite a few things to concern us, with terrorism, nuclear proliferation, climate change (colder or hotter? I forget which...) and the many real and imagined dangers that lurk around every corner. So how can I be an optimist?

The answer is simple: history. When we look at the whole range of human history—and especially the last century—I believe there is hope for optimism. How can I say that? Let's take a look at a few statistics (taken from my book):

Poverty and Literacy: That there are still multitudes who live out their lives in grinding poverty cannot be denied. Much of the world survives on a few dollars a day, and in some countries a few hundred dollars a year. It seems that the twin spectres of poverty and illiteracy have been a part of the human condition since homo sapiens first emerged from the forest and remains with us like an ache that refuses to go away no matter how badly we wish it would go away.

However, once we accept the fact that poverty, deprivation, and want has always been a part of the human equation, the next question we need to ask is not whether there is still hunger and poverty, but whether the percentage of people who live in these conditions is the same, greater, or less than it was a century ago. Or two centuries ago. Or a thousand years ago. In other words, to make the case for a declining humanity, we should see poverty not only keeping pace with population growth, but even increasing as a percentage of the world's population.

Fortunately, when we take the time to more carefully examine the statistics, we find some reason for optimism. According to figures taken from the March 22, 2006 edition of The International Economy magazine, poverty rates declined approximately 4 percent every twenty years between 1820 (when economic statistics first began being kept) to 1950. Between 1950 and 1980, that decline increased to a rate of 14 percent each twenty years, and even more impressive, since 1990 worldwide poverty rates have decreased an astonishing 20 percent. One example: in 1980, the poverty head count ratio in India and China was 50 and 60 percent, respectively. By 2000, the poverty ratios in both economies were in the range 10 to 25 percent, meaning that the number of human beings that moved out of poverty in these two countries alone was around a billion-a historical upliftment of 20 percent of the developing world's population! Clearly, the percentage of human beings living in poverty is going down (both proportionally and in actual numbers) while the world is seeing the birth of a small but growing middle class emerging in even the traditionally poorest countries. This is a fairly recent innovation in the human condition and, I think, a positive one.

Further, according to UN studies, world literacy rates stand at nearly 82%, with literacy rates approaching 99% in almost every industrialized country on the planet. Compare that with the worldwide literacy rate at the start of the twentieth century when, even after factoring in the industrialized nations (which were few and far between) literacy hovered at a dismal 5-10%. If such trends continue, it's not unreasonable to imagine a worldwide literacy rate of 100% by the end of the twenty-first century. As such, today humanity is the most literate it has ever been at any point in its history.

Consider this: in 1900 only about 10% of Americans had high school diplomas. Today, only 10% don't have them! Plus, there are twice as many institutions of higher education in the world today than there were a mere 50 years ago. In fact, in almost every area of human endeavor—infant mortality, life expectancy, annual income, access to medical attention, sanitation—the world has improved dramatically in the last one hundred years. Of course, that's not to say that there aren't areas of the world still mired in abject poverty, or that AIDS and other diseases aren't cutting swaths through some populations, but compared to the quality of life experienced just a century ago by most human beings on the planet, ours is an infinitely better world today.
Human Rights and Civil Liberties: Have human and civil rights kept pace with this upliftment in terms of poverty, litracy, and health? Absolutely! For example, consider that just a couple of centuries ago slavery was considered an acceptable practice around the world (and, in fact, played a major role in the development of civilization over the last seven thousand years), while today it is nowhere legal on the planet. Additionally, for the most part people cannot be worked to death, imprisoned in a debtor's prison, or summarily executed for crimes as petty as stealing a loaf of bread or making off with another man's horse. Further, today people cannot be hanged for practicing witchcraft or burned at the stake for heresy, nor can a mob lynch a man because of the color of his skin and expect the judicial system to turn a blind eye as was sometimes the case a mere century ago. The rights of woman, children, and minorities has also improved substantially—especially when contrasted to the conditions even 75 years ago—until today truly repressive societies, while still in existence, are growing less common and sustainable. Of course, there are exceptions: child labor laws are sometimes lax in third-world countries and exploitation by the wealthy is still common (and, in places, prevalent) but the point is that such behavior, when exposed, is routinely prosecuted, whereas a century ago such behavior was common, tolerated, and even expected. While still far from realizing a utopian world, it would be difficult to maintain that humanity is not collectively becoming increasingly aware of the rights of all human beings and so less willing to exploit the weak for the benefit of the wealthy as it once was.

