>I'll go with the more charitable interpretation that it's a realistic observation about unspecified others

Good call. I have no issue with edgyquant.

They said:

   For sure I’m not saying there aren’t lessons, just 
   that the type of people who cherry pick a few 
   examples and take them as given proof of some 
   historical trend aren’t likely to find these lessons.

And I seconded their assessment with a bit of color.

>I think if one[2] of you could just a bit more explicitly acknowledge that you are not saying "OMG this is EXACTLY the same, America is 100% for certain going to fall just like Rome in 471!" but only "there are quite a few parallels here, here, and there, so it might well behoove us to keep an eye on this, this, and that"; and/or the other could apply this more charitable reading -- which seems to be the precise point they're arguing -- to what the first is saying, then it looks to me like there really isn't any (or at least, not much) actual disagreement between you at all. Or is it just me that's totally misreading one or both of you?

Unless I missed something, neither edgyquant nor I asserted anything even close to "OMG this is EXACTLY the same, America is 100% for certain going to fall just like Rome in 471!"

If I read them correctly, edgyquant pretty directly dismissed such "reasoning," and I never even approached saying anything close.

But you're right. Edgyquant and I seem to be (mostly) in agreement.

What's more, I didn't get the sense from edgyquant that they thought we were in conflict, nor did I contradict anything they said. Rather, I elucidated why I thought that history was valuable.

Perhaps edgyquant got a different vibe. I don't know. Perhaps they can chime in.