Heck, future generations may enjoy the decadent thrill of eating cloned human flesh.
No harm, no foul?
And now I have hope for the future.
But really, as Cognisseur said, I don't think the future generations will be "better" than us for many of the reasons he pointed out. That doesn't change the fact they may still look down on us for our archaic thinking, though, because it's more of a question of changes in society than what is actually right (morality being subjective and all).
So perhaps all this forward thinking and planning for the future will one day be mocked and derided because, hey brah, just relax and slam a brewski.
Honestly, trying to predict the future may very well be perceived as silliness in the future simply because of how pointless it would be. Things are changing faster and faster.
My grand-parents grew up in a world not that different from their grandparents. My experience in the world right now is astronomically different from that of my parents. The Internet has changed every facet of life in such a pervasive and powerful way that it also looks like a Neal Stephenson book.
10 years ago, we joked about how in the future popular things would change everyday and you'd need to constantly be catching up. Flash forward to now and you can see that's precisely how things are.
My childhood experience was markedly different than my sister's, despite her being only 4 years younger than me. I now have a step-brother who is 3 years old and I can't even envision what his childhood will look like.
So yeah, I imagine they'll think it's pretty silly trying to predict the future. It'd be like us sitting here and trying to guess what tomorrow's meme will be.
I'd say it may more likely be something like standing by and watching Rwandans commit genocide because there's no profit to be made by stopping them. You can take your pick of impoverished country/atrocity, but it's all the same idea.
I'd say it may more likely be something like standing by and watching Rwandans commit genocide because there's no profit to be made by stopping them. You can take your pick of impoverished country/atrocity, but it's all the same idea.
I think the next generation can be split either way on this one.
On the one hand, the amount of information they process may allow them to see there's more to the world than just whichever random terrible thing people decide to make a video out of today. People die everyday, or all sorts of things. "Ethnic cleansing" occurs, governments make terrible decisions (how many people died because Mao said to kill sparrows or whatever?), people die from diseases that vaccines have long for existed, etc. It's really sucky, but perhaps they won't hate us just because we didn't stop the one that someone arbitrarily decided was worse than others.
On the other hand, perhaps they'll just become conditioned from watching so many "FW:FW:FW: Man reunited with his lion pal" videos and will only be able to care for shit when it comes in 30 second packages with a moving soundtrack in the background. Given the direction our politics continues to swerve, to the point where we quite openly discuss that gaffes, misquotes, and "did Obama put his hand on his heart during the pledge" are what decide elections, I'm worried we're moving more of in this direction.
If that's the case, then they'll hate us only if someone makes a sad 30 second clip about it. And then they'll forget about it and care about something new 30 seconds later.
The fight for polyamory is going to be incredibly frustrating, I can tell you that. The sheer number of law changes required.
Polyamory is 100% legal.
And polygamy will probably never be unless marriage becomes a pure formality; the reason marriage is able to swing as large a bat as it does is because the restriction to two people naturally prevents abuse.
The fight for polyamory is going to be incredibly frustrating, I can tell you that. The sheer number of law changes required.
Polyamory is 100% legal.
And polygamy will probably never be unless marriage becomes a pure formality; the reason marriage is able to swing as large a bat as it does is because the restriction to two people naturally prevents abuse.
Er, slightly tangential, and if this ends up being the sort of thing that needs a lot of discussion we can make a separate thread, but what is the point of government being involved in marriages? I don't really get the purpose behind all the tax breaks and such associated with marriage. Other than "you can make medical decisions for me when I'm unconscious", I'm having difficulty seeing why the benefit of the government treating married people somehow differently.
If you think the struggle over gay rights is bad, wait until we get to argue about cyborg rights in fifty years.
HOW FAR DOES HUMANKIND HAVE TO BE AWAY FROM A MOTORBOAT TO COMPETE IN SWIMMING OLYMPICS? WHO WILL DRAW THE LINE?!
But, eh, if I had to guess, maybe the next "great evil" will be politics to please the masses (which is a very funny problem, once you think about it). More show, less action; many shallow words; every miniscule detail analyzed for idiots; being voted is more important than anything. I'm not talking about the USA, even- it's pretty bad in parts of Europe as well.
