Are we living in a bloodier world than our ancestors were?

[blazeofglory]

This is really an irksome question in point of fact. We know little about history; for what we call history is not a true account of what really happened in times gone by in point of fact. History has more often than not been colored, adapted, tailored to suit the interests of dynasts. Historians were subjected to mold, twirl events and what we are left to us are not without lies, if not all lies in essence.

I oftentimes think that there were worse times, more violent than what we are in today. There were ruthless potentates who barbarically and brutally massacred countless innocents. Kublai khan, one of the great rulers waged so many wars, and people were cold-bloodedly and heartlessly forced to fight and die for a cause in which people had no interests at all. There were more moments of violence, carnage, bloodbath in the ancient times than now we do have.

Of course we hear and read more and more of casualties now than ever before. But it does not mean there were less amounts of violence in the past. The fact we must know is that today we are more armed with means of information and we hear and read incidents of casualties today more than ever before in the past in point of fact.

I do not think this epoch we live in are horrific and bloodthirsty. I do not know what will happen afterwards but I claim this era we live in is less fierce in essence.

[LMK]

No, I don't think we are living in a bloodier or more dangerous society.

First, there are more people on the planet and more diversity and expected acceptance of diversity world wide.

Second, we have instant information so we hear more of what is going on all the time.

Third, there is very little actual news any more, those who are on the major "news" stations create and sensationalize they do not report the news. So, its difficult to really understand what is what sometimes.