well, this hints at much deeper subtleties than just naming governments. how are we to delineate what counts? if we say that a temporary decline in government tyranny doesn’t count then the original assertion can be made true by choosing long enough time periods.
thus we are knee deep in the legitimacy problem: what successions can be counted as a continuation of the previous regime and which are not?
100%? There has never been an underzealous government? Not that I’m saying I can name one.
well, this hints at much deeper subtleties than just naming governments. how are we to delineate what counts? if we say that a temporary decline in government tyranny doesn’t count then the original assertion can be made true by choosing long enough time periods.
thus we are knee deep in the legitimacy problem: what successions can be counted as a continuation of the previous regime and which are not?
He was rounding to 3 significant digits.