Or maybe we'll all be hatin' on the economy. I mean, there's already a lot of bile directed at evil companys, since the early ages of industrialization. I could imagine such a movement growing beyond the hassles of communism and Luddite uprisings. It helps that there's less and less people knowing anything other than today's economy (You wouldn't believe how many young people [younger than, say, 25] in Germany want their country to be divided again... on both sides of the wall!). I don't think I know nearly enough about the dynamics of society to properly analyze that...
But, no worries. In fifty years, I plan to be far too rich to concern myself with that. I'll make my own moon imperium, with blackjack and hookers!
Wingo on
0
Options
DrakeEdgelord TrashBelow the ecliptic plane.Registered Userregular
The fight for polyamory is going to be incredibly frustrating, I can tell you that. The sheer number of law changes required.
Polyamory is 100% legal.
And polygamy will probably never be unless marriage becomes a pure formality; the reason marriage is able to swing as large a bat as it does is because the restriction to two people naturally prevents abuse.
Er, slightly tangential, and if this ends up being the sort of thing that needs a lot of discussion we can make a separate thread, but what is the point of government being involved in marriages? I don't really get the purpose behind all the tax breaks and such associated with marriage. Other than "you can make medical decisions for me when I'm unconscious", I'm having difficulty seeing why the benefit of the government treating married people somehow differently.
I believe the thinking behind this sort of thing is meant to be an incentive for marriage, which creates families, which are a big part of a functional society.
If you think the struggle over gay rights is bad, wait until we get to argue about cyborg rights in fifty years.
Get to the back of the hoverbus, fleshbag. You're sitting in the augmented citizen section.
MrVyngaard on
"now I've got this mental image of caucuses as cafeteria tables in prison, and new congressmen having to beat someone up on inauguration day." - Raiden333
0
Options
MorgensternICH BIN DER PESTVOGELDU KAMPFAFFE!Registered Userregular
edited May 2010
SkyNet, pfft. What's the worst that could happen?
Morgenstern on
“Every time we walk along a beach some ancient urge disturbs us so that we find ourselves shedding shoes and garments or scavenging among seaweed and whitened timbers like the homesick refugees of a long war.” - Loren Eiseley
The fight for polyamory is going to be incredibly frustrating, I can tell you that. The sheer number of law changes required.
Polyamory is 100% legal.
And polygamy will probably never be unless marriage becomes a pure formality; the reason marriage is able to swing as large a bat as it does is because the restriction to two people naturally prevents abuse.
Er, slightly tangential, and if this ends up being the sort of thing that needs a lot of discussion we can make a separate thread, but what is the point of government being involved in marriages? I don't really get the purpose behind all the tax breaks and such associated with marriage. Other than "you can make medical decisions for me when I'm unconscious", I'm having difficulty seeing why the benefit of the government treating married people somehow differently.
The basic thrust of marriage, if you look at it, is for two people to be considered by the state as one person as much as possible. Since that's something that a lot of people are interested in, it's a useful concession for the government to make.
I'm particularly worried about the generation right behind us, the kids just getting into college right now, who were more or less raised with the early internet from very close to day 1, with a lack of perspective of how things have changed as a result of it. The absolute deluge of crude communication devices that has left everyone walking around with their heads glued to a phone.
.
Thats ok, the brain-cancer is going to wipe them out. :P
In 50 years people are going to be absolutely horrified by how we run our jails and who we put in them.
That might take closer to 100... There's an entire industry set up to continue the shit we do with prisoners and they won't give up easily. Eventually, though, we'll get rid of their influence (hopefully) and can take an honest look at how to reduce crime and how our legal system should work in order to best benefit everyone.
Until then, free slave labor cuz some dude smoked pot. Hurrah!
Heck, future generations may enjoy the decadent thrill of eating cloned human flesh.
No harm, no foul?
Don't we taste terrible though? Shit there are like what, 5 animals that would eat us given the chance. Sharks have been known to bite people, hate the taste, and swim away.
I am so looking forward to artificial meat. Imagine a steaks in a store all lined up and looking absolutely perfect. They even let you decide exactly how much fat per square inch you want. All the fat is perfectly evenly distributed. I'm droooling
As far as the op, i'm thinking it's pretty obvious that our constant raping of the earth will be a sore spot. I mean jesus, do you know how much trash the average american produces in a lifetime?
Heck, future generations may enjoy the decadent thrill of eating cloned human flesh.
