Maybe the future isn't so shocking after all

Technology is changing faster than people or governments can keep up. The move to an information economy is rapidly displacing old industries. People subjected to a continual barrage of news and data feel anxious and alienated. They're suffering from "information overload."

These ideas could easily be part of a stock description of life at the beginning of the 2020s. In fact, they were first popularized half a century ago, in 1970, when the author Alvin Toffler and his wife Heidi, later credited by Alvin as co-author, published their book, Future Shock.

The Tofflers were trying to make sense of a world moving faster and faster, thanks to jet travel, mass media, the birth control pill, and the then-still-very-nascent computer revolution, leaving people and society struggling to cope. Some of these concerns may seem quaint or dated (check out the documentary film about the book, which opens with a Pan-Am jet and a middle-aged Orson Wells walking through an airport puffing a cigar), but many of the trends it identified are still relevant: today's policymakers, business leaders, and citizens face a new wave of technology-related angst. Artificial intelligence, automation, and viral disinformation are leaving people alienated, disrupting traditional institutions, and raising concerns about the future of democracy.

What lessons can this 50-year-old book offer? Here are two ways to look at it - one positive, and one slightly more pessimistic:

The world (and democracy) survived the "future shock" of the 1970s – it will do so again. While the Tofflers may have put their finger on an important trend, the world didn't fall apart after 1970. Future Shock also arguably put too much stock in the idea of accelerating change as the culprit behind the "malaise, mass neurosis, irrationality and free-floating violence" of its time and too little stock in society's ability to adapt to technological disruption.

People, governments and other important institutions adapted to the technological changes of a previous era, and they can do it again. In another 50 years, social scientists may look back on today's big sources of tech-driven angst and see either overblown worries or other factors besides technology as the main drivers of disruptive trends. In other words, don't underestimate the power of human beings to change. We've been doing it for a long time.

Future Shock was before its time: It wasn't technological change itself that the Tofflers were worried about. It was the acceleratingpace of change. The world we live in today is scarcely recognizable from 1970, and not just because you can no longer smoke in the airport. The information overload wrought by the internet and smartphone revolution will only increase as technologies like artificial intelligence and ultra-fast 5G networks lead to an exponential increase in the amount of data that people, governments, and criminals can access. As another futurist, the novelist William Gibson might say, the Future Shock is here, it just isn't evenly distributed.

More from GZERO Media

- YouTube

At the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion, Ukraine was already punching above its weight in technology—having one of the most powerful IT hubs and digitized governments in the world. Now, three years into the war, tech innovation in Ukraine has become a battlefield advantage, one that Anna Gvozdiar, Deputy Minister for Strategic Industries, says could benefit all of Europe.

- YouTube

“If the G-Zero world is winning, one of the things that's also winning is impunity,” says Ian Bremmer, president and founder of Eurasia Group and GZERO Media. Speaking at the 2025 Munich Security Conference, Bremmer highlights the rise of global impunity and the challenges of deterrence in today’s volatile geopolitical climate.

Israelis sit together as they light candles and hold posters with the images Oded Lifschitz, Shiri Bibas, and her two children, Kfir and Ariel Bibas, seized during the deadly Oct. 7, 2023 attack by Hamas, on the day the bodies of the deceased hostages were handed over under by Hamas on Feb. 20, 2025.

REUTERS/Itay Cohen
South Korea's impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol attends a hearing of his impeachment trial at the Constitutional Court in Seoul, South Korea, February 20, 2025.
Matrix Images/Korea Pool

Impeached South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol appeared before two courts on Thursday. His first stop at the Seoul Central District Court made him the first sitting president — he’s not yet been formally removed from office — to face criminal prosecution.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and U.S. President Donald Trump's special envoy, General Keith Kellogg, meet in Kyiv, Ukraine, on February 20, 2025.
Photo by Maxym Marusenko/NurPhoto

Ahead of the third anniversary on Monday of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky and Donald Trump’sUkraine envoy, Keith Kellogg,met in Kyiv on Thursday to discuss bringing the fighting to an end as Washington’s allegiances appear to be shifting toward Moscow.

South African president Cyril Ramaphosa takes the national salute below a statue of former president Nelson Mandela at the Cape Town City Hall, ahead of his State Of The Nation (SONA) address in Cape Town, South Africa February 6, 2025.
REUTERS/Nic Bothma

South Africa’s ruling coalition, made up primarily of the African National Congress and the Democratic Alliance, is showing signs of a possible crack in its government of national unity.

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) speaks to the media, on the day of a Senate Republicans' weekly policy lunch on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., February 19, 2025.

REUTERS/Kent Nishimura

Those of us who grew up in a Cold War world have long thought of Republicans as the US political party that is most consistently tough on Moscow.

Luisa Vieira

The shocking US pivot to Russia has sent the world through the political looking glass and into the upside-down era of Trumpland. Is the US abandoning its historic allies in NATO, Europe, and Canada in favor of … Russia? The short answer is yes, writes GZERO Publisher Evan Solomon. For now.

The Energy Security Hub @BMW Foundation Herbert Quandt Pavilion at the Munich Security Conference held crucial talks last weekend on pressing global issues to the energy transition. Over 2.5 days of controversial and constructive talks in the heart of Munich, it became clear that energy security is not only an economic and geopolitical issue but one that’s also inextricably linked to social progress and democratic values. “There is not just one way forward,” said Dr. Heba Aguib, board member of the BMW Foundation Herbert Quandt. However, speed, scale, and collaboration across sectors are needed to drive the transition. “The open and collaborative approach that big tech companies are taking can serve as a model for other organizations and countries to use external expertise and resources to drive their energy initiatives, tailored to local needs,” she said. Learn more about the program here.