The world is awful. The world is much better. The world can be much better
An essay from Our World in Data arguing that “the world is awful, much better, and can be much better” prompts debate over how to balance optimism about long‑term progress with honesty about present suffering and risk. Commenters contrast gains such as falling child mortality and reduced violence with worsening climate change, biodiversity loss, inequality, and localized crime or social breakdown, and argue over how trustworthy official statistics are. Many see value in a fact-based, hopeful narrative to motivate action, but warn it can slide into complacent propaganda if it glosses over environmental limits or the lived experience of those still doing badly.
Article context & framing
- Commenters note the article’s original 2018 date but updated 2023 stats; some wish the revision note were more prominent.
- Many agree with the triad “world is awful / much better / can be much better,” seeing it as a healthy middle between pessimism and complacency.
- Others argue this framing can become an “everything is fine” narrative that protects the status quo and downplays ongoing harms.
Crime, data, and lived experience
- Long subthread debates crime trends (especially in US cities like San Francisco and Portland).
- One side cites official statistics showing long‑term declines and post‑COVID drops, arguing worries are media‑driven and politically weaponized.
- Critics counter that police data undercount crime (especially minor/property crime), reporting practices change, and many people don’t bother reporting.
- Several stress that averages obscure local spikes and that dismissing people’s fears with “ACKSHUALLY” statistics is alienating.
Progress narratives, optimism, and propaganda concerns
- Some praise data‑driven books and projects showing improvements in poverty, health, and violence, saying realistic optimism motivates action.
- Others see “things are better than ever” messaging as neoliberal or pro‑capitalist propaganda, cherry‑picking positive indicators and ignoring negative trends.
- There’s concern that such narratives are used to argue against systemic change and to tell struggling people to stop complaining.
- A recurring tension: factual acknowledgment of progress vs. political use of those facts to dampen urgency.
Environment, population, and degrowth vs. tech optimism
- Multiple comments argue biodiversity loss, climate change, and resource overshoot make “overall improvement” dubious.
- Some advocate lower global birth rates and eventual population decline (“degrowth”) as necessary; others call degrowth harmful or even “murder.”
- Tech optimists point to efficiency, renewables, nuclear, and future innovations as ways to decouple growth from environmental damage.
- Disagreement persists on whether current and projected population/consumption levels are sustainable.
Democracy, media, and polarization
- Several note that crime, climate, and progress stats are heavily “culture‑war coded,” so facts are interpreted as tribal signals.
- Social and mass media are seen as amplifying fear and outrage, distorting risk perception and undermining democracy.
- Some advocate better civic education, negotiation skills, and electoral reforms to reduce polarization.
Philosophical and psychological angles
- Threads explore whether existence is net positive, antinatalist views, and whether any amount of joy justifies severe suffering.
- Others emphasize the importance of imagination, nuanced empathy, and focusing on changeable problems without denying harsh realities.