No harm, no foul?
Don't we taste terrible though? Shit there are like what, 5 animals that would eat us given the chance. Sharks have been known to bite people, hate the taste, and swim away.
We taste like salty pigs, as we share similar dietary habits. It's possible that carrion-eating mammals such as ourselves are not as tasty as things that have fresher diets.
At the beginning of the twentieth century, women wore full-body bathing suits and they didn't show off their legs. By the 50s, women wore skirts but they had to be knee length. By the 90s, Victoria's Secret ads ran on primetime TV showing women in sexy undies. Going by this trend, I suspect young twenty somethings will walk around naked in public fifty years from now.
At the beginning of the twentieth century, women wore full-body bathing suits and they didn't show off their legs. By the 50s, women wore skirts but they had to be knee length. By the 90s, Victoria's Secret ads ran on primetime TV showing women in sexy undies. Going by this trend, I suspect young twenty somethings will walk around naked in public fifty years from now.
Heck, future generations may enjoy the decadent thrill of eating cloned human flesh.
No harm, no foul?
Don't we taste terrible though? Shit there are like what, 5 animals that would eat us given the chance. Sharks have been known to bite people, hate the taste, and swim away.
We taste like salty pigs, as we share similar dietary habits. It's possible that carrion-eating mammals such as ourselves are not as tasty as things that have fresher diets.
The next generation will laugh at how we wear clothes and don't surgically modify our bodies so we have pockets of skin and cartilage to carry stuff in.
Actually, I hope that later generations look upon "our" current acceptance of neonatal circumcision with disgust.
The Children of Men movie had a brief scene of what music will sound like in 50 years. Just a buncha guys yelling! Turn that racket down!
emnmnme on
0
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
edited May 2010
A couple of things I think our generation will be holding back...
I think the meat one is possibly a big one. The thing is, I don't know if that's gonna be in fifty or a hundred years when people start saying "You people farmed meat like that, and ate that much of it?"
Environmental waste is a big one. We're certainly trashing the place up.
Our erosion of certain civil liberties might be looked back at poorly. But that and the environmental ones are less likely to be things we're holding back... I can see us legitimately holding back ethical meat though. "God damnit, I don't want no vat meat! Shit's nasty! Give me a real cow!"
I can certainly see us holding back transsexual rights, too. That's one that doesn't get talked about, largely because people aren't aware of the issues and on the whole are almost entirely ignorant of everything related to transness. I'd say that people will eventually find it silly that we demanded to know the sex of an individual for every little thing, but I don't know how long that will take. In any case, I bet we'll be holding back availability of hormones, and generally interfering with laws designed to let people choose what's best for themselves, for what I'm sure will be hilariously stupid reasons that we argued against perfect analogues for when defending gay rights.
Another big one is prisons and such. Our generation is, in general, not going to want to see people rehabilitated when they could be punished. We'll have non-insignificant portions of our population arguing for the death penalty (we do now) and trying to keep adding harsher and harsher sentences for general revenge and the purpose of seeing bad people punished, while ignoring ways to rehabilitate people and reduce the number of "bad people." Essentially, we'll be the guys saying "PUNISH THEM!" while not spending money to keep kids in school, and the people younger than us will be telling us we're idiots.
Shivahn on
0
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
I am so looking forward to artificial meat. Imagine a steaks in a store all lined up and looking absolutely perfect. They even let you decide exactly how much fat per square inch you want. All the fat is perfectly evenly distributed. I'm droooling
As far as the op, i'm thinking it's pretty obvious that our constant raping of the earth will be a sore spot. I mean jesus, do you know how much trash the average american produces in a lifetime?
They could do the same with fruits and veggies. Perfectly square broccoli sheets, etc
Ultra liberal right upper wing neo conservative hidden agenda fasciocommunist baby thumpers will have finally completed their hundred year mission to outbreed all other persuasions of politcal belief, taking over democracy all over the world by sheer numbers.
Later, in history class, their numerous children will laugh at the current generation for its foolish attempts to balance power without the benefit of population control
bwahahahahahaha!
Paladin on
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Actually, I hope that later generations look upon "our" current acceptance of neonatal circumcision with disgust.
! How did I forget this!
We will totally be viewed as monsters for this, in America, as well as hypocrites for condemning similar rituals elsewhere.
