Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Sigh. What data could possibly exist to make this chart more than empty retrojection of the author's assumptions? Modern polling doesn't go back much further than the 1930s; this is founded on sand. Fund the humanities or else we'll get more bad history done by zoologists.https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1447199730153500672 …
Also it is absurd on its face to suggest that we hit Bleeding Kansas levels of political stress in 2014 or that things now are more stressed than in 1860 - a year in which, I feel the need to note, a state voted to treasonously secede from the union to defend slavery.
Is the political climate bad and potentially trending worse? Yes. Am I concerned about this? Yes. Do I think this chart does anything to help us understand that? No.
That slope leading up to 1861 seems so *normal*...
@Peter_Turchin has extensive and very rigorous historical data base.
Reminds me of this graph in Sebastien Gorka's PhD dissertation Honestly wish I had the absolute shamelessness and unshakable level of self confidence to put stuff like this out there and call myself an expertpic.twitter.com/APyOo7NdYo
Also, if that graph were even *slightly* informed by anything real there would be multiple peaks and valleys. Compromise of 1820 and then 1850, Mexican War, Kansas war, etc
Not sure what you mean here, but Jack Goldstone's PhD is, I believe, in sociology, which while closer than zoology, is still neither history nor political science, the two disciplines that actually focus on these questions on a historical basis.
Little knowledge of any kind-+no increase in tension in 1820 or around SC's fight with Jackson?? Unreal
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
