# Is the decline of violence beginning to wane? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 23, 2015, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765 "2015-03-23T06:58:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![PlaceboTarget](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/placebotarget/32/1073_2.png) [@PlaceboTarget](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PlaceboTarget)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/1 "2015-03-23T06:58:55Z")
[Steven Pinker’s “The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Better_Angels_of_Our_Nature) puts forward the idea that the world’s violence has been dwindling for some time. The author does not claim this trend will last indefinitely. One cannot fail to notice the increasing number of armed conflicts breaking out all over the planet lately. The world no longer looks like a place where violence is decreasing and [this article](http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/03/20/breaking-a-decades-long-trend-the-world-gets-more-violent/) points out just that. Not only are the numbers of international armed aggressions higher in number, but they also show a trend that confirms an escalation of violence. Thus, the trend that Steven Pinker has identified may be a mere period of lull in the long history of human aggression. I think the current situation will deteriorate and it is going to be worse before it gets better. Peace and violence succeed each other cyclically and there is no real improvement in the human nature, in my opinion. Do you also believe we should get ready for more violence and international belligerence? ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 7:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/2 "2015-03-23T07:05:32Z")
My only counterpoint to your opinion is that in recent decades a lot of “small” wars never made it on TV. So how can you really compare??? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 7:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/3 "2015-03-23T07:41:19Z")
I think the long term trend is down, but the emergence of a multi-polar world combined with the decline of the US(relatively) will create incentives for adventurism. Especially since some of these powers are kinda new to the world stage and often neighbor other rising powers that they don’t like all that much. If you’re under 50, I’d expect a major war in your lifetime. Not between the US and a major power(at least not at first), but between two major powers with us trying in vain to not get drawn in. Henry Kissinger wrote not too long ago that Asia in the 21st century looks a lot like Europe in the 19th in terms of rising, competing powers. All we’re waiting for is for them to form alliances against each other. But once that’s all sorted out, I think we’ll see the continuance of the trend towards less violence. ---
**Author:** ![PlaceboTarget](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/placebotarget/32/1073_2.png) [@PlaceboTarget](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PlaceboTarget)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/4 "2015-03-23T08:41:58Z")
> [@Robert163](#): > > My only counterpoint to your opinion is that in recent decades a lot of “small” wars never made it on TV. So how can you really compare??? [Here’s](http://newint.org/features/2012/09/01/media-war-coverage/) a explanatory article. TV media coverage is not a good criterion. One should diversify one’s sources of information I think. ---
**Author:** ![PlaceboTarget](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/placebotarget/32/1073_2.png) [@PlaceboTarget](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PlaceboTarget)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/5 "2015-03-23T08:54:00Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > But once that’s all sorted out, I think we’ll see the continuance of the trend towards less violence. I doubt it that there has ever been such trend. There has been a lot of intra- and inter- national violence in the years regarded as a period of lull. The fact that killings seem to have remained at a low level in comparison with the total population is a misleading criterion. For instance, those who support Putin’s autocratic regime do not have to murder the entire political opposition in order to intimidate dissidents. One man’s death may equally deter a thousand or ten thousand rebels. Plus, with today’s rapidly growing population, violence is equally effective when millions of people are rendered/kept poor, illiterate, ill, or homeless (and no less violent - sic!). ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 10:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/6 "2015-03-23T10:23:52Z")
A one-year spike in violence (and violence measured just one specific way, namely, the lethality of the 20 most violent conflicts in the world) is irrelevant to Pinker’s thesis. His book demonstrates a centuries-long trend of declining violence of almost all kinds imaginable. Violence is an inherently volatile phenomenon subject to wild spikes and dips, so you have to look at long-term trends. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/7 "2015-03-23T12:02:23Z")
