ما انسانهای مدرن، نمیتوانیم نکتهٔ کاملاً تازهای در اخلاقیات یا سیاست یا هنر کشف کنیم. سنجیدن همهچیز با قضاوت شخصی یا خرد شخصی کاری خطیر است. جان پافورد
👍16

Channel
@whynationsfail2019
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
11,547subscribers
+30 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001216091019 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @whynationsfail2019 |
| Description | 2016///۱۳۹۵ شروع مجدد: 9March2019/// اسفند ماه ۱۳۹۷ زندگی👨👩👧 مالکیت🚧 آزادی🗽 پُست آغازین کانال👇 https://t.me/whynationsfail2019/2 |
| Created | 9 March 2019 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (TGDataset) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 13 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 10 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 13 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/whynationsfail2019 |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 13 Aug 2026, 03:44 | 11,547 | +3 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 06:27 | 11,544 | +5 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 09:23 | 11,539 | +4 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 07:56 | 11,535 | +8 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 08:31 | 11,527 | +7 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 07:38 | 11,520 | +4 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 10:12 | 11,516 | -3 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 10:30 | 11,519 | +2 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 06:15 | 11,517 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 06:08 | 11,517 | first reading |
23 posts held, back to 9 June 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 16 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 10 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 23 (9 June 2026 – 10 August 2026) |
| Views total | 24,360 |
| Reactions total | 269 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 13 Aug 2026, 04:02 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 13 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
Measured directly from 1 video with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
830 reactions across 22 posts, in 2 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 78.4% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 651 | 78.4% | |
| 👎 | 179 | 21.6% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 23 of the 23 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 855reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 9 June 2026 to 10 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
ما انسانهای مدرن، نمیتوانیم نکتهٔ کاملاً تازهای در اخلاقیات یا سیاست یا هنر کشف کنیم. سنجیدن همهچیز با قضاوت شخصی یا خرد شخصی کاری خطیر است. جان پافورد
👍16
درآمد ماهانه شما حدودا چند دلار است؟
The shares total 102%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
👎15👍2
در اینجا دوستمان مهران خسروزاده مطلبی تحقیقی را نوشته است که چگونه پایهایترین اخلاقیات آکادمیک در زمینهٔ نقلقول صحیح زیر پا گذاشته میشود و تمام این کارها را هم به نام دفاع از ارزشهای انسانی انجام میدهند. متن مهران خودش به اندازهٔ کافی گویاست و نیاز به توضیحی ندارد. من میخواهم در همین رابطه به یک موضوع دیگر اشاره کنم. شما برای لحظهای فرض کنید اصلاً میزس حتی از خود هیتلر هم فاشیستتر و نژادپرستتر بود! میزس ا…
👍17
شاهکار اقتصادی عصر طلایی دونالد ترامپ که پیشتر وعده داده بود؛ Rice: +45% Cotton: +27% Wheat: +25% Wool: +21% Rubber: +20% Cheese: +16% Tea: +15% Sunflower oil: +15% Palm oil: +15% Lumber: +14% Soybeans: +13% میگفتند، Golden Age در راه است! بالاخره وعده « عصر طلایی » محقق شد، فقط یک سوءتفاهم پیش آمد؛ ما فکر میکریدم طلایی شدن یعنی رفاه، نه فاکتور خرید! مهمترین دلیل این جهش قیمتها؟ تعرفهها. قرار بود تعرفهها …
👍40👎16
منتشر شد: ⚜️برای یک آزادی جدید⚜️ نویسنده: موری نیوتن روتبارد مترجم: رامین احمدی انتشارات: نشر آماره تعداد صفحات: ۴۲۸ قطع: رقعی قیمت: ۱ میلیون و ۲۵۰ هزار تومان لیبرتارینیسم بدیل رادیکالی است که میگوید قدرت دادن به دولت نه تنها نتیجۀ مثبتی ندارد بلکه غیراخلاقی است. مورای نیوتون روتبارد، «آقای لیبرتاریَن» و «بزرگترین دشمن زندۀ دولت» لقب گرفت. بله، او پیشینیان بسیاری داشت که از آنها بهره گیرد؛ کل سنت لیبرالیسم …
👍7👎4
آیا شریعتی «شیاد» نبود؟ 📝مرتضی کاظمی هر کسی تجربهای شخصی از مواجهه با آثار علی شریعتی دارد. این نوشته، تجربه شخصی من است. از نظر من، علی شریعتی یک «شیاد» بود. منظورم از شیاد کسی است که برای پیشبرد یک هدفِ سیاسی و ایدئولوژیک؛ تاریخ، دین یا واقعیت را به گونهای بازسازی کند که مخاطب به نتیجهای برسد که با شواهد تاریخی سازگار نیست. با این تعریف، من علی شریعتی را یک شیاد میدانم. مطالعه کتابهای شریعتی در نوجوانی و پی…
👍64👎14
ما نوآیینهای مکتب روسو نیستیم؛ما حواریون ولتر نیستیم؛ هلوتیوس در ما پیشرفتی نداشته است؛ بیخدایان موعظهگران ما نیستند؛دیوانگان، قانونگذاران ما نیستند. ما قلبی از گوشت و خون داریم که در سینههامان میتپد؛ از خدا میترسیم، با احترام به پادشاهان خود مینگریم، با حرمت به کشیشان، و با احترام به اشراف. ادموند برک
👍41👎33
*محبوبیت تجارت آزاد پس از دهه گرسنگی در بریتانیا/ زنگ تاریخ* ◻️قیمت غلات در دهه ۱۸۴۰ در بریتانیا به شدت بالا رفت که قوانین غلات (تعرفههای بسیار سنگین برای واردات غلات) یکی از علل اصلی آن بود. گرسنگی ناشی از این جهش قیمت در اين دهه به «گرسنگی دهه چهل» معروف شد. این گرسنگی باعث شد بحث تجارت آزاد و لغو ممنوعیت واردات به محور اصلی بحثهای مردم بریتانیا تبدیل شود. ◻️مجله اکونومیست در همین دهه و در سال ۱۸۴۳ تأسیس شد و س…
👍29👎2
«غمی که بر جان نشست» را از طاقچه دریافت کنید https://taaghche.com/book/289493
👎6👍3
چیزی به نام چالهی فراموشی وجود ندارد. همیشه یک نفر زنده میماند تا داستان را بازگو کند. هانا آرنت
👍58👎8
بدفهمی زمانِ حالْ محصول گریزناپذیر جهل نسبت به گذشته است. مارک بلوخ
👍38
مشروطهٔ ایران حتی فاقد افسانه بنیانگذار است و بیشتر در نابودی قدرت دربار توفیق یافته است تا اینکه نظم سیاسی جدیدی را بنیاد گذاشته باشد. در حقیقت مشروطه پایان یک نهاد سیاسی کهن بود نه سرآغاز بنایی نو. مشروطه حتی نتوانست ارزشها را متحول کند و موقعیتهای اجتماعی را چندان تغییر دهد. اینکه ظلالسلطان توسط مجلس با جار و جنجال از حکومت اصفهان معزول شود و سپس به شخصیت مورد وثوق مشروطهطلبان بدل گردد یا شیخ نوری از حامی بزرگ …
👍45👎17
Showing the 12 most recent of 23 posts we hold for @whynationsfail2019. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
درآمد ماهانه شما حدودا چند دلار است؟
The shares total 102%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 9 June 2026 to 10 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Citation-graph rank — 571,525 of 1,176,251entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Named by 2 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 13 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“چرا ملتها شکست میخورند؟” (@whynationsfail2019), 11,547 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/whynationsfail2019.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.