I think the average person has evolved considerably; however, our governments and institutions have certainly NOT kept up with us. That's how the modern government ends up clashing so often with the modern citizen -- government is about power, period. People are far more complex.
The key difference between the modern world (say, from the French Revolution onward) and what came before is the idea of society -- before this time, the concept of the "rights of man" was mere wishful thinking, because there WERE no rights; everything was determined solely by force -- obey or die.
Very gradually, the idea of human society became clearer, accompanying the influx of people into cities and the capitalist destruction of the old regime. The nationalist movements of 1789 - 1800s were efforts to control this idea of society, by saying that the Nation (state) was the society in question -- you were a German, or a Frenchman, or an American, etc.
However, what we see at the latter part of this period is an extension of the idea of society to humanity at large -- again, building on the "rights of man" -- where people (socialists, anarchists) saw each other across national boundaries, seeing only human beings.
That's why the elite institutions of today have to engage in *covert* action against other countries, or use the media to whip up the ignorant into a frenzy -- in other words, they have to rely on parlor tricks, because to most people, they don't see people in Zaire and Bosnia as inferior beings; they see people.
The government, however, sees "big/powerful country" and "little/weak country" -- with the big country brutalizing and exploiting the weaker country. The people are incidental to the "real" issue, which is, as always, power.
Government, being a product of earlier times, has not kept up with this critical evolution in human beings, which is why covert action and thought control (via the media) are full-blown businesses.
Before, when there was no human society, government was, in fact, necessary -- as protection. However, now that there IS, in fact, a human society, government becomes more and more anachronistic.
If you look at the classic works -- Hobbes, Rousseau, Locke, etc. you find the social myths behind government (the Social Contract, for example) to be almost comically naive, given what we know today.
I am not a beast held in check by the power of the government; I am a rational, reasonable human being. I don't rape and pillage because it doesn't suit me to do that; I am not a "natural born killer." Same with the vast majority of society. When you look at the statistics for crime, you find the vast majority of crimes are PROPERTY related -- theft, robbery, etc. and that rapes and murders are always but a fraction of the overall total. For example, I did a little research here in Chicago and found a 98% property versus 2% personal crime skew -- these numbers (and they are repeated everywhere, in varying levels) call into question the existence of government.
For, if we were all the wild, evil animals we are told we are by the authorities, then why aren't those numbers higher? Moreover, could *any* amount of law enforcement keep 270 million savage, evil fiends at bay, even if it were true?
What you end up with is a paradox -- either we aren't as bad as we are told we are, in which case we don't need government; or we ARE as bad as we are told we are, in which case, we can't trust ANY authority, as it will be made up of wicked human beings just like us!
Both paths point to anarchism!
>technology, we are now MORE barbaric, as technology increases in
>intelligence, deep blue, "smart" bombs have no intelligence but a computer
>that can out stratigise the chess world champion does, we decrease in
>intelligence, lower test scores, less graduates from worse schools...
Actually, IQ levels have increased dramatically since the 1920s, and, as for test scores, who says they have anything to do with intelligence and learning? Perhaps the students simply aren't interested in what's being taught to them -- or, more likely, what they know from their own experience doesn't gel with what they're taught, so they reject it!
Remember that compulsory education is a tool the government uses to control its people -- it is the most insidious form of thought control, as it created educated, indoctrinated, but not necessarily intelligent people! The perception of education as synonymous with intellect is a most dangerous delusion. It has led to the government of experts, of savants -- the "best and brightest" deciding for the rest of us what's good for us!
There is only one thing an education should provide: the ability to think critically, to evaluate and argue ideas -- education should create critical thinkers.
But you don't see that, because it would mean the death of the state. The ability to think, to reason, is discouraged in school, supplanted by teaching conformity and obedience to authority, the only "lessons" the state really wants you to learn.
"Good" becomes obedience to the law, payment of taxes, submission to authority -- which is exactly what created the Nazis. They arose out of law, order, discipline, and obedience to authority, NOT critical thought and reason.
The government, ANY government, wants a trained populace -- able to do their assigned tasks competently; it doesn't want an educated populace -- able to think for themselves; for that would mean an end to government, and all governments wish to survive forever.
>i am not a luddite but i fear the power of technology is growing and sukking the
>minds out of our people... this isn't realy on the subject we had going
>but... i thought it should be said
Technology is a tool, like any other; it can be used and abused. A hammer can be used to build a house; it can also be used to bludgeon someone to death. It all depends on the use.