And I'm sure that many of us will still be fighting to keep it legal while everyone else is trying to ban it.
Like most...perhaps all?...elective neonatal surgical procedures (though I guess it wouldn't be called invasive), a majority of males worldwide don't undergo it. A minority does.
So we might be approaching that point already.
Synthesis on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
edited May 2010
we will be derided for our inability to take furries seriously or something
like, we'll object to the little census boxes that lets you claim you're a fox or ocelot or something
and that will be bigotry
Irond Will on
0
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
edited May 2010
Synthesis, I meant domestically. I have no doubt that we're viewed that way by great regions of the rest of the world, but I think it'll take a while for sentiment in the US to reach the point where it's an issue, and I think people our age will at least have enough of a split for younger people to be going "Honestly, grandpa, fuck off and die already."
Ah. I'm not sure how common it is in the United States. Pretty common, I'd guess, though I can only speculate (thankfully, having evidence would be....awkward...) compared to other parts of the world.
Synthesis on
0
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
edited May 2010
Here's some data, if you're interested. The rate is still above 50% (or, was, as of four years ago), so I'd assume the number of people currently old enough to have children who would not support a ban is at least that high.
At the beginning of the twentieth century, women wore full-body bathing suits and they didn't show off their legs. By the 50s, women wore skirts but they had to be knee length. By the 90s, Victoria's Secret ads ran on primetime TV showing women in sexy undies. Going by this trend, I suspect young twenty somethings will walk around naked in public fifty years from now.
Yeah but in the Victorian era there were more prostitutes in New York than there were bibles. Roughly speaking. The conservatism of the past has mostly been about sweeping all the freaks that have always been around under the rug.
I dunno about this notion of the future generation so much better than us, here's why:
-Previous generations were raised mostly by tradition and parental values. We hate gays. Why? Bible says so. Don't steal. Why? Because I told you to, shut the hell up.
-Starting pretty much now, generations are being raised by a combination of tradition, parental values, and media... with tradition losing its foothold. I would argue that within 50 years, tradition will continue to lose its foothold to media, and parents will just become more detached in their parenting and assume media/schools can handle the job of socializing their kids.
-Now, we can already see how media works -- pander to the lowest common denominator and say whatever they want to hear. Fox is naturally the worst culprit in this, as the majority of their "news" has no bearing to news of any sort, but the other stations are quickly catching up in recognizing news is totally an entertainment media now, not information media.
-So what's going to raise our kids? We will, to varying degrees, with our own values of commercialism, apathy, and everything else you guys think they'll hate us for. The media will raise them, but their goal is just $texas and not actually raising your kid (buy Platinum Bling Bling Barbie now! you need one to be cool!), so I don't see any reason that'd help the kids turn out any better.
-No, I'd say ethically, the next generation won't be that different except for changes due to scientific advancement. Like meat-eating. We learn more about how close animals are to humans, our children will learn about how pigs have relationships and play games and shit, and then they'll think us monsters for eating something so similar to ourselves.
I'd agree with all of that but you're missing something. Exposure is the balancing force against prejudice and bias. Media can go either way and enforce either prejudice or tolerance. I agree that it's making us less rational and more easily swayed by emotion but crazy populist leaders have always been a part of American history.
Racial prejudices in a society are pretty strongly correlated with how often two groups are in contact with each other and under what conditions. We may be fine with non-Mexican immigrants in most of the U.S. right now because we determine the terms for their moving here so we have no problem dealing with educated people who can take care of themselves and not refugees. Mexican immigrants have had such strong reactions on both sides of the scale because they're coming here on their own terms and because we are still depenent on a cheap and local source of labor.
And for outside the U.S. there's a huge backlash against islamic immigrants in parts of Europe. From what I've heard the conflict's mostly because of the huge contrast between largely secular societies and traditionally conservative foreigners.
So it's tough to draw a line on a graph and say that more exposure is leading to more tolerance or prejudice but in comparison to the days where England and France were constantly at war with each other I'd say we've made some progress.
Posts
Honestly, trying to predict the future may very well be perceived as silliness in the future simply because of how pointless it would be. Things are changing faster and faster.
My grand-parents grew up in a world not that different from their grandparents. My experience in the world right now is astronomically different from that of my parents. The Internet has changed every facet of life in such a pervasive and powerful way that it also looks like a Neal Stephenson book.
