[mistrial9]

I have dealt with people on a large spectrum of literacy -- it is true that many people have little practical knowledge of even major international events, but a simple measure misses an important point. People care about those events to vastly different degrees; people know about those events to vastly different degrees; and then people know and care about parts of real history, in skewed and incomplete ways, as an inevitable part of the human condition.

by example -- I knew about ancient greeks partly due to interest in classics as a young intellectual.. most people at that age did not know any details of ancient greeks. But I did not care very much about military history, so even if I knew it, I didnt factor it into relevant thinking. Next, wrt middle ages history of Ottoman slave society, fluxes in military rule in North Africa, or endless tribal and cultural clashes in eastern Europe.. I just did not know many of those things, to this day. Maybe I might care, but I had literally not heard of certain things (like Mongols in Poland, or Napolean imprisoning a sitting Pope, or Vikings in Turkey) and did not know they existed, even as as active learner.

So to sum up, people may know a little bit, but do not care, therefore do not apply it to reasoning. Even people who do have greater capacity for details, may not know, due to incomplete learning and local teaching of history. Last, wikipedia really is a remarkable thing in our time.