Even our government institutions have demonstrated tremendous and usually positive changes in just the last sixty years. Immediately prior to the Second World War, there were just over two dozen functioning democracies on the planet; today nearly two thirds of the world's people live under some form of democracy or benign, constitutional monarchy which guarantees basic civil liberties and human rights. Truly nihilistic, totalitarian governments can be counted on the fingers of one hand, while repressive societies—defined as those under the control of authoritarian leaders or those with dismal human rights records—number only in the dozens (out of a total of nearly 200 sovereign nations on the planet). Of course, there is always the danger of a major democracy failing and being replaced with an authoritative regime (as happened in Germany in 1933) but in a world in which each nation's economy is becoming increasingly integrated with those of their neighbors to form a genuine world economy, such a descent into darkness would be more difficult to sustain.
Wars and Nuclear Weapons: Further, and largely as a result of this democratization process, war as an almost natural and expected instrument of foreign policy is growing increasingly unpopular and uncommon. Though small-scale conflicts still rage in some isolated spots around the world (and are usually confined to non-democratic nations), really big wars—that is, armed conflict between two or more sovereign nations—are growing increasingly rare, demonstrating that today nations are far less willing to resort to violence to resolve their disputes than they were in the past. Of course, the threat of terrorism or of a rogue nation developing and then actually using nuclear weapons remains a real threat, but these are mere flea bites when compared to the twin threats the world faced from Nazism and Communism throughout much of the twentieth century.

Consider also that while the threat of nuclear war remains a potent one, that the proliferation of such weapons has dramatically decreased over the last two decades. In 1987, there were over 70,000 warheads of all types in the nuclear arsenals of the world's six nuclear powers. Today, thanks in a large part to various treaties negotiated in the 1980's and 90's and the collapse of the old Soviet Empire (who held the lion's share of such warheads) the number is closer to 20,000, with further cuts anticipated in the coming years. While 20,000 warheads (about half of which are considered fully operational) is still a massive number, it's a far cry from the height of the Cold War, when the prospect of destroying all life on the planet ten times over remained a very real one. Certainly, the fact that we are cutting our nuclear arsenals rather than increasing them has to be considered a positive sign for the future-at least in the long term.

But what of the two great wars that ravaged the twentieth century, the horror of the Holocaust, Stalin's brutal gulag, and the more immediate concerns about rising crime rates, terrorism, and international drug trafficking? Couldn't it be said that modern history argues far more persuasively for a humanity in moral decline rather than for a world on the verge of a golden age of enlightenment?

The atrocities committed in this century seem so much worse than those in the past for two reasons. First, most people aren't aware of the many atrocities that took place in the past when pogroms and the extermination of entire populations because of their religious or political views were common, thereby making it appear that genocide is a modern aberration. Second, thanks to the media and the internet, we are now more aware of the scope and horror of genocides when they are committed, whereas a century ago such news seldom found its way into the popular consciousness. Additionally, when such atrocities are brought to light, they are much more likely to incite international outcry and response, making it far more econimically and politically difficult for a brutal regime to get away with their crimes than they were only a few decades ago.

In the end, it's not whether there are more evil deeds and criminal acts being committed today than in the past, but whether there are proportionately more. No doubt more people die at the hands of their fellow citizens today than they did in the past, but that's because there are more people than in the past. Naturally, when the population increases, the numbers of crimes are going to go up. That, however, is not necessarily indicative of an increase in frequency. For example, if a population were to double at the same time its crime rate fell by 40%, there would be still be a net increase in the total number of crimes committed, thereby giving the appearance that things were getting worse when statistically they are actually significantly improving. It's often just a numbers game.
Environmental Threats: But certainly the destruction of our environment argues strongly for a planet in peril, does it not? With a world population approaching seven billion, the threat posed to our weather, oceans, and ecosystems by global warming, the tragic consequences of deforestation, the reality of rapidly dwindling energy supplies and reduced sources of new energy to feed an ever more ravenous and growing world economy, how can anyone even begin entertaining the possibility that things are improving in any way?

