[trough]

My own bias as a person interested and well read in history as a science wants me to agree but there is a selection bias at work that the authors of this study do not address to my satisfaction: We are talking about PUBLISHED language. On the one hand, published and distributed works are only a fraction of the written literary works of an era and therefore only represents a commercially viable subset. On the other hand, the commercial viability is determined by the demand in the market of readers which would suggest that their language analysis could be more sound than not.

I THINK I’m reading more and more abstracts that show similarities between our current societal climate and that of the late 20s/early 30s of the last century. It will be academically interesting to see what the continuation of the current inflation and energy crisis which disproportionally hits the lower two thirds of the western populace causes in the next 2 years. The road to a substantial outburst - be it revolutions as a form of inward-directed change or god beware war - is paved at least.

[darkerside]

The bar for publication has dropped dramatically in the past two decades

[hahaitsfunny]

100%

[Sxubas]

I think this section addresses that sort of bias (a limitation of the used data):

>The availability of large-scale historical records of published languages going back centuries may provide a unique opportunity for the quantitative investigation of important cultural and linguistic dynamics (“culturomics”) (21), while acknowledging limitations with respect to verifying hypotheses and testing the causal mechanisms that underlie any observations from these data.

I enjoyed that overall the article does not try to sell the idea that there is/was an actual change in the society, but rather showing how this analysis may be an indicator of that and inciting future work on the topic.

[permo-w]

what would be a better subset then? if you take the set of all computer-indexed written text, you would end up simply measuring the rise of the capacity of the unwashed masses to air their thoughts in permanent, public, usually informal form.

[winnit]

Could you share any of those abstracts? I would be intrigued to read some research that highlights similarities between now and a century ago.

[hahaitsfunny]

Yeah, well much of accepted history from that time is up for debate - from who funded the Germans and Soviets and their ties to industry and banking in the US and Europe. The current energy and inflation crises are caused in parts by similar global forces pursuing agendas today. I don't think revolutions will be forms of inward-directed change, but more as a result of financing by global elites similar to how Lenin and Trotsky's revolutions were funded by wealthy financiers in the US and London. Kennedy's father also helped fund the Germany war machine.

As you pointed out - we find ourselves in a similar political climate but not because of the people who elected these governments but because of the globalists who still run them behind the scenes, just like they were doing prior, during and after WWII.

[penguino_pi]

I would love to read more about the above claims.

Can you please point me in the direction of some foundational books?