He’s not wrong. His thesis isn’t “there was WWII and then war stopped.” It’s a much longer analysis and looks at things like duals, blood feuds and executions as well as war. For much of history violence has been a chronic condition for basically everyone. To have large numbers of people living in peace is unique. I was surprised that the deadliest war since WWII, the Second Congo War, was glossed over despite something like 3-5 million deaths and involving 9 countries. I think he discounts the role of famine and displacement as a tool of war. But what we are seeing today is ordinary churn that has been with us for decades. It’s just that the areas that happen to be violent right now are ones we happen to care about. ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/8 "2015-03-23T12:08:26Z")
But Pinker’s thesis has been challenged: [http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/mar/13/john-gray-steven-pinker-wrong-violence-war-declining](http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/mar/13/john-gray-steven-pinker-wrong-violence-war-declining) ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/9 "2015-03-23T12:44:23Z")
> [@PatrickLondon](#): > > But Pinker’s thesis has been challenged: > > [http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/mar/13/john-gray-steven-pinker-wrong-violence-war-declining](http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/mar/13/john-gray-steven-pinker-wrong-violence-war-declining) Pinker’s [reply](http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/20/wars-john-gray-conflict-peace) to the linked article. ---
**Author:** ![Robert163](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/4af34b/32.png) [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/10 "2015-03-23T12:47:24Z")
> [@PlaceboTarget](#): > > [Here’s](http://newint.org/features/2012/09/01/media-war-coverage/) a explanatory article. TV media coverage is not a good criterion. One should diversify one’s sources of information I think. it’s a good article, thank you ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/11 "2015-03-23T12:48:04Z")
> [@PlaceboTarget](#): > > [Steven Pinker’s “The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Better_Angels_of_Our_Nature) puts forward the idea that the world’s violence has been dwindling for some time. Did Pinker ignore absolute numbers and focus on percent of the population killed? So if two tribes numbering only a couple hundred individuals fight and kill half of each it’s worse than Vietnam? Because that would be…unconvincing. Another problem with the idea is that for the latter half of the 20th century hundreds of millions of people could have died at the drop of a hat. One thing I might agree with is individual violence. Even 50-60 years ago it seemed like it was much more common for people to get plastered and slug it out. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2015, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/12 "2015-03-23T23:43:32Z")
> [@PlaceboTarget](#): > > I doubt it that there has ever been such trend. There has been a lot of intra- and inter- national violence in the years regarded as a period of lull. The fact that killings seem to have remained at a low level in comparison with the total population is a misleading criterion. For instance, those who support Putin’s autocratic regime do not have to murder the entire political opposition in order to intimidate dissidents. One man’s death may equally deter a thousand or ten thousand rebels. Plus, with today’s rapidly growing population, violence is equally effective when millions of people are rendered/kept poor, illiterate, ill, or homeless (and no less violent - sic!). And that has been the case for the overwhelming majority of human being throughout history. The unique thing about the last few decades is that it is no longer the default that a human being is illiterate peasant barely eking our survival. > [@marshmallow](#): > > Did Pinker ignore absolute numbers and focus on percent of the population killed? So if two tribes numbering only a couple hundred individuals fight and kill half of each it’s worse than Vietnam? Because that would be…unconvincing. > > Another problem with the idea is that for the latter half of the 20th century hundreds of millions of people could have died at the drop of a hat. > > One thing I might agree with is individual violence. Even 50-60 years ago it seemed like it was much more common for people to get plastered and slug it out. Well yes otherwise you unfairly weight violence in favour of advanced societies who can support larger populations and field larger armies. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_the\_Immortal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6de8d8/32.png) [@Max\_the\_Immortal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_the_Immortal)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2015, 8:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-decline-of-violence-beginning-to-wane/715765/13 "2015-03-25T08:35:52Z")
> [@marshmallow](#): > > Did Pinker ignore absolute numbers and focus on percent of the population killed? So if two tribes numbering only a couple hundred individuals fight and kill half of each it’s worse than Vietnam? Because that would be…unconvincing. He focuses on a given person’s likelihood of being killed by war (or other forms of violence). From a quality of life perspective, you _should_ find that convincing. Incidentally, he also challenges conventional thinking about nuclear weapons.