I saw "Looper" this weekend, and there's a bit of dialogue where Jeff Daniels, from 2077, criticizes Joseph-Gordon Levitt for wearing a tie, calling it "a rediculous 20th Century affectation." The irony is that Daniels' clothes are pretty clearly Victorian inspired-everything comes back.
Started wondering what the appeal of the 20th Century would be for someone from Looper's 2044 world. It looks like the American economy collapsed about a decade ago, resulting in mass deindustrialization and possibly the collapse of the Government in it's recognizable form. The 20th Century's social welfare state and social stability would almost certainly appeal to a youth whose early life was defined by social chaos that's almost impossible for Westerners to imagine.
That got me thinking about common perceptions of the 19th Century. The image is one of repression-of political, sexual, social and cultural movements stifled by decaying social mores and authoritarian co-opting of nationalist sentiment. In 120 years, will people talk about the crazed follies of the 20th Century-Totalitarianism, say-or will they talk about the return of China under Deng Xiao Ping? There's a lot of guesswork about the future involved in this, I suppose, but I still think it's an interesting topic.
We built way more efficient ways to kill each other. That's a characteristic, right?
Quote from: HVC on October 01, 2012, 07:43:11 AM
We built way more efficient ways to kill each other. That's a characteristic, right?
name a century where we didn't build more efficient way of killing each other?
21st - drones
20th - tanks, planes, aircraft carriers
19th - rifles, machine guns, battlships
18th - ring bayonette, iron cannons
17th - plug bayonette, bronze cannons, muskets
16th - arquebus
15th - cannon
14th - plate mail, longbows, halberds
etc.etc.... If anything the defining characteristic of the 20th century will be the Ideology. The century starts out with Communism rising from the ashes of Autocracy, through Fascism to the re-rise of ancient scepticism in post-modernism through to the end of history to the two reactions to the end of history in fundamentalist islam and multiculturalism.
Quote from: Viking on October 01, 2012, 07:50:13 AM
20th - tanks, planes, aircraft carriers
I think you're missing an important invention or two there.
Quote from: HVC on October 01, 2012, 07:43:11 AM
We built way more efficient ways to kill each other. That's a characteristic, right?
I agree with you, HVC, even if Viking equates the introduction of industrialization principles to mass killing with the invention of the ring bayonet.
The 21st century hasn't found a more efficient way to kill as compared to the 20th. You've forgotten about the atom bomb.
Quote from: Syt on October 01, 2012, 08:02:58 AM
Quote from: Viking on October 01, 2012, 07:50:13 AM
20th - tanks, planes, aircraft carriers
I think you're missing an important invention or two there.
meh, anything that doesn't kill more than 200k people or isn't decisive in a war doesn't make my list.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 01, 2012, 08:07:28 AM
Quote from: HVC on October 01, 2012, 07:43:11 AM
We built way more efficient ways to kill each other. That's a characteristic, right?
I agree with you, HVC, even if Viking equates the introduction of industrialization principles to mass killing with the invention of the ring bayonet.
Of all the things on my list that you could have used that criticism on the ring bayonette is the worst. For the simple reason that the ring bayonette made line infantry drill possible and was the first vital step on the way to industrialized war. You no longer needed warriors to fight, you could make do with dull russian serfs or prussian recruits beaten to a inch of their life so as to fear their officers more than the enemy and drilled to exhaustion to act as a machine on the battlefield.
Eh, they had that before. They just had guys hold big long sticks to support the gunners.
I'd say that the defining characteristics of the 20th Century in retrospect will be the growth of mass communications and pop culture. There were elements of the former going back at least to the telegraph, and of the latter arguably going back even further, but they both really developed hugely in the 20th Century. (I'd say that mass communications was the more important of the two, and in fact pop culture as we know it probably couldn't exist without it.)
