In one of twenty cases when we put economic sanctions on some country to change its regime, the regime actually changed. Therefore, economic sanctions sometimes work.
brimstoneSalad wrote:That said, even 5% is saying something and if you look at WHY that is you'll see a clear trend.
Do I even need to point out the fallacies in this reasoning?
1)Broken Window Fallacy
It's easy to underestimate the damage the economic sanctions had done to the citizens, because we don't see what would have happened if the economic sanctions weren't there. For all we know, the regime would have changed without the economic sanctions, but in a less painful way.
2)Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy
The "study" you linked, and I assume other such studies are no better, is using the same dataset to formulate the hypothesis and to test it. That's not how science works, the way to test the hypothesis is to make predictions based on it and see how often they come true. Seriously, how can you even calculate the p-value here?
It's an attempt to derive general laws from what are, essentialy, historical anecdotes, especially since the number of "successful" economic sanctions is very low.
4)Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
Why assume the regime changed because of the sanctions, and not for the reasons unrelated to it, or even in spite of it?
5)Confusing correlation with causation.
So, the study you linked to claims the economic sanctions are more likely to work in democratic societies. However, the statistics cited to support that can also be interpreted as saying that regimes are more likely to change if they are slightly more democratic, irrespective of the economic sanctions.
brimstoneSalad wrote:Again, read the short paper I linked.
Fine, I've found a way to view PDFs on this mobile phone (Google Drive app, which I had pre-installed, can open them, you need to download a PDF, then move it to Google Drive using Samsung My Files, then let the synchronisation happen over the cellular network in the Settings, and then you can view the PDF by opening it in the Google Drive app. Just in case this helps anybody...).
I just don't understand how you can dismiss my linguistic theories as not even worth considering, yet some obviously even less scientific "study" should, according to you, inform the government actions. From my perspective, it's just a bunch of mostly irrelevant statistics which are probably not even accurate, and no attempt whatsoever to calculate the p-value, or establish any form of rigour.
brimstoneSalad wrote:Israel is one of those very rare situations where sanctions would probably work if you look at past cases.
Even if that "study" is telling the truth, hardly so, because the actions of the Israeli government are motivated by religion (they want to be able to build a temple in Jerusalem, which happens to be an important city in Palestine), and that study says economic sanctions are almost powerless against religiously motivated regimes.
I can't spend this much of my time on-line, I've spent 1200 MB of cellular data in the last 15 days, and I only have 1500 MB per month. I've watched only one or two videos (it's also not much pleasure to watch videos over the slow cellular connection), but browsing Quora and Britannica (full of large images) also appears to be prohibitively expensive. Connecting my computer to the cellular network in order to upload some binary files onto GitHub also takes unexpected amount of data, not sure if that's because of the GitHub website containing a lot of images or because of some background apps running on my computer sending noise. Anyway, don't expect me to respond very soon.