Steven Pinker has an interesting essay in the Wall Street Journal arguing that violence has declined precipitously in the human race in recent decades and centuries. He recognizes that there is still far too much violence in the world and also that his claim will be greeted with skepticism, but he presents compelling arguments for why violence in modern nation-states is much lower than in earlier epochs:
Believe it or not, the world of the past was much worse. Violence has been in decline for thousands of years, and today we may be living in the most peaceable era in the existence of our species.
The decline, to be sure, has not been smooth. It has not brought violence down to zero, and it is not guaranteed to continue. But it is a persistent historical development, visible on scales from millennia to years, from the waging of wars to the spanking of children.
he pinpoints six major transitions and transformations that helped achieve this decline in violence. I’m not going to rehash all of his arguments for this. In fact, I’m going to grant them as accurate and move on to his explanation:
Why has violence declined so dramatically for so long? Is it because violence has literally been bred out of us, leaving us more peaceful by nature?
This seems unlikely. Evolution has a speed limit measured in generations, and many of these declines have unfolded over decades or even years. Toddlers continue to kick, bite and hit; little boys continue to play-fight; people of all ages continue to snipe and bicker, and most of them continue to harbor violent fantasies and to enjoy violent entertainment.
It’s more likely that human nature has always comprised inclinations toward violence and inclinations that counteract them—such as self-control, empathy, fairness and reason—what Abraham Lincoln called “the better angels of our nature.” Violence has declined because historical circumstances have increasingly favored our better angels.
The most obvious of these pacifying forces has been the state, with its monopoly on the legitimate use of force. A disinterested judiciary and police can defuse the temptation of exploitative attack, inhibit the impulse for revenge and circumvent the self-serving biases that make all parties to a dispute believe that they are on the side of the angels.
We see evidence of the pacifying effects of government in the way that rates of killing declined following the expansion and consolidation of states in tribal societies and in medieval Europe. And we can watch the movie in reverse when violence erupts in zones of anarchy, such as the Wild West, failed states and neighborhoods controlled by mafias and street gangs, who can’t call 911 or file a lawsuit to resolve their disputes but have to administer their own rough justice.
Another pacifying force has been commerce, a game in which everybody can win. As technological progress allows the exchange of goods and ideas over longer distances and among larger groups of trading partners, other people become more valuable alive than dead. They switch from being targets of demonization and dehumanization to potential partners in reciprocal altruism.
For example, though the relationship today between America and China is far from warm, we are unlikely to declare war on them or vice versa. Morality aside, they make too much of our stuff, and we owe them too much money.
A third peacemaker has been cosmopolitanism—the expansion of people’s parochial little worlds through literacy, mobility, education, science, history, journalism and mass media. These forms of virtual reality can prompt people to take the perspective of people unlike themselves and to expand their circle of sympathy to embrace them.
These technologies have also powered an expansion of rationality and objectivity in human affairs. People are now less likely to privilege their own interests over those of others. They reflect more on the way they live and consider how they could be better off. Violence is often reframed as a problem to be solved rather than as a contest to be won. We devote ever more of our brainpower to guiding our better angels. It is probably no coincidence that the Humanitarian Revolution came on the heels of the Age of Reason and the Enlightenment, that the Long Peace and rights revolutions coincided with the electronic global village.
I agree with pretty much all of that. In short, we are progressing morally as a species. There is still far too much tribalism and violence in the world, of course, but the Enlightenment really did have a huge impact. And as bad as things are today, they were far worse in the past. Only 200 years ago it was almost universally accepted that slavery was not only okay, it was normal and natural and God-endorsed; today almost no one believes that.
Within the lifetimes of many of my readers, the majority of Americans saw nothing at all wrong with whites-only lunch counters and outright discrimination against entire races of people. The natural inferiority of women was assumed for centuries. And though we are still in the trenches fighting for equal rights for gay people all over the world, there is no question that enormous progress has been made.
That doesn’t mean we should stop fighting for the continued progression and broader application of those ideals. And it doesn’t mean we should be any less outraged when we do see bigotry and violence. What it does mean is that we should recognize the astonishing power of the ideals of freedom and equality and wield them as weapons in those battles. And we should have confidence that the inexorable pattern of history is on our side. In the end, human beings really do improve as a group, we really do overcome our worst natures, one step at a time, and make the world a better place.