History is condemned to repeat itself

My opponent's resolution is that history is condemned to repeat itself. He is seeking to prove that there exist some sort of cycle and that this cycle must repeat. I do not contend that it is impossible for certain types of historical events to arise again. However, I oppose any suggestion that history must repeat itself or that any such cycles as those contended do in fact exist. My opponent's analysis of history as cyclical is incorrect. History is linear and not cyclical. There is no law, no principle and no force that could drive history to repeat itself in any cyclical manner. History is not condemned to repeat itself. Essentially, most of my opponent's claims are, to an extent, true. His account is, however, an extremely over-simplified version of History, picking only very few events and completely ignoring their causes and how they fit into the fabric of history. While empires have risen and fallen, there is no reason to suggest that this is part of any large-small-large-small empire cycle. There is no reason to suggest that this will continue. History is not an exact science where forensic observation under laboratory conditions could lead to any conclusions about future behaviour. My opponent is ignoring the fact that the course of our history is progressive one. Humanity has over time attained higher levels of civilisation, science and law. This is why monarchy has been largely traded in for various types of democracy. Even today, most monarchies are democratic ones with a fairly symbolic head of state. This is not a pattern that has been oscillating between democracy and authocracy. To the contrary, there has been a progressive tendency of the world's political systems to move towards a more democratic distribution of power. While it is true that we have had a period commonly referred to as the "Dark Ages", there is no evidence to suggest that such a period is ever likely to repeat itself. Nations of today have established an elaborate system of international law, making it virtually impossible for a large empire to form. Any attempt by a state to engage in a conquest would arguably meet with international sanctions, followed by possible military action aimed at bringing the situation under control. In recent times, this can be seen in Kosovo or Kuwait (Desert Storm). It may be true that ideologies do not die. However, my opponent is incorrect in claiming that fascism is popular the fomer communist bloc. Not that this is in any substantial way relevant to the debate. My opponent repeatedly says that certain things "may happen". Well, they may! Things may happen. Or they may not happen. Whether they do or not is a matter of the particular circumstances at the relevant time. Simply put, there is no way of saying what will or will not happen. One cannot possibly conclude that history is condemned to repeat itself simply because we've had some ancient empires followed by the Dark Ages. Let's also remember that even during the times of the large empires, smaller empires have existed in other parts of the world. There is no cycle, there is no rule, there is no reason to suggest that history is condemned to repeat itself.