"H.G. Wells's The Time Machine is a profound exploration of humanity’s relationship with time, progress, and the fragility of civilization," the time traveller continued. "At its core, the novel invites readers to reflect on the paradox of human advancement: the same technological and social progress that enables comfort and convenience can also lead to stagnation and division. The Time Traveler’s journey to the distant future reveals a world dominated by two evolved species: the Eloi, representing frailty and decadence, and the Morlocks, embodying toil and darkness. This duality serves as an allegory for the consequences of unchecked social stratification. The Eloi, descendants of a ruling class, have grown weak and purposeless, while the Morlocks, descended from labourers, have become monstrous and predatory. Wells suggests that a society overly reliant on technological and economic hierarchies risks devolving into alienation and dehumanization.
Moreover, the novel questions the permanence of human achievements. The decayed ruins of human civilization in the far future underscore the impermanence of even the greatest empires. Through this, Wells challenges the Enlightenment-era optimism that saw progress as linear and everlasting. Instead, he offers a cyclical vision of history, where humanity’s potential is shadowed by its inherent flaws.
Let's go back to Will and Ariel Durant's The Lessons of History. They argue that Monarchy seems to be the most natural kind of government since it applies to the group the authority of the father in a family or of the chieftain in a warrior band. If we were to judge forms of government from their prevalence and duration in history we should have to give the palm to monarchy; democracies, by contrast, have been hectic interludes.
After the breakdown of Roman democracy in the class wars of the Gracchi, Marius, and Caesar, Augustus organized, under what in effect was monarchical rule, the greatest achievement in the history of statesmanship—that Pax Romana which maintained peace from 30 B.C. to A.D. 180 throughout an empire ranging from the Atlantic to the Euphrates and from Scotland to the Black Sea. After him monarchy disgraced itself under Caligula, Nero, and Domitian; but after them came Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurelius—“the finest succession of good and great sovereigns,”
All in all, monarchy has had a middling record. Its wars of succession brought mankind as much evil as the continuity or “legitimacy” of the monarchy brought good. When it is hereditary it is likely to be more prolific of stupidity, nepotism, irresponsibility, and extravagance than of nobility or statesmanship. Louis XIV has often been taken as the paragon of modern monarchs, but the people of France rejoiced at his death. The complexity of contemporary states seems to break down any single mind that tries to master it.
Imagine governance as a Time Machine that travels between two eras: the outgoing regime and the incoming one. The journey is about moving through time and ensuring the machine (the nation or system) arrives intact at its destination. The engineers, fuel suppliers, and navigators play key roles in this transition. In history, there have been instances where one regime and its successor have reached agreements regarding governance regulation, typically during transitions of power or to ensure continuity in administration. Such agreements are often documented in treaties, legal codes, or transitional frameworks.
Although not a transition between regimes, The Magna Carta (1215) represented an agreement between King John of England and his barons to limit royal power and establish certain legal protections. It became a foundational text for constitutional governance. The Treaty of Westphalia (1648) ended the Thirty Years' War in Europe and established principles of sovereignty and non-intervention, regulating governance between states. The U.S. Constitution (1787) was the result of an agreement among the states to replace the Articles of Confederation with a new framework for governance. It established a balance between federal and state powers.
When power transitioned from the Tokugawa shogunate to the Meiji government, the Meiji Restoration in Japan (1868) was made to modernize and regulate governance while respecting certain traditional structures temporarily. Agreements between the apartheid government and the African National Congress (ANC) led to the drafting of a new constitution, marking a peaceful transition of governance.
Governance transitions—whether through revolution, reform, or negotiation—are like a journey through time. The Time Machine symbolizes the mechanisms and structures of governance that carry a nation from one era (regime) to another.
Furthermore, Will and Ariel Durant argued that most governments have been oligarchies—ruled by a minority, chosen either by birth, as in aristocracies, or by a religious organization, as in theocracies, or by wealth, as in democracies.
The Time Machine must be designed to work in both the outgoing and incoming eras. Oligarchs, as engineers, ensure their construction aligns with their interests, embedding mechanisms to maintain their influence regardless of the destination. How do they do it? Drafting laws or agreements that protect their assets and privileges (e.g., amnesty deals, favourable economic policies). Or, negotiating with incoming leaders to ensure their involvement in the future system. During the transition from communism in Eastern Europe, oligarchs used their engineering skills to secure privatized state assets, building a new system where they remained indispensable.