Quote from: Queequeg on October 01, 2012, 12:51:20 AM
In 120 years, will people talk about the crazed follies of the 20th Century-Totalitarianism, say-or will they talk about the return of China under Deng Xiao Ping? There's a lot of guesswork about the future involved in this, I suppose, but I still think it's an interesting topic.
If things fall apart the 20th century will be remembered as the golden age when standards of living were high. School kids will also wonder how anyone could live without the internet.
Quote from: dps on October 01, 2012, 11:31:27 AM
I'd say that the defining characteristics of the 20th Century in retrospect will be the growth of mass communications and pop culture. There were elements of the former going back at least to the telegraph, and of the latter arguably going back even further, but they both really developed hugely in the 20th Century. (I'd say that mass communications was the more important of the two, and in fact pop culture as we know it probably couldn't exist without it.)
Yep. Nobody will care about the wars and the deaths as time goes on. These are the main things.
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 11:38:16 AM
Quote from: dps on October 01, 2012, 11:31:27 AM
I'd say that the defining characteristics of the 20th Century in retrospect will be the growth of mass communications and pop culture. There were elements of the former going back at least to the telegraph, and of the latter arguably going back even further, but they both really developed hugely in the 20th Century. (I'd say that mass communications was the more important of the two, and in fact pop culture as we know it probably couldn't exist without it.)
Yep. Nobody will care about the wars and the deaths as time goes on. These are the main things.
They will if we have a nuclear war that destroys civilization as we know it.
Quote from: Queequeg on October 01, 2012, 12:51:20 AM
That got me thinking about common perceptions of the 19th Century. The image is one of repression-of political, sexual, social and cultural movements stifled by decaying social mores and authoritarian co-opting of nationalist sentiment.
That feels like a very European perspective on the 19th century.
My perception of the 19th century was more one of expansion, exploration, advancement. It was the era of the frontier, the gold rush, the colonial expansion, wiping white spaces off the map.
Quote from: Barrister on October 01, 2012, 11:41:47 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 01, 2012, 12:51:20 AM
That got me thinking about common perceptions of the 19th Century. The image is one of repression-of political, sexual, social and cultural movements stifled by decaying social mores and authoritarian co-opting of nationalist sentiment.
That feels like a very European perspective on the 19th century.
My perception of the 19th century was more one of expansion, exploration, advancement. It was the era of the frontier, the gold rush, the colonial expansion, wiping white spaces off the map.
You mean making spaces on the map white dont you?
Quote from: dps on October 01, 2012, 11:31:27 AM
I'd say that the defining characteristics of the 20th Century in retrospect will be the growth of mass communications and pop culture. There were elements of the former going back at least to the telegraph, and of the latter arguably going back even further, but they both really developed hugely in the 20th Century. (I'd say that mass communications was the more important of the two, and in fact pop culture as we know it probably couldn't exist without it.)
The 19th certainly had "pop culture". From newspaper serials to popular music distributed by sheet music, there was a widespread popular culture.
Quote from: Barrister on October 01, 2012, 11:41:47 AM
My perception of the 19th century was more one of expansion, exploration, advancement. It was the era of the frontier, the gold rush, the colonial expansion, wiping white spaces off the map.
My suspicion is that Indians, Chinese, etc. would not agree with you. Assuming the BRIC end up converging to or close to first world standards of living, the 20th century will probably be about a return to a "normal" global economy, and not one dominated by Northern Europe.
The desire to change the world and the belief that one could.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 01, 2012, 02:26:46 PM
The desire to change the world and the belief that one could.
And killing millions in the attempt.
Astonishing progress in scientific understanding and conversely massive active rejection of that which contradicts the individual's and society's prejudices.
Quote from: mongers on October 01, 2012, 02:40:47 PM
Astonishing progress in scientific understanding and conversely massive active rejection of that which contradicts the individual's and society's prejudices.
What do you mean by "the individual's" prejudices and how are they adopted on a massive scale?
