Did I say cyclical? I don't think any cycles that exist are very prominant. I think instead we have novelty, all the time, infinite novelty.
Discussion
let me refine that. The principles by whichi things behave and happen are as old as time itself. But the details about what happens always appear novel and strange in the moment. When looking back on them we can categorize and label them and they fall into the principles.
Same shit, different day.
New boss, same as the old boss.
You can't change the spots on a leopard.
You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
People never change.
I suppose you could explain the cyclical view of history as "people never learn" combined with 1 Samuel 8:3-20
There appears to be two sides to the argument on Russia, whether we should be their ally or their foe. Like most false dichotomies, the truth is not in the middle, but that both sides are correct. In this case, an old Nigerian tribal parable keeps coming to mind:
'You can try to make friends with a crocodile by throwing him rabbits every day, and he will come and wait for you every day and be tame as long as you have a rabbit to give him. But when he sees you one day with no rabbits, he will eat you.'
In regard to the West and the 'East' (Russia, India, China), we have a case of two alligators where one believes he can be friends with the other by feeding him rabbits.
The truth is, we both are nuclear powers, and we both have war machines that must continually be fed. Our peace and security is obtained through a strong state. War is strength of the state. Therefore, we seek peace through war.
I interpreted your recital of the Aristotelian typology of constitutions as having a cyclical view of history
Ok. What I was thinking is that human behavior hasn't changed since Aristotle (since long before really). And the fact that banks affect politics, or governments deceive their citizens, or suicide bombing keeps being reinvented, or whole societies go on pretending things when they all know it is not true (Putin will soon be at 120% support) all these novel-in-our-lifetime human interaction things are not really novel amongst humanity. And this BBC show is making the case that we are all being fooled on all kinds of things... and I think that we are... but just that this is the norm, not itself something novel.
Ecclesiastes comes to mind.