Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The country has substantially better social indicators than it did from most of the mid-70's through the early 90's - that's when we hit our peak murder rates, teen pregnancy rates, and other negative social metrics.
So, by that standard, things have actually improved since that point in time.
I disagree with the poster who said that we can only know about the past through second-hand sources. By definition a second hand source is another researcher; primary source materials can include written documents dating from older periods, or can include things like archaeological evidence. We may not "know" things 100%, but we can have a fairly good idea. Overall I think most Americans would be well-served by spending more time studying the past; it helps put modern issues into a bigger context. It makes one realize that any reference to ""traditional" culture or days gone by as being some sort of utopia is a fantasy.
I study quite a lot of history. My point was that what you are seeing when you read history are words in a book. It doesn't matter whether you are reading primary or secondary sources. The narrator is ALWAYS subject to bias. Written work is by definition biased. Even our very medium of communication, our language, is biased. If I wrote a 'history' of the United States over the past ten years, it would be completely different than the history that you would write even though we've both lived through the period. This principle also applies to professional historians of the past and present.
We are all biased creatures. A historian tends to view history in a way that is in harmony with his/her ‘lens.’ Unless you are there, you will not get a 100% accurate account--even then, you are watching it all happen through your own 'lens' (bias). Once the real world is taken into our own conscience, it is archived in a faulty system. And that's just the first layer of bias.
If the United States is so bad than why do we have the largest population of illegal immigrants in the world ? Obviously they think the U.S has more to offer them than their home country. I don't see millions of Americans leaving the U.S every year to start a better life in a different country.
How many Americans do you think would trade the U.S for Iran, North Korea, Somalia, Pakistan, or Cuba for example ?
Do you not see how disingenuous it is to compare America to obviously undeveloped nations? Of course anyone would prefer America over that. Now let's make it a fair comparison. What about Britain, France, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Luxembourg, Denmark, etc.?
Back to the topic, it's always funny to me the way people(typically old people) idealise the past as if it were infinitely more moral in that age. I mean sure, there's the Native Americans, slavery, Jim Crow, grinding poverty, monopolies, lynchings, church bombings, napalm covered villages, et. al. But at least people held the door open for you!
I study quite a lot of history. My point was that what you are seeing when you read history are words in a book. It doesn't matter whether you are reading primary or secondary sources. The narrator is ALWAYS subject to bias. Written work is by definition biased. Even our very medium of communication, our language, is biased. If I wrote a 'history' of the United States over the past ten years, it would be completely different than the history that you would write even though we've both lived through the period. This principle also applies to professional historians of the past and present.
We are all biased creatures. A historian tends to view history in a way that is in harmony with his/her ‘lens.’ Unless you are there, you will not get a 100% accurate account--even then, you are watching it all happen through your own 'lens' (bias). Once the real world is taken into our own conscience, it is archived in a faulty system. And that's just the first layer of bias.
No, of course everything is biased, but reading things for the biases themselves is usually informative. And there are other forms of "history" besides written documents. I agree that we won't know 100% what it was like, but we can get a good snese. And, like you point out, no one person's experience in a given time is ever the same.
I study quite a lot of history. My point was that what you are seeing when you read history are words in a book. It doesn't matter whether you are reading primary or secondary sources. The narrator is ALWAYS subject to bias. Written work is by definition biased. Even our very medium of communication, our language, is biased. If I wrote a 'history' of the United States over the past ten years, it would be completely different than the history that you would write even though we've both lived through the period. This principle also applies to professional historians of the past and present.
We are all biased creatures. A historian tends to view history in a way that is in harmony with his/her ‘lens.’ Unless you are there, you will not get a 100% accurate account--even then, you are watching it all happen through your own 'lens' (bias). Once the real world is taken into our own conscience, it is archived in a faulty system. And that's just the first layer of bias.
Love it and agree 100%
I find that older people I know often complain about how "sick" our society is. But as someone else pointed out, it's mainly because we are more exposed to it and on a wider scale.
No, of course everything is biased, but reading things for the biases themselves is usually informative. And there are other forms of "history" besides written documents. I agree that we won't know 100% what it was like, but we can get a good snese. And, like you point out, no one person's experience in a given time is ever the same.
Absolutely. Reading of history (biased or not) is fascinating--especially given that we (our species) tend to be so cyclical and always want to ‘reinvent the wheel.’ It’s sometimes like looking into a mirror.
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,307 posts, read 38,338,115 times
Reputation: 7180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weekend Traveler
Everyone I talk to complains about the sick American culture. They say America and its society and culture has hit a new low and we are dying as a country. They bring up the crazy things on TV, popular culture, drugs, failing schools, obesity, our failing economy, drug use, violence, children born into one parent households, etc, etc.
Yes, America and its society has serious problems but is our culture and society really that much sicker than any time in our past?
I doubt it, I think it seems that way because politeness and discretion have gone by the wayside (which is a problem in and of itself).
Do you not see how disingenuous it is to compare America to obviously undeveloped nations? Of course anyone would prefer America over that. Now let's make it a fair comparison. What about Britain, France, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Luxembourg, Denmark, etc.?
I found the 70's to be pretty dark and scary. Much more so than today. It's all relative I guess but seriously look at an archive of 70's films and tell me it wasn't brutal dark and scary!
I was a kid in the 80s, a teen in the early-mid 90s. Back then it seemed a decent amount of folks just knew this country was going to hell in a hand basket. Just look at all of us gen-x slackers with our crappy gunge music and attitudes? This county was doomed. You just didn't know anymore "these days."
Funny how everything managed to turn out just fine in the long run. It must have been a miracle, I guess
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
