Slashdot Mirror


Mathematician Predicts Wave of Violence In 2020

ananyo writes "In a feature that recalls Asimov's Foundation series and 'psychohistory', Nature profiles mathematician Peter Turchin, who says he can see meaningful cycles in history. Worryingly, Turchin predicts a wave of violence in the United States in 2020. Quoting from the piece: 'To Peter Turchin, who studies population dynamics at the University of Connecticut in Storrs, the appearance of three peaks of political instability at roughly 50-year intervals is not a coincidence. For the past 15 years, Turchin has been taking the mathematical techniques that once allowed him to track predator-prey cycles in forest ecosystems, and applying them to human history. He has analyzed historical records on economic activity, demographic trends and outbursts of violence in the United States, and has come to the conclusion that a new wave of internal strife is already on its way. The peak should occur in about 2020, he says, and will probably be at least as high as the one in around 1970. 'I hope it won't be as bad as 1870,' he adds." We recently discussed similar research into predicting violence in the short term.

33 of 397 comments (clear)

  1. It won't happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    We already know the world ends on December 21, 2012, so why is he speculating about a future that won't even happen?

    1. Re:It won't happen by I(rispee_I(reme · · Score: 4, Informative
  2. Always be wary of extrapolating by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 5, Funny

    Obligatory xkcd.

    1. Re:Always be wary of extrapolating by Opyros · · Score: 5, Informative

      Forget XKCD, here is the obligatory Mark Twain quote!

    2. Re:Always be wary of extrapolating by VortexCortex · · Score: 5, Funny

      One can learn a great deal about Statistics by having multiple Statisticians perform multiple predictions based on a series of datasets with reduced sample sizes, all the way down to one sample.

      (un)Surprisingly, the prediction accuracy is only very weakly related to the dataset accuracy, and varies wildly between predictioneers. One can thus conclude that Statistics are Statistically worthless.

    3. Re:Always be wary of extrapolating by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I just wish people would apply the same skepticism with the climate change extrapolations.

      The guy in TFA is seeing some fluctuations, and despite having no idea what is causing the pattern, he is predicting the pattern will repeat.

      With climate change the warming was predicted, and climate scientists have models that explain the underlying cause for the trend. So the situation is not the same.

  3. Predicting violence is easy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It will happen.

    If you're vague enough about your predictions... you won't be wrong often.

  4. Government needs to be slapped down again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's see:

    1. "Extrajudicial" killing of US citizens
    2. Use of drones against US citizens
    3. Cameras recording activities
    4. Government snooping into private conversations

    Good damn thing there is a 2nd Amendment.

    1. Re:Government needs to be slapped down again? by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      2. Use of drones against US citizens

      This is fodder for some good discussion right here, and Id like to get something cleared up.

      I understand the importance of jury trial and the dangers of an unchecked government. I understand that the last thing you want is an executive that can freely ignore the judicial branch.

      But if a US citizen in 1942 were to go and fight for the Nazi's, and lets say he became a high-up officer-- would we not be justified in going after his life "extrajudicially"? What if a US citizen went to Mexico and became a higher up in the militarized drug cartels (lets not turn this into a discussion on drug politics)-- would we be justified in assisting in his death if capture were not an easy option? What if in those situations the choice was between his death, and him going free?

      It seems to me there IS some line for when someone takes up arms in a foreign theatre against US forces; I might be wrong here, which is why Im hoping for constructive responses which could demonstrate my error if there is one.

    2. Re:Government needs to be slapped down again? by Unnngh! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Good damn thing there is a 2nd Amendment

      I'm all for second amendment rights but I really don't think they are going to help with any of these things. If we can't live together as a society without the threat of violence, there is not much hope of maintaining a stable, long-lasting state. It is violence spurred by political unrest and divisiveness that the OP is predicting, go figure.

    3. Re:Government needs to be slapped down again? by artor3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fuck you.

      You think you can just start murdering people to fix all your problems. It doesn't work that way. You spill blood, and other people will fight back, and we'll end up in a 3rd world hellhole for a century. You will not live to see a return to peace. None of us will.

      Go visit other countries, if you think things here are bad. See hundreds of millions of people living in shantytowns. See the bribery that is required on a daily basis. See people sentenced to years in prison because they spoke out against Putin or Ahmadinejad or some other despot. See life behind the Great Firewall, or in Brazil where it is illegal to be anonymous.

