I and others have only shown that the Victorian era had more violent conflicts and human rights abuses than the modern era has tended to have.
That shouldn't be taken as a claim that the present day is without horrific abuses and conflicts, either. It's simply a statement that things are better today than they were then.
Ehh... I'm not sure I entirely agree. The point that the Victorian Era wasn't peaceful (really, who would make that statement except looking purely at continental Europe and the Concert therein) is well made. Nonetheless, I'm not sure how many people in Rwanda, for example, would say things are better now than they were then. Or the Balkans, or Chechnya, or Nepal. I think it's fairer to say that for many people, things are better. For many others, things are worse. For yet many others, things haven't changed all that much.
I think it might be fair to even say that the percentage of total world population for whom things are better and is at peace is higher today than it was back then. This points to a trend of a better future world.