Dear ybgirp,

I'm a glass half full kinda guy and Hans Rosling shines a light on a future that is a touch less glum than many of our less optimistic would have us believe, although I accept their take may have some validity.

I know it is a race between reaching a peak world population before we do wholesale, irreversible damage to the environment's ability to sustain us as a species, or see us erupt into wholesale slaughter of each other for scarce resources. Han's figures showing such a dramatic drop, in such a short time, in birth rates across the world gives me hope. We are taming the drive for procreation without snuffing out its pleasures. Could we be doing that better? Of course, but it is simply awe inspiring to me what has been achieved.

After that peak is reached, if of course we reach it in one piece, then a whole new set of challenges will arise like how to keep an economy going with decreasing numbers of people and caring for a burgeoning geriatric population.

As to idyllic notions of pre-civilized tribal communities I think any fair assessment, even of our own indigenous folk, or our northern neighbours the Papuans whose whole culture in many cases was based around tribal warfare, might force a reality check. Tahiti did sound like paradise however.

Considering the idealism of our childhoods I'm old enough to know they were also about policemen doing their rounds but ignoring the sounds of husbands beating wives, of clergy molesting our friends without being challenged, of sadistic teachers, of alcohol driven carnage on our roads and of deep corruption and brutality within our police forces.

Dear Poirot,

Your last few post have raised a number of issues and you will have to forgive me for focussing on just one, but I feel teasing it out might help address some of the others.

I am of the mind that in many ways Facebook and other social media being adopted by our youth is a return to the 'village'. Anyone who has lived in a small town knows that privacy is often in scant supply. That past deeds were always remembered and never expunged from the community memory. Gossip, while often malicious, also served to ensure shady traders or cheating husbands or wives were outed. A more positive aspect was people seeing each other growing, sharing their ups and down, celebrating births and commiserated loss.

But our generation got anal about privacy. Was it the Cold War or itinerant populations or something else I don't know but we are an aberration.

The lack of respect shown by this new generation for their own and others privacy horrifies us, but it directly echoes the village scene we lament has gone forever.

I do not have a personal Facebook page. Both my children do with literally hundreds of friends on them. Is it a bad thing?

My cousin and I would normally catch up at best a dozen times a year. His child and my two stay in touch on almost a daily basis. That closeness is afforded purely by the technology. They know the important and not so important goings on in each others lives and there is no doubt it enhances empathy.

It is easy for our generation to scoff at these 'cyber' relationships but it is our 'programming' that keeps us from recognizing that this new paradigm may be fulfilling or extending the capacity for relationships of our race, and in some ways reflecting the village life of old.

Perhaps they are on their way to beating the curse of itinerancy that our modern economies have forced upon our populations.

It is too early to judge one way or the other.

csteele,

Very good point!

Yes, I did seem dismissive, but you're right that Facebook provides a venue to talk about any old thing - and in that respect it's hanging washing on the line for all (your "friends") to see. So I think you're analogy and comparison to a village is apt to some extent.

This is so embarrassing. I've been cursed with the ability to see at least three sides of every argument, thus I agree with everything you both write with such clarity and thought, while hanging on to my own opinions. I accept that no human society can ever be perfect, for obvious reasons, and that every positive is balanced by a negative. I'd hate to go back to the fifties, but it does seem a shame we didn't keep the good bits while chucking out the bad.
Such an interesting observation, csteele, about the desire for privacy. I could never share myself on a social network site. Apart from the privacy issue, most of what's written seems somewhat banal.
And yes, the rate of population increase is declining, but the rate of growth remains alarming.
Fortunately for my peace of mind, I accept there's nothing I can do about the way human civilization develops.

Dear Poirot and ybgirp,

Forgive me for continuing to prattle just on closing time and off topic, I just felt my argument needed a little more fleshing out before finishing so here are a couple of observations on the fly.

I agree with ybgirp and am not sure Illich's concentric circles every really existed in the manner portrayed. 

Facebook can be represented as intersecting circles where work, school, family, friends, fellow hobbyists, sporting mates all overlap to some extent and their reach is obviously greater, but so are the intersecting areas.

I am interested in how much these structures, represented by each ring, will be preserved over time. For instance will ones high school friendships suffer the same attrition that they once did when one heads off to university and new relationships? There was certainly a retained interest in the past as evidenced by the typical turnout at school reunions. However I think the medium will help maintain and even strengthen circles in the future.

Poirot said;

 "There was a time where reliance on one's intimate community was part and parcel of social interaction, where the people you worked with were part of your social universe, where, as Illich points out, most education was "complex, lifelong and unplanned."

Could well be talking about Facebook.

There has been a degree of concern about prospective employers accessing Facebook pages to ascertain if one is suitable for employment within their firms. But the younger generation are far more accepting of that possibility. When we think what would have happened in the village scenario it isn't that much different.

"I'm thinking of giving Jim's boy a job at my mill, you know he and his father well enough, what do you think? I mean I know he was one of the lads who burnt down the ferriers hay shed a few years ago, am I doing the right thing?"

"He is alright, not as bright as some and easily led, but has a strong back and is a great worker, keep him away from Simon's lad and you will have no trouble."

Cont...

Cont...

I also have a feeling accountability is being strengthened. My two are very aware of the things that might end on Facebook and it definitely impacts their behaviour.

It is a behavioral adjustment I think I am too old to make but they are embracing it.

Having insisted my two go through their friends list with me I know the variety of ages represented. I think the structures based on age Poirot raised earlier are also being eroded by the medium.

I do feel we need to be careful about letting our prejudices get in the way of the world that is being created through the technology by our young. On some very real levels it may well prove superior.

Poirot's point about being divorced from the natural world is valid and harder to address. But even here there are exceptions. I wonder if you know anything about the Geochaching community? While I am a part timer the cousin I spoke of earlier is a huge participant. It involves people placing hidden caches in often very picturesque locations for others to find via GPS and contribute to. Yes there is an iPhone app for it. It is treasure hunting for all ages and continues to grow wildly in popularity.
http://geocaching.com.au/

It is hardly the stuff of growing of foodstuffs with a deep appreciation of the seasons but our new technologies can, without ever replacing, sometimes be facilitators rather than always devaluers in these respects.