      Life in the US is unbelievably wonderful compared to damn near everywhere else in the world. And you want to destroy that, because of some fucking security cameras? Well thank God for those cameras! I hope some are pointed squarely at you. As soon as you seek to end a human life, you deserve to be taken away and locked up in a place where the world can forget you.

    4. Re:Government needs to be slapped down again? by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good damn thing there is a 2nd Amendment.

      The 2nd Amendment has failed to prevent any of the things that you listed. What was your point again?

    5. Re:Government needs to be slapped down again? by FhnuZoag · · Score: 4, Insightful

      *What socialist governments* since LBJ? The tax rate pretty much dropped uniformly after the end of his presidency. It's the lack of socialism that has fucked the US up.

      http://www.personal.psu.edu/sjh11/images/mtrgraph.gif

  5. Re:completely idiotic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It just makes me so angry! If they keep up this nonsense for another 8 years, I think it might push me over the top!

  6. Buried in Last Paragraph by dcollins · · Score: 5, Interesting

    FTA: "For example, it seems that indicators of corruption increase and political cooperation unravels when a period of instability or violence is imminent."

    Why do articles like this act as though "violent acts" were the essential force, and "corruption" some kind of indicator symptom? I submit that the latter is the cause and the former the resulting symptom.

    The article includes this viewpoint, but you have to get all the way to the very last paragraph to see it -- "But perhaps revolution is the best, if not the only, remedy for severe social stresses. Gintis points out that he is old enough to have taken part in the most recent period of turbulence in the United States, which helped to secure civil rights for women and black people. Elites have been known to give power back to the majority, he says, but only under duress, to help restore order after a period of turmoil. “I'm not afraid of uprisings,” he says. “That's why we are where we are.”"

    --
    We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
  7. Re:completely idiotic by musicalmicah · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Also, where's the peak at 1820? I suppose there was the War of 1812 (lasted until 1815) but he's already excluded war from his chart.

  8. Re:There are those of us who can see it coming by rubycodez · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are full of shit and hatred. There are over 2 million muslims in the USA who have been here for over 2 decades who haven't been "biding their time" to do anything. I have over a dozen muslim friends, their families came over here to get away from the B.S. at home and to live a happy non-violent life in a prosperous country. they excel in business and academics, asian people tend to be funny that way (there is a racial stereotype for you, and it's a useful generalization)

  9. Psychohistory by clintp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course, psychohistory doesn't work if you publish the results -- so all of this is bullshit. This implies that the psychohistorical result is actually not violence in 2020, but something else that they're trying to steer us towards. Maybe this is also why we're not supposed to be aware that psychohistory exists.

    Back to the Prime Radiant, guys.

    --
    Get off my lawn.
  10. One also wonders by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why those Mayors discuss feeding their city's poor but are silent on starvation in Africa. Come off it people, you fight battles you can win. I'm sure they'd love to spread tolerance throughout the world, but their Mayors, not God-Kings.

    Speaking of religion, have you ever actually read the Christian Bible? You can do all sorts of things to people you don't like and it's A-OK. And don't forget, blacks weren't people until the last 1970, so says Mitt Romney (or at least his religion). Every religion that's existed for any length of time has terrible things in it's dogma.

    We're not pretending Islam is just fine. But we're rationalists. Give people enough food, shelter and some discretionary income for hobbies and they mellow out. Ever wonder why terrorists don't send deep cover moles over here? It's because give them a taste of good life and they stop being psychotic extremists. The challenge is giving that life to everybody. Not just the vague promise that you might have a chance at it that economic conservatives and 'libertarians' favor, but the real thing.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:One also wonders by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You say 'buying off', I say giving people a life worth living and something to lose.

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  11. Not necessarily by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People who have options don't get violent. Not in mass anyway (yes, chemical imbalances will result in the occasional horror story like that Batman shooting). That's why Canadians are so well behaved. They feel secure in their well being thanks to an extensive safety net and healthcare system. Systemic violence is an outgrowth of poverty. The single most enlightening moment of my life was when I realized that every war ever fought was over money in one form or another.

    e.g. the American South wasn't fighting to defend slavery, but to defend the right to oppress blacks. Blacks were oppressed not for the economic benefit (immigrants where cheaper and disposable) but because it gave poor white southerns someone to look down on and kept them from asking questions like, how come I barely make it through the winter while that guy sips mint juleps? Don't take my word for it, google Karl Rove and the Southern Strategy.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  12. Re:There are those of us who can see it coming by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You mean all those Muslims who, much like the Minutemen and colonists, have risen up and overthrown oppressive regimes in many middle eastern countries?