Every journey requires fuel, and the Time Machine is no different. Oligarchs control critical resources—wealth, industries, or political influence—that serve as fuel for the transition. Without their contribution, the machine risks stalling. How do they do it? Financing political campaigns, transitional governments, or stability programs to ensure the machine keeps moving. Or, offering concessions, such as keeping industries operational during uncertain times. In post-apartheid South Africa, business leaders (many oligarchic in their influence) provided economic stability by agreeing to cooperate with the new government while securing their business interests.
Once the Time Machine is moving, someone must chart its course. Oligarchs often sit in the navigator’s seat, steering the machine toward a destination that safeguards their position. They may justify this control as being in the nation’s best interest, claiming that their experience ensures a smoother journey. How do they do it? Lobbying for policies that align with their interests while framing them as beneficial for the nation. Or, influencing media narratives to shape public opinion about the direction of the transition. In Ukraine, oligarchs have historically funded political parties and controlled media outlets, guiding the country’s trajectory post-Soviet independence to favour their economic dominance.
In transitional periods, the public is often uncertain about the future. Oligarchs exploit this uncertainty by crafting narratives that either reinforce their indispensability or discredit opposing voices. Presenting themselves as stabilizers of the economy or as protectors of national identity to gain public trust. By controlling narratives, oligarchs can shift blame for problems (e.g., economic crises, corruption) onto others, such as external forces, or the public itself. Public opinion is a powerful tool. Positive media portrayals can legitimize oligarchs’ actions, ensuring they remain influential in the new system.
Maybe because my father is a journalist I am one of those who strongly believe that journalists can make a difference. Imagine life as a series of interconnected stories, unfolding moment by moment. Each individual's life story contributes to the collective human experience, much like chapters in a grand, ever-evolving book. A time machine symbolizes the dream of traversing these life stories—not just our own, but those of the past and future.
Journalists, in a sense, are time travellers. They delve into the past to uncover truths, present them in the here and now, and shape the narratives that will guide future generations. Just as a time machine allows one to visit different eras, journalists journey through time by researching historical events, documenting current happenings, and influencing future discourse with their reporting.
Journalists capture snapshots of life at various points in time. Their stories allow us to experience moments we weren't present for, similar to how a time machine would transport us to different eras. For example, photojournalism immortalizes pivotal moments, making them accessible to future generations. They bridge the past, present, and future. Investigative pieces often trace events from their origins to their present-day impact, akin to travelling through time to understand the full arc of a story. Once upon a time, the kingdom of Achipelago's most popular magazine, "Tempo," featured a cover that was a parody of Prabu Petruk, holding Vivivavi high above his head, just like Rafiki held Simba in "The Lion King." The citizens wondered if Vivivavi would break into a rendition of "Hakuna Matata" at any moment. But the plot-twist thickened when Vivivavi, in his quest to win the hearts of the people, decided to distribute milk throughout the kingdom. "Milk for everyone!" he proclaimed, as he handed out bottles with his name plastered all over them. The citizens, while grateful for the free milk, couldn't help but raise an eyebrow. "Isn't this our tax money?" they whispered among themselves. Another replied, "He's such a milk fan!"
By informing the public and holding powers accountable, journalists influence the future. Their work ensures that society learns from past mistakes and strives for a better future. In this way, they serve as custodians of time, guiding humanity through its collective journey. Journalists document history as it happens, ensuring that future generations have a record of significant events. This is analogous to a time machine's ability to preserve moments in time for future study and reflection.
However, despite their noble role, journalists face several challenges and drawbacks. Journalists can sometimes introduce their own biases into their reporting, leading to skewed or one-sided coverage. Bernard Goldberg in Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News critiques perceived liberal bias in the media based on Goldberg's experiences during his tenure at CBS News (2001, Regnery Publishing).
In the race for viewership and readership, some journalists or media outlets may resort to sensationalism, prioritizing shocking or controversial stories over more substantive reporting. W. Joseph Campbell in The Yellow Journalism: The Press and America’s Emergence as a World Power (2001, Bloomsbury Academic) examines the phenomenon of yellow journalism during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, particularly focusing on the rivalry between newspaper magnates William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer. Campbell discusses how sensationalism in reporting influenced public perception and policy during critical historical moments, including the Spanish-American War. His work provides insights into how media can shape national identity and public opinion.
