Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zonecake to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 18 days agoDefensive Votinglocklemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square428linkfedilinkarrow-up1716arrow-down159
arrow-up1657arrow-down1imageDefensive Votinglocklemmy.blahaj.zoneUriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zonecake to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 18 days agomessage-square428linkfedilink
minus-squarecommie@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down2·17 days agoduverger’s “law” is literally a tautology and has no predictive power at all
minus-squareSeptimaeus@infosec.publinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·17 days ago duverger’s “law” The name is a historical artifact of his 1950s phrasing. It’s a tendency theorem with scope conditions. literally a tautology Cox, Riker, Lijphart, and Clark+Golder have all reformulated the law as a conditional strategic-equilibrium claim. that’s a lot of ink spilled for “literally a tautology”
duverger’s “law” is literally a tautology and has no predictive power at all
The name is a historical artifact of his 1950s phrasing. It’s a tendency theorem with scope conditions.
Cox, Riker, Lijphart, and Clark+Golder have all reformulated the law as a conditional strategic-equilibrium claim.
that’s a lot of ink spilled for “literally a tautology”