I imagine that 20th century will be remembered as the Age Ideology, where nations devoted themselves entirely to one strange ideal or another. Typically with catastrophic results.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 02:47:04 PM
I imagine that 20th century will be remembered as the Age Ideology, where nations devoted themselves entirely to one strange ideal or another. Typically with catastrophic results.
How is that different from other ages?
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 01, 2012, 02:49:01 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 02:47:04 PM
I imagine that 20th century will be remembered as the Age Ideology, where nations devoted themselves entirely to one strange ideal or another. Typically with catastrophic results.
How is that different from other ages?
There wasn't a great deal of ideological states in the 10th century.
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 01, 2012, 02:44:47 PM
Quote from: mongers on October 01, 2012, 02:40:47 PM
Astonishing progress in scientific understanding and conversely massive active rejection of that which contradicts the individual's and society's prejudices.
What do you mean by "the individual's" prejudices and how are they adopted on a massive scale?
Late 20th/ early 21st century economics allow more than a few individuals to live in massively delusional lifestyles, whereby much of what they 'randomly' decide is correct and reject out of hand the science as plain wrong.
For instance, every 3rd or 4th parent thinks of themselves an expert on immunology and the scientists involved aren't just wrong, but are actively conspiring against them/society/only doing it for big business etc.
Look at the new orthodoxies in many areas of modern life ie organic food/farming is always best, and yet paradoxically if instituted worldwide, would really lead to half the world starving and dying.
In extreme cases, I can think of people who reject almost all sciences as corrupt and yet never reject any of its fruits.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 02:52:33 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 01, 2012, 02:49:01 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 02:47:04 PM
I imagine that 20th century will be remembered as the Age Ideology, where nations devoted themselves entirely to one strange ideal or another. Typically with catastrophic results.
How is that different from other ages?
There wasn't a great deal of ideological states in the 10th century.
Thats because there were no "states" in the 10th century :P
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 02:47:04 PM
I imagine that 20th century will be remembered as the Age Ideology, where nations devoted themselves entirely to one strange ideal or another. Typically with catastrophic results.
I seriously doubt that. People will remember the 20th century depending on how it impacts their current world. Those catastrophic results are not impacting them so they will probably not think of that. Similar with the failed ideologies of the 20th century. The advances of information technology and the like on the other hand will be remembered because they will still be around impacting human life.
Quote from: Barrister on October 01, 2012, 11:41:47 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 01, 2012, 12:51:20 AM
That got me thinking about common perceptions of the 19th Century. The image is one of repression-of political, sexual, social and cultural movements stifled by decaying social mores and authoritarian co-opting of nationalist sentiment.
That feels like a very European perspective on the 19th century.
My perception of the 19th century was more one of expansion, exploration, advancement. It was the era of the frontier, the gold rush, the colonial expansion, wiping white spaces off the map.
when the non-european world defined itself as "the third world" it wasn't saying what it was, it was attempting to claim that it wasn't one of the two european ones. I think the history will be more eurocentric in our history books than the 3rd bc was mid-east centric. It is the point of time in history where one little part of the world dominated the rest more totally than at any other time since.
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 03:04:52 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 02:47:04 PM
I imagine that 20th century will be remembered as the Age Ideology, where nations devoted themselves entirely to one strange ideal or another. Typically with catastrophic results.
I seriously doubt that. People will remember the 20th century depending on how it impacts their current world. Those catastrophic results are not impacting them so they will probably not think of that. Similar with the failed ideologies of the 20th century. The advances of information technology and the like on the other hand will be remembered because they will still be around impacting human life.
Well, it will be just as much an age of ideology as the Industrial Revolution was an age of Industry, the Enlightenment was an age of science and the Reformation was an age of religion. Ideology is the object, cause and mediating influence on all events of the 20th century in addition to involving itself in all aspects of it regardless.