10 years ago, we joked about how in the future popular things would change everyday and you'd need to constantly be catching up. Flash forward to now and you can see that's precisely how things are.
My childhood experience was markedly different than my sister's, despite her being only 4 years younger than me. I now have a step-brother who is 3 years old and I can't even envision what his childhood will look like.
So yeah, I imagine they'll think it's pretty silly trying to predict the future. It'd be like us sitting here and trying to guess what tomorrow's meme will be.
I think the next generation can be split either way on this one.
On the one hand, the amount of information they process may allow them to see there's more to the world than just whichever random terrible thing people decide to make a video out of today. People die everyday, or all sorts of things. "Ethnic cleansing" occurs, governments make terrible decisions (how many people died because Mao said to kill sparrows or whatever?), people die from diseases that vaccines have long for existed, etc. It's really sucky, but perhaps they won't hate us just because we didn't stop the one that someone arbitrarily decided was worse than others.
On the other hand, perhaps they'll just become conditioned from watching so many "FW:FW:FW: Man reunited with his lion pal" videos and will only be able to care for shit when it comes in 30 second packages with a moving soundtrack in the background. Given the direction our politics continues to swerve, to the point where we quite openly discuss that gaffes, misquotes, and "did Obama put his hand on his heart during the pledge" are what decide elections, I'm worried we're moving more of in this direction.
If that's the case, then they'll hate us only if someone makes a sad 30 second clip about it. And then they'll forget about it and care about something new 30 seconds later.
And polygamy will probably never be unless marriage becomes a pure formality; the reason marriage is able to swing as large a bat as it does is because the restriction to two people naturally prevents abuse.
Er, slightly tangential, and if this ends up being the sort of thing that needs a lot of discussion we can make a separate thread, but what is the point of government being involved in marriages? I don't really get the purpose behind all the tax breaks and such associated with marriage. Other than "you can make medical decisions for me when I'm unconscious", I'm having difficulty seeing why the benefit of the government treating married people somehow differently.
HOW FAR DOES HUMANKIND HAVE TO BE AWAY FROM A MOTORBOAT TO COMPETE IN SWIMMING OLYMPICS? WHO WILL DRAW THE LINE?!
But, eh, if I had to guess, maybe the next "great evil" will be politics to please the masses (which is a very funny problem, once you think about it). More show, less action; many shallow words; every miniscule detail analyzed for idiots; being voted is more important than anything. I'm not talking about the USA, even- it's pretty bad in parts of Europe as well.
Or maybe we'll all be hatin' on the economy. I mean, there's already a lot of bile directed at evil companys, since the early ages of industrialization. I could imagine such a movement growing beyond the hassles of communism and Luddite uprisings. It helps that there's less and less people knowing anything other than today's economy (You wouldn't believe how many young people [younger than, say, 25] in Germany want their country to be divided again... on both sides of the wall!). I don't think I know nearly enough about the dynamics of society to properly analyze that...
But, no worries. In fifty years, I plan to be far too rich to concern myself with that. I'll make my own moon imperium, with blackjack and hookers!
I believe the thinking behind this sort of thing is meant to be an incentive for marriage, which creates families, which are a big part of a functional society.
Get to the back of the hoverbus, fleshbag. You're sitting in the augmented citizen section.
The basic thrust of marriage, if you look at it, is for two people to be considered by the state as one person as much as possible. Since that's something that a lot of people are interested in, it's a useful concession for the government to make.
Go to Cancun on spring break. All that is bad radiate from the non-natives there. All that is good radiate away from them.
Or, to see the European equivalent, go to Sunny Beach or whatever. Man I don't even know.
MAN
I DON'T EVEN KNOW
Thats ok, the brain-cancer is going to wipe them out. :P
We could eventually rise up and defeat the machines?
PSN : Bolthorn
That might take closer to 100... There's an entire industry set up to continue the shit we do with prisoners and they won't give up easily. Eventually, though, we'll get rid of their influence (hopefully) and can take an honest look at how to reduce crime and how our legal system should work in order to best benefit everyone.
Until then, free slave labor cuz some dude smoked pot. Hurrah!
Don't we taste terrible though? Shit there are like what, 5 animals that would eat us given the chance. Sharks have been known to bite people, hate the taste, and swim away.
