In the wake of recent events whether it be the Boston Marathon bombing, the Sandyhook shooting, the Colorado Theater shooting or the almost daily terror attacks occurring in the Middle East and across the world, what does it really mean to be “in touch” with the human condition? It seems this concept used to be more easily defined as those of us growing up in the sheltered suburbs of 20th century America found it rather easy to be kind and generous as we experienced relatively little violence and owned a majority of the worlds resources. Now, however, it would appear peace and harmony may be a waning concept. In generations past atrocities were, at the very least, much further removed from daily life. The average family in North America could go about their day nearly assured they would not hear of a shooting or famine affecting others across the world as there was no such thing as national television and global social media. There have always been terrible events and people who commit heinous acts, but in an age of global communication these events are brought into nearly every home and every individuals pocket via their personal cell phone (studies show we check these over fifty times per day). Never before has evil had such an avenue of communication or such a wide audience. It certainly speaks to the human condition and possibly to the psyche of all mammals in that, we all love violence. While to what degree it may vary, you and I are no different. We all love to see the good guy beat up the bad guy, see the car crash in a NASCAR race, or simply see a big hit in an NFL football game. Our society has been indoctrinated into a culture of celebrated violence of which there may be no easy escape. Every post apocalyptic book or movie we see displays visions of a future primitive and vicious society. Are we regressing back to the way of the Neanderthal? Or are some of us evolving into more aware and harmonious beings while the majority of humans, experiencing betrayal and neglect from their leaders and increasing resource shortages, more prone to become violent and emotionally vacant? This is a question the leaders of the world should begin asking quite vigorously if they intend to maintain hope for civilization long into the future. I leave you with this question, what motivation would world leaders have to give up a piece of their very large pie to improve the lives of those they barely know? Then again, aren’t those very leaders the ones least likely to be affected by such crises?