I have been watching old films and television recently and it struck me how far we have come in terms of our world view. No, I am not talking about the big stuff, all the things about which I usually gripe, such as our worship of change, of novelty and youth, and the dreadful consequences it brings. No, I am thinking of the simple things. Little things that have changed, and, though seemingly unimportant, have made our world a much less comfortable place in which to live.

Let us start with a very simple thing. How we view the police. In the past, and not that distant past, police were generally trusted. I don't mean to sound like a naif or a pollyanna, I know there were problems, there were those who suspected the police of misdeeds, but in general, among the general public, the assumption was the police were generally good guys there to help us*. Today, the presumption seems to be that the police are, by and large, on the edge at best, over the edge at worst. Yes, there are many police boosters, but even they have a quite different perspective on police than existed in the past. They might support the police as a practical matter, but even the police boosters have something of the tainted view so common today.

Then again, that view was just part of the common view in the past that others were generally decent. Again, I am not being unrealistic. I know there were problems, there were groups who did not trust others. I know there was racism, religious bias, ethnic bigotry and the rest in the past. It was far form perfect. But, there was still something good too. And that was the general belief that other people were generally decent, that others could be trusted until they proved otherwise**.

And there was a reason for this. Society took it upon itself to enforce decency. Yes, again, this could be problematic, as overly zealous social pressures could turn into violence, into mob rule. And even when it didn't, some such pressures could be stifling for some. But in general, the social compact which kept everyone in line, which encouraged decent behavior and shunned those who did not follow conventions, kept people behaving well toward one another, and made it safe to assume others were going to behave themselves.

But then came our great liberation form such "straight jackets". We lost all those stifling social controls, gained the right to behave however we want, and as a consequence, we also no longer knew how a stranger would react. We lost our "naive" faith in the police and others in authority and, as a consequence, they began to behave as badly as we imagined they had all along.

I could go on and on, but I have written that post many times.  ("Juvenile Intellectuals", "Pushing the Envelope", "Trophy Spouses", "Cranky Old Man?", "Faux "Realism"") Instead, let me just say that, for all the supposed ills critics can find in the 50's or even earlier, I can find ten times as many now, most the outcome of the supposed "correction" of those supposed problems. And yet, when I ask about why we abandoned those behaviors of the past, I am only told about all the hidden ills of that era, no mention being made of the many times worse ills of the present.

I don't claim to understand why it is so, as the ills of the present are hardly a partisan issue. The left and right both abhor the results of this supposed liberation, yet it seems that the left does nto want to recognize the part those very "reforms" played in creating our problems today. Perhaps because they were the architects of that collapse, perhaps because they do find some of the outcomes pleasing, I can't say. But I will never understand why one or two "hidden" flaws of the past are seen as so much worse than the many, many problems we openly experience today.

======================================================

* I know this makes some libertarians and small government conservatives cringe, as they confuse fear of government with freedom. Still, there is nothing incompatible with confidence in the general decency of the police and a dedication to freedom and small government.

** There are many reasons we no longer believe this. Partly because of the tort-oriented society where every stranger is a potential litigant. Partly because our general social collapse has made violence and just rudeness more common. Partly because our philosophy tells us most people are not decent, but incompetent and possibly dangerous. And so on.

=====================================================

POSTSCRIPT

I am actually even more puzzled by one specific aspect of this issue. When I mention anything good about the early part of the 20th century, I always hear about the racism of that era, and I am told that only middle class white people found it good. Having listened to many lower class coal mining immigrant relatives who also found that era good, I don't necessarily agree, but let us agree for the sake of argument. However, these same people decry the racism of today as well, sometimes even arguing it is worse than in the past. So, if destroying the traditional society of the past did not cure racism, but did get rid of a whole slew of beneficial social controls, then what is the good that came of it? And why is it somehow racist to suggest we might want to restore some of that environment, where social controls did the job now done so much worse by explicit laws and government inducements? (Cf "In Defense of Standards", "Addenda to "In Defense of Standards"", "Shame and Behavior", "Our Rude Behavior", "Social Controls", "The Carrot and the Stick - Or How to Create a Fat, Lazy, Surly Donkey")