Why does it seem like today's world is less dynamic than the past?

by C-Blake

It seems like good life= boring history. In ancient, classical, medieval, renaissance, and even early modern times you had large scale war, usurping, revolutions, rise and fall of empires, "great men" like Alexander and Genghis Khan. It all seemed to end with the fall of the third reich, and now that there is no more Cold War it's not even mildly interesting. Now it's all peaceful and democratic, except for third world holes (not superpowers). Is this to blame on nuclear weapons? Globalization? A shared market in Europe being more prioritized than taking land and resources?

lngwstksgk

Let me suggest a cure: Read the newspapers--note the plural.

If you read about history, you're handed the connections between people and events and you're told what's meaningful and why. You see the interplay and begin to realize the importance of the little things--this is where the interest lies.

If you don't find today interesting, it's because you don't know enough about events to see the interplay and little connections between things. Reddit is not a substitute for the newspapers. Newspapers have backgrounders on important files and run a series of opinion pieces and analyses as well. Reddit is a supplement to this, but you need to lay the groundwork first.

There have been SO MANY fascinating things in recent years, though this sub is not the place for current events. If you start following it, I guarantee that peaceful diplomacy will become mesmerizing. Nothing but nothing happens without diplomacy.

gingerkid1234

In ancient, classical, medieval, renaissance, and even early modern times you had large scale war, usurping, revolutions, rise and fall of empires, "great men" like Alexander and Genghis Khan.

These happened over millennia. You're likely compressing all of antiquity into a much shorter amount of mental time than is the case. Some metrics to illustrate:

  1. More time had elapsed between the construction of the Sphinx and Cleopatra than between Cleopatra and now
  • More time elapsed between Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan than between Genghis Khan and now
  • The Roman Empire rose and fell over a longer period than between the Crusades and now, and that's counting the fall when the Western Empire collapsed. Between the beginning and the fall of Byzantium and the death of the last Roman Emperor, it's the amount of time elapsed from the transition of Rome to an Empire from a Republic and now (i.e. Rome existed as a Republic for as long as there hasn't been any Roman Empire).

Those "great men" you mention lived over a thousand years apart. You've put "the past" into one time period, it seems.

And as others have said, your definition of "interesting" is quite subjective. You seem to be talking about time since the Cold War being boring. That's roughly 20-years, and is outside the scope of this subreddit. Julius Caesar was active in politics for longer than that. Numerous interesting political and military events have taken place sense then--it seems you just don't care about them.

[deleted]

Not that I really agree at all with what you're saying, but if I accept the basic premise, because you lack the perspective gained by temporal distance. How can you tell which events will have lasting impact when they're still happening?