U say you want a revolution

  "The Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century had given people a new conception of space; Darwin radically altered our conception of time" (396, Perry, West Civ).

"The world began experiencing a media revolution unparalleled since the introduction of the Guttenberg printing press" (34, Rearview).

From Amanpour & Co., "AI Could Actually Help Rebuild the Middle Class, Says MIT Economist": "As artificial intelligence [AI] catches on in America, fears of general unemployment are growing.  Elin Musk called AI 'the most disruptive force in history' and 75% of U.S. adults believe it will lead to job losses, according to a recent Gallup pole."

Not to mention revolutionizing from workforce to retirement, for the biggest generation we had in the workfierce engine of the nation.  For a few years now, they've been reporting on hundreds a day moving on to other interests.  Revolutions are not always prompted by people waving signs and wearing colors.  And for much of history there was no such thing as such a thing without bloodshed.

  Big discoveries, big innovations, big changes seem to be some sort of changing of the guard very often, on a spectrum of blurt-words we use for complex processes of happening--war, social concerns, "work".

  Well, to hear tell, a lot of the baby boomers are set with retirement plans and pensions, etc.  Though some are trying to keep a sense of humor about living not hand-to-mouth but piggy bank to piggy bank.  Dyed in the wool conservatives I guess, won't spend $3 on a cup o'jo in order to save up the five and change for a junior burger.

  People are all over the place out this way, so mainstream trends more bulldoze than listen.

  I guess.  Better start roasting the boomers Sam Walter.  You shouldah heard my mama snicker when Betty White put out off their rockers.  A brother asked in between gulps of cereal with milk, You think it's funny ma?  Don't call me ma.  Wait 'til you see Ours, Our Old People Funnies.

  Intellectually, Perry's encapsulation of "Darwinism", especially to an early 1990's bunch of scholars, resparked long-quiet talks about eugenics, and us readers were treated to opening of discussions like the truly genius, ______________;  Menand's work that helped us see how traveling science salesmen took a bunch of skulls around the world and told people how to classify people as types-- like closer to neanderthal than Victorian.

Are there Chinese asians in America???

I'm sure of it.

But their asian-cy doesn't have the same weight as our law enforcement here.

"...a crucial advantage in the struggle for food..." Reading....

About mid-19th century Europe or what all was influencing all of those turn of the century immigrants who flooded Ellis Island in the late late 1800's during the tater famine.

  Perry says Newton's law of "universal gravitation" and Darwin's "theory of evolution" "had revolutionary consequences in areas other than science" (397), and, that EVOLUTION challenged traditional Christian belief.  Why?  "To some, it undermined the infallibility of scripture and the conviction that the Bible was indeed the word of God" (396 Western Civilization:  A Brief History).

  Darwin's theory squiggled up religious controversy.  Like any word besides the Word taps into existing and ongoing argumenting like determinism v free will.

  All that round of debate pitched fundamentalists against (v or versus) advocates of the new biology.

  "In time," Perry writes, "Religious thinkers tried to reconcile evolution with the Christian view": There was a creation and that it had a purpose (398).  "These Christian thinkers held that God was the creator and the director of the evolutionary processes" (Perry, 398).

  Talks about changes in the practice of relying on the Bible as an authority in questions of science.

  Perry cites Galileo as initiating a trend; but I think Galileo fits more squarely into the "heretic tradition" or that element of the Catholic Christian Church tradition that claimed the authority to assert itself as court, jury, and law that "burned people at the stake" for non-submission to a kind of religious totalitarianism.  And so, deemed some heretical or deviant to acceptable per dominating.

  As "positivists" had rejected Plato's tradition which had spawned talk of "metaphysics", very often history is the story of particular and large-scale argument.  And when argumentation is attached to reward and punishment, like money and life/death, the risks of outlaying beliefs can be very serious.