No one said there are not challenges, but consider that the first step in overcoming adversity is becoming aware that a threat exists in the first place. For decades the world went about its business creating an industrial revolution the likes of which the planet had never experienced before, spewing clouds of noxious gas into the environment, clear cutting entire forests, and filling our lakes and rivers with all kinds of toxic pollutants without a second thought. Now, however, we are taking steps to change all that. Emissions standards for both factories and automobiles—once never imagined to be necessary—are now strictly enforced, logging is heavily regulated, species once on the verge of extinction have been brought back to viability, recycling is one of the fastest growing industries on the planet, and the push towards clean, renewable energy is well underway. Obviously, we have a long way to go and unrestricted growth among rapidly industrializing countries like China and India remains a concern, but for the most part there is an effort underway to rein in the worst of the abuses. Just the mere fact that we are aware of the magnitude of the problem and are willing to pursue solutions can't be seen as anything but positive. Undoubtedly the world has a number of challenges ahead and many political, economic, and technological hurdles to overcome (along with a few unforeseen catastrophes yet to endure) before we straighten things out, but a very good case can be made that we are on the right track.

Those who hold to the disintegrating society theory are unlikely to be impressed with these examples, but I submit their gloomy outlook can only be sustained by determinedly ignoring the judgment of history. While in many ways we are still a very brutal people but one mindless act away from exterminating ourselves, we are at the same time far less tolerant of those who diminish the value of human life, rape the environment, or practice injustice. It's not a perfect world that we seek, nor do I believe that human beings are perfectable. There will probably always be selfishness and cruelty and all the other unfortunate hallmarks of what it is to be human, but I do believe it is possible to create a world in which humanity respects itself and its environment, where it solves its problems through dialogue and hard work, and where each day brings it closer to realizing the potential that resides within it.

What would such a society look like? Imagine a world in which every nation was a representative democracy, where every constitution guaranteed basic human rights and civil liberties such as freedom of speech and religion. Where—as Dr. Martin Luther King once said—people will be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. Imagine a world where warfare was a historical anomaly taught in class but not a practical reality any longer. And picture a planet in which everyone had the same access to public education, healthcare, and opportunities for advancement. That's the sort of "utopia" I imagine and believe is possible.

Would there be no crime, no rape, no murder, no abuse in my little world? Probably not. Would there be no greed, materialism, selfishness, or cruelty on such a planet? Unlikely. People would still have to find their own way through life and struggle through the challenges fate and their own decisions places before them, for such is the stuff that makes us grow intellectually and spiritually. Some may fail in business or in their chosen professions because life does not come with guarantees (nor should it). Some may have less than others because they refuse to work for more, but that is their own decision. In these senses, then, mine may not be a utopia in the classical sense, but it would be enough to lay the foundation for an exciting future among the stars that is, in my opinion, not only our destiny, but our birthright. It may not happen in my lifetime, or within the lifetime of those reading these words, but it is a near certainty we will one day obtain, no matter how long it takes. We are the authors of our destiny; not fate, not the stars, and not even the gods. I believe we are just beginning to understand that, and once we fully appreciate it, we will find the strength within ourselves to create the sort of world we can be proud of. As such, I don't believe for a moment that the future is nearly as bleak and hopeless as many assume, nor do I consider hope and faith to be foolish ideals. I believe in tomorrow—however niave that may sound—and hold out hope that in some small way, I can help others find the confidence and assurance that humanity, for all its many flaws, is not on the verge of its own destruction but may, in fact, be standing at the threshold of a bright and remarkable future. Pie-in-the-sky? Maybe, but what sort of world do you want to live in? One of despair and fear or one of hope and faith in the future? It's all up to you.