As far as the op, i'm thinking it's pretty obvious that our constant raping of the earth will be a sore spot. I mean jesus, do you know how much trash the average american produces in a lifetime?
We taste like salty pigs, as we share similar dietary habits. It's possible that carrion-eating mammals such as ourselves are not as tasty as things that have fresher diets.
Organ windows.
Check out the curves on them kidneys.
I'm pretty sure we don't taste like pork.
Actually, I hope that later generations look upon "our" current acceptance of neonatal circumcision with disgust.
I think the meat one is possibly a big one. The thing is, I don't know if that's gonna be in fifty or a hundred years when people start saying "You people farmed meat like that, and ate that much of it?"
Environmental waste is a big one. We're certainly trashing the place up.
Our erosion of certain civil liberties might be looked back at poorly. But that and the environmental ones are less likely to be things we're holding back... I can see us legitimately holding back ethical meat though. "God damnit, I don't want no vat meat! Shit's nasty! Give me a real cow!"
I can certainly see us holding back transsexual rights, too. That's one that doesn't get talked about, largely because people aren't aware of the issues and on the whole are almost entirely ignorant of everything related to transness. I'd say that people will eventually find it silly that we demanded to know the sex of an individual for every little thing, but I don't know how long that will take. In any case, I bet we'll be holding back availability of hormones, and generally interfering with laws designed to let people choose what's best for themselves, for what I'm sure will be hilariously stupid reasons that we argued against perfect analogues for when defending gay rights.
Another big one is prisons and such. Our generation is, in general, not going to want to see people rehabilitated when they could be punished. We'll have non-insignificant portions of our population arguing for the death penalty (we do now) and trying to keep adding harsher and harsher sentences for general revenge and the purpose of seeing bad people punished, while ignoring ways to rehabilitate people and reduce the number of "bad people." Essentially, we'll be the guys saying "PUNISH THEM!" while not spending money to keep kids in school, and the people younger than us will be telling us we're idiots.
! How did I forget this!
We will totally be viewed as monsters for this, in America, as well as hypocrites for condemning similar rituals elsewhere.
And I'm sure that many of us will still be fighting to keep it legal while everyone else is trying to ban it.
They could do the same with fruits and veggies. Perfectly square broccoli sheets, etc
Monk would be in heaven
Ultra liberal right upper wing neo conservative hidden agenda fasciocommunist baby thumpers will have finally completed their hundred year mission to outbreed all other persuasions of politcal belief, taking over democracy all over the world by sheer numbers.
Later, in history class, their numerous children will laugh at the current generation for its foolish attempts to balance power without the benefit of population control
bwahahahahahaha!
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Like most...perhaps all?...elective neonatal surgical procedures (though I guess it wouldn't be called invasive), a majority of males worldwide don't undergo it. A minority does.
So we might be approaching that point already.
like, we'll object to the little census boxes that lets you claim you're a fox or ocelot or something
and that will be bigotry
MEAT
Fuck you all, you can take my delicious dead animal from my cold dead delicious hands you vegan motherfuckers! Now get off my lawn!!!!
Yeah but in the Victorian era there were more prostitutes in New York than there were bibles. Roughly speaking. The conservatism of the past has mostly been about sweeping all the freaks that have always been around under the rug.
I'd agree with all of that but you're missing something. Exposure is the balancing force against prejudice and bias. Media can go either way and enforce either prejudice or tolerance. I agree that it's making us less rational and more easily swayed by emotion but crazy populist leaders have always been a part of American history.
Racial prejudices in a society are pretty strongly correlated with how often two groups are in contact with each other and under what conditions. We may be fine with non-Mexican immigrants in most of the U.S. right now because we determine the terms for their moving here so we have no problem dealing with educated people who can take care of themselves and not refugees. Mexican immigrants have had such strong reactions on both sides of the scale because they're coming here on their own terms and because we are still depenent on a cheap and local source of labor.
And for outside the U.S. there's a huge backlash against islamic immigrants in parts of Europe. From what I've heard the conflict's mostly because of the huge contrast between largely secular societies and traditionally conservative foreigners.
So it's tough to draw a line on a graph and say that more exposure is leading to more tolerance or prejudice but in comparison to the days where England and France were constantly at war with each other I'd say we've made some progress.