the scholars that oppose this are exactly the same people who exhibihed. they argue that had this was a bad idea. >> to conclude, now going over by a minute. i would say the overall scholarly performance in these three episodes are not amazing. to agree the scholar would have gone a wry, the disconnect between making decisions in these circumstances, i would say that the implication is number one, we scholars frequency criticize policy makers. my paper would add weight on my part. i think we could do better. it will involve a very, very difficult trick in uniting the general with the particular which is the hardest job a scholar has to do. thank you for those cruel by fair comments. thanks to all three panelists and the papers as well, which i commend to you. we have a bit less than 1 hour. i feared we would have a lot less than 1 hour. >> if we agree that there is such a thing as a disruptive moment or political scientists talk about critical junctions. how do you know you are in one of these at the time? we choose for obvious reasonses, 1989. one questio