People will remember the 20th century as the age of simultaeneous progress and terrible human disasters. The great totalitarian regimes and the world wars will stand out; people will no more forget Hitler, Stalin and Mao than they have forgotten Ghengis Khan.
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:17:24 PM
People will remember the 20th century as the age of simultaeneous progress and terrible human disasters. The great totalitarian regimes and the world wars will stand out; people will no more forget Hitler, Stalin and Mao than they have forgotten Ghengis Khan.
I tend to agree, but I've seen statistics showing that the 20th century was one of the safest and least prone to violence, even with what seems to us to be rather significant disasters.
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:17:24 PM
forgotten Ghengis Khan.
There is a pretty popular book about him that came out recently that was practically praising the guy. So maybe in the future they will be studying how Hitler and Stalin made all the progress possible or something.
Genghis Khan was pretty spectacularly successful from a medieval Mongol point of view.
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 03:04:52 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 02:47:04 PM
I imagine that 20th century will be remembered as the Age Ideology, where nations devoted themselves entirely to one strange ideal or another. Typically with catastrophic results.
I seriously doubt that. People will remember the 20th century depending on how it impacts their current world. Those catastrophic results are not impacting them so they will probably not think of that. Similar with the failed ideologies of the 20th century. The advances of information technology and the like on the other hand will be remembered because they will still be around impacting human life.
We don't remember the 12th century as the age of windmills. We remember it as as the age of Crusades. I think the other thing that people will remember about the 20th century is the fall of Europe.
Seeing as how we are still at the end of the last glories of the 20th century, nobody knows yet. We are like the diviners in 1912 trying to figure out how they would be viewed by an unknown future.
Quote from: alfred russel on October 01, 2012, 03:25:52 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:17:24 PM
People will remember the 20th century as the age of simultaeneous progress and terrible human disasters. The great totalitarian regimes and the world wars will stand out; people will no more forget Hitler, Stalin and Mao than they have forgotten Ghengis Khan.
I tend to agree, but I've seen statistics showing that the 20th century was one of the safest and least prone to violence, even with what seems to us to be rather significant disasters.
Advances in medical science, nutrition, the "Green Revolution" in farming, etc., I would assume saved more lives than died in the wars and purges of the 20th. Also, everyday life got considerably less violent for most people. Hence, simutaneous disasters and progress.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 03:44:14 PM
We don't remember the 12th century as the age of windmills. We remember it as as the age of Crusades.
We do not remember the Great Northern War, the War of Spanish Succession, the zillions of other horrible things that happened in the 18th century. We remember the Enlightenment and all the technological and political changes that followed. Because they actually impact us.
Quote from: PDH on October 01, 2012, 03:44:51 PM
Seeing as how we are still at the end of the last glories of the 20th century, nobody knows yet. We are like the diviners in 1912 trying to figure out how they would be viewed by an unknown future.
OMG, PDH predicts Aug.2014 = WW3. :(
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 03:26:27 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:17:24 PM
forgotten Ghengis Khan.
There is a pretty popular book about him that came out recently that was practically praising the guy. So maybe in the future they will be studying how Hitler and Stalin made all the progress possible or something.
People in Asia sometimes think of Hitler as 'that guy who failed to unite Europe and crush the Russians. Pity.' ;)
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 03:47:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 03:44:14 PM
We don't remember the 12th century as the age of windmills. We remember it as as the age of Crusades.
We do not remember the Great Northern War, the War of Spanish Succession, the zillions of other horrible things that happened in the 18th century. We remember the Enlightenment and all the technological and political changes that followed. Because they actually impact us.
I imagine the Russians and Swedes remember the Great Northern War. In the US we sorta remember the American Revolution, and I think the French Revolution looms fairly large in mindset of the West.
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 03:47:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 03:44:14 PM
We don't remember the 12th century as the age of windmills. We remember it as as the age of Crusades.
