no, this is a classic fallacy in historiography.

things don’t just happen. we have to choose to do them, first.

your thesis ignores… every single time in history progress didnt “win out.”

saying “progress wins out eventually” is unfalsifiable because the only true constant in this universe is change. you’re like, not technically wrong but the statement is so detached from the human experience as to be meaningless. this type of analysis isn’t welcome in academia for a reason.

in other words. get out there, there’s work to do!