    Ha ha ha .. tell that to the non-Muslims in those countries. They were actually a lot better off under the "oppressive regimes"

  13. Income inequality. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the current trend of inequal distribution of wealth continues then yes, we will see increased violence. It's a formula that's a old as civilzation itself. Poverty is and always has been the root cause of most crime, including violent crime. (Some of it is due to crazy. You will always have jealousy, rich people shoplifting for thrills, adultery, etc)

    Whatever your political creed or economic philosophy, you must recognize that gross wealth inequality /always/ leads to bad things. It's a common theme of all civilizations world wide throughout all recorded history. It's the destroyer of nations. It's the murder of kings. It's the ruin of the most mighty military forces. It's the trigger of violent, bloody revolution where the innocent and the guilty both suffer alike.

    Our country used to recognize this function but in the last few decades it's been ignored wholesale. The rich are getting very very rich and have somehow convinced everyone that they "deserve" it while our nation stumbles with infective public programs and crumbling infrastructure. Wealth redistribution used to be a clear, stated goal of our government and now, somehow that idea is taboo and evil.

  14. Re:There are those of us who can see it coming by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And what makes you an authority on the matter? Fuck, you don't even have the balls to post with an account.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  15. Re:completely idiotic by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    His graph shows the Napoleonic wars and World War II as points of relatively low violence, so the solution is obvious: you can avoid the next wave of violence by going to war with China.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  16. Title gets it wrong by Florian+Weimer · · Score: 5, Informative

    The guy isn't a mathematician, he's an ecologist. And I find it hard to believe that by 2020, social acceptance of domestic violence (say) rises again to mid-20th century levels. The reporter's suggestion that the precise moment in time of the Egyptian revolution was predictable is likely based on a misunderstanding of Turchin's work.

    By the way, the field isn't as new as the article suggests. Steven Pinker's recent book, The Better Angels of Our Nature, collects quite a bit of quantitative research in this area, most of which does not support the existence of stable cycles.

    1. Re:Title gets it wrong by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Steven Pinker's statistics very clearly show the violence has gone down steadily over the millennia. By orders of magnitude. Steadily. His range goes from incessant tribal warfare, inter societal plunder and robbery, national wars, global wars, regular crime, ... and extends it to racial discrimination, gender discrimination, acceptance of gays ... etc etc.

      Pinker only briefly touches upon the reduction in violence before recorded history. For that we can look at Nicholas Wade in "Before the Dawn". The gradual thinning of human skull from 200000 years ago to 75000 years ago shows the reduction in violence. (The older skulls were "robust" and the modern skulls were "gracile"). Basically skulls less able to withstand thumping blows from clubs and stones actually survived and thrived.

      So the general arc of violence has been on the downward path. There would be short term fluctuations. But 2020s will not be like 1970s. No way. Steven Levitt first broke the taboo and mentioned the link between legalization of abortion in 1970 and the reduction in violence in 1990s. 2020s will be when the grand children of unwanted babies aborted in 1970s will be missing from the crime age pool. Very unlikely we are going to see any spike in violence in 2020.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  17. Re:There are those of us who can see it coming by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The muslims in the west are just biding their time until they are strong enough to act like muslims in the middle east.

    Heh.

    One wonders why the Mayors of Chicago and Boston go off on fundamentalist Christian Chick-Fil-A, which voices opposition to gay marriage, but are silent against fundamentalist Islam extermination of gays themselves.

    Probably because the Christians won't kill 'em.

    Just ask Theo Van Gogh.

    Oh, wait. You can't. Muzzies actually KILLED him.

    Wonder if the Piss Christ artist has the balls to do a Shit Koran?

    Yeah, we know the answer to that, don't we.

    Very true. The thing that gets me is that everyone knows that Islam is evil and violent, they know that they cannot criticism them for opposing gay marriage and so on, but they all pretend that Islam is just fine because they are sheep following the "PC" herd.

