I lack the words. It's 2021, and IR theorists have spent decades doing quantitative studies on war, but have been leaving out Native Americans the whole time. The non-state dataset has been entirely meaningless. (And don't get me started on the definition of a state)https://twitter.com/ProfPaulPoast/status/1394621206222057474 …
-
-
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @MilHist_Lee
I'm always really skeptical about quantitative IR-approaches because the evidence is so uneven; like the 'map of conflicts' from a week or so ago. I have real questions here as to how much the 19th cent. surge is a visibility thing here, for instance
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 10 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @BretDevereaux
it's totally a visibility thing. Look at the 3 sources they used. They are U.S. (i.e. post 1789) centric
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä
I just think about the sort of raw gibberish you'd get trying to do this to Rome. You'd have a TON of small wars from 218 to 167 and then a huge drop-off from 167 till 90 or so which would be almost entirely a function of "those books of Livy are lost"
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.