I claim that, if it matters for world history who wins WWII (as just one example), then the great man theory of history is straightforwardly correct.
Bismark and Hitler come to mind: if you substitute them with their counterparts from nearby worlds, the power balance of Europe, and the world, looks radically different in their time and, I think, today.
And I think it DOES matter who wins WWII (for instance), because, at minimum, which nations have the "center of mass" of power is going to influence the way the deployment of transformative AI plays out.
Which isn't to say that Trends and Forces™️ aren't also a thing.
But it seems pretty obvious that at least sometimes, the exceptional skill, or particular incompetence, of specific people in positions of power, changes how history flows.
But it seems pretty obvious that at least sometimes, the exceptional skill, or particular incompetence, of specific people in positions of power, changes how history flows.
Is this controversial?
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