    Let me rephrase that to make ti a bit more on-topic:

    Very true. The thing that gets me is that everyone knows that humans are evil and violent, they know that they cannot criticize them for opposing gay marriage and so on, but they all pretend that humanity is just fine because they are sheep following the "PC" herd.

    Point being: people are greedy and violent and abuse power structures. The degree to which this happens in a given society seems to go in cyclic 2-generational waves, and this mathematician has found a way to model it. The rhetoric in this thread ascribing human faults to specific people groups (faith based or ethic based) and pointing out specific failings inside these groups is totally beside the point. If there were no non-white muslims living in the US, there'd be someone else, and the rhetoric would be almost identical. Eventually, the overall level of societal dissatisfaction with the way these issues are resolved by "peaceable" means will come to a head, and people will look to physical solutions. This will carry on until there is a majority formed who share strong core societal values that they then shove down the throats of everyone else, at which point "peace" returns and "everyone" is happy.

    They say history repeats itself, and in this case they (and this mathematician) appear to be spot-on.

    What these models don't factor in especially well though, is population density. I'd like to see this guy do a slightly more complex model that ties in the affects of density on the level and duration of the violence.

  18. contradictory opinion by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Informative
    From the article, here is the opinion of historians who disagree with this guy, probably worth reading:

    Cliodynamics is viewed with deep scepticism by most academic historians, who tend to see history as a complex stew of chance, individual foibles and one-of-a-kind situations that no broad-brush 'science of history' will ever capture.....Most think that phenomena such as political instability should be understood by constructing detailed narratives of what actually happened — always looking for patterns and regularities, but never forgetting that each outbreak emerged from a particular time and place.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  19. Re:completely idiotic by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

    The 1970 spike was more violence against fashion. Did you see those bell bottoms and sideburns?!?!

  20. Re:completely idiotic by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since people going totally apeshit doesn't happen for no reason, I'd say it's more reason based than some natural recurring phenomenon based on time.

    It's called "mortality". Given enough time, the memory of the previous time a bad idea was tried fades, and the new generation does it all over again. How long it takes depends on the depth of the trauma and how fast the nasty effects take hold: for example, the recent rise of Western police states is due to the memory of Nazism finally fading, while it was Reagan who began ignoring the lessons of the Great Depression, yet it took until now for deregulation to finally lead to a new economic collapse.

    Basically, you get a new Great War as soon as those who survived the previous one are too frail to prevent it anymore. Or earlier, if enough charisma and stupidity are involved.

    --

    Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  21. Short answer no by aepervius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Long answer : back in 1942 there was such things as an official war against germany. No matter how your governement , there is no such a things as a recognized war against a *word* (war agaisnt drug, war agaisnt terrorism) just like the made up "illegal fighter". The simple truth is that terrorism is a judicial problem (aka non military) but your governement saw the occasion to use new toy in real theater instead of training zone/firing range.

    So we are speaking of assassination(the correct word in absence of due process) of citizen from your (or other) country.

    *Shrug* . I don't expect that to change any time soon. Your military right now is probably creaming in their pants just as the amount of data they got about their toy used and potential advance.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  22. Re:Regulation caused the Great Depression by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Here's the basic story of the Great Depression, which is very similar to the story of the more recent financial crisis.
    1. Times were good in the 1920's on Wall St. People could and did make good money trading stocks.
    2. A bubble began to form, with financial companies willing to extend credit in order to buy stocks. For instance, you could buy a $1 stock for 10 cents and owe your banker for the other 90 cents. They were willing to do this because the stocks were constantly going up, so this was a good investment.
    3. Of course, the stocks were going up because people were entering the market with only 10% of the value of the stock in hand, which meant they could pay 10 times what they previously could.
    4. Eventually, somebody discovered that the underlying assets were worth, at most, 10% of what they were priced at in the market. When this became public knowledge, everyone tried to get out at the same time.
    5. End result: Crash. And when one business crashes, their stock, which was considered good, is now worthless, so businesses holding their stock also crash, so it cascades through the system leaving things worse than if the Crimson Permanent Assurance had hit them.

    Replace "stocks" with "mortgage backed securities", fast forward 70 years or so, and the same thing happened. It happens any time that a con man can successfully make worthless pieces of paper look like representations of valuable property. And yes, it could conceivably happen that the pieces of paper that say "One Dollar" on them will also become worthless - if it does, you want to have land and a team of people who will help you defend it.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/