Media outlets often rely on advertising revenue, which can influence the content they produce. This can sometimes lead to conflicts of interest or pressure to avoid stories that might upset advertisers. Ben H. Bagdikian in The Media Monopoly (2000, Beacon Press) critiques the consolidation of media ownership in the United States, arguing that a few large corporations control the majority of media outlets, which limits diversity in news coverage. Bagdikian highlights how this concentration affects public knowledge and democracy, emphasizing the need for a more pluralistic media landscape.
In the rush to break news, journalists may sometimes report inaccurate or incomplete information, leading to the spread of misinformation. Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky in Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988, Pantheon Books) analyze how mass media serves elite interests through a "propaganda model" that influences news production. Herman and Chomsky argue that media content is shaped by economic factors and political agendas, leading to biased reporting that often serves powerful entities rather than the public interest.
Journalists, especially those covering conflicts or dangerous areas, face significant physical and psychological risks. This can impact their well-being and the quality of their reporting. Ray Moseley in Reporting War: How Foreign Correspondents Risk Capture, Injury and Death to Bring Us the News (2018, Yale University Press) explores the challenges faced by foreign correspondents during wartime, detailing their experiences and sacrifices while covering conflicts like World War II. Moseley highlights the evolution of war reporting and its significance in shaping public understanding of global events. It serves as both a historical account and a tribute to the journalists who risk their lives for accurate reporting.
Increasingly, the public's trust in the media has eroded due to instances of perceived or real bias, sensationalism, and misinformation. This distrust can undermine the essential role of journalists in society. In his provocative book, Ryan Holiday (Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator, 2012 Portfolio) reveals his experiences as a media strategist who manipulated online journalism for promotional purposes. He critiques the current state of news media, particularly how blogs drive sensationalism and can be easily influenced for commercial gain. He discusses tactics used to exploit the media landscape, raising questions about ethics in journalism and marketing.
In essence, while we may not have physical time machines, journalists perform a similar function by traversing the timelines of human experience, preserving our past, examining our present, and influencing our future. They are the chroniclers and time travellers of our world, ensuring that the story of life is told in all its richness and complexity. But, like any other human endeavour, journalism is not without its flaws and challenges. It is through understanding and addressing these cons that we can strive for a more informed, balanced, and trustworthy media landscape.
While the Time Machine moves through governance transitions, the people—symbolized as Life—are its passengers. Their experience of the journey reflects their hopes, struggles, and challenges as they navigate the uncertain terrain of change. Most passengers in the Time Machine have no direct control over its operation. They rely on the engineers and navigators to take them safely to a better future, though often at the cost of their comfort and equality. Wealth disparities often widen as oligarchs prioritize their interests over public welfare. The burden of the transition—such as economic uncertainty or political instability—falls disproportionately on ordinary citizens. In Russia during the 1990s, the privatization efforts enriched oligarchs while plunging millions into poverty and unemployment.
Despite their lack of control, the passengers hold onto dreams of reaching a better destination. These hopes—of democracy, equality, or prosperity—sustain them through the turbulence of the journey. However, oligarchs often manipulate these dreams, presenting illusions of progress while maintaining the status quo. Citizens may initially support transitions, believing they will bring positive change, only to find themselves in a system as inequitable as the last. After the Arab Spring, some nations experienced a return to oligarchic or autocratic dominance, dashing public hopes for meaningful reform. But Revolts often lead to chaos, power vacuums, or counter-revolutions, harming ordinary people more than the oligarchs. In Venezuela, public protests against oligarchic corruption and mismanagement have contributed to ongoing political and economic crises.
The interplay between the Time Machine and Life determines the ultimate success of the governance transition. Oligarchs, despite their control, depend on the passengers for legitimacy and productivity, while the passengers rely on the oligarchs for leadership and resources. Passengers trust the oligarchs to lead responsibly, but oligarchs often exploit this trust for personal gain. Passengers envision a better future, while oligarchs ensure the destination closely resembles the past to preserve their power.
And, my time is up, it's time to flip my sand timer to move on to the next session."