We do not remember the Great Northern War, the War of Spanish Succession, the zillions of other horrible things that happened in the 18th century. We remember the Enlightenment and all the technological and political changes that followed. Because they actually impact us.
One thing you are forgetting is how very appealing the Nazis are as villians. In those 18th century wars, there is little to memorably tell the antagonists apart - sure the Sun King often acted like a would-be Hitler, particularly towards the Hugenots, but he did not have the Nazi's sense of deliberate menace. I'm willing to bet Nazis as stock villians will persist for centuries. ;)
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 03:47:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 03:44:14 PM
We don't remember the 12th century as the age of windmills. We remember it as as the age of Crusades.
We do not remember the Great Northern War, the War of Spanish Succession, the zillions of other horrible things that happened in the 18th century. We remember the Enlightenment and all the technological and political changes that followed. Because they actually impact us.
I dunno, seems Scandis on the board bring up the Great Northern War a lot and Americans certainly remember the Revolution. One doesn't typically need to delve as deeply into history to know the broad geopolitical strokes of an era as they do the technological and social changes.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 03:50:40 PM
I imagine the Russians and Swedes remember the Great Northern War. In the US we sorta remember the American Revolution, and I think the French Revolution looms fairly large in mindset of the West.
Yeah hardly anybody knows a damn thing about the American Revolution or French Revolution themselves. They remember the political ideas that came out of it. And I am sure Jews will always remember WWII but I thought we were talking about how it will be remembered generally. if you bring up the 18th century I doubt even a Swede will go 'Ah! The Century of the Great Northern War!' rather, presuming this Swede has an opinion at all on the 18th century, will be talking about the Enlightenment and the Revolutions both political and economic.
I just think we are too close to the mass killings of the 20th century. I just think the impact on human life and technology and so forth were so massive they will vastly overshadow all the events that today, since they are still in living memory, we view as so important.
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:51:57 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 03:47:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 03:44:14 PM
We don't remember the 12th century as the age of windmills. We remember it as as the age of Crusades.
We do not remember the Great Northern War, the War of Spanish Succession, the zillions of other horrible things that happened in the 18th century. We remember the Enlightenment and all the technological and political changes that followed. Because they actually impact us.
One thing you are forgetting is how very appealing the Nazis are as villians. In those 18th century wars, there is little to memorably tell the antagonists apart - sure the Sun King often acted like a would-be Hitler, particularly towards the Hugenots, but he did not have the Nazi's sense of deliberate menace. I'm willing to bet Nazis as stock villians will persist for centuries. ;)
We sorta remember the guillotine as the symbol of a bloodthirsty bureaucracy.
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 03:57:00 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 03:50:40 PM
I imagine the Russians and Swedes remember the Great Northern War. In the US we sorta remember the American Revolution, and I think the French Revolution looms fairly large in mindset of the West.
Yeah hardly anybody knows a damn thing about the American Revolution or French Revolution themselves. They remember the political ideas that came out of it. And I am sure Jews will always remember WWII but I thought we were talking about how it will be remembered generally. if you bring up the 18th century I doubt even a Swede will go 'Ah! The Century of the Great Northern War!' rather, presuming this Swede has an opinion at all on the 18th century, will be talking about the Enlightenment and the Revolutions both political and economic.
Wait, what? You sorta lost on the first sentence. I was under the impression that the political ideas of both Revolutions predated the revolutions themselves. And Hell, in the US we have a hard time agreeing what the American Revolution was actually about.
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:51:57 PM
One thing you are forgetting is how very appealing the Nazis are as villians. In those 18th century wars, there is little to memorably tell the antagonists apart - sure the Sun King often acted like a would-be Hitler, particularly towards the Hugenots, but he did not have the Nazi's sense of deliberate menace. I'm willing to bet Nazis as stock villians will persist for centuries. ;)
Sometimes I wonder how Louis thought about his Grandfather being one of them before he said a mass for Paris.
Anyway that is a good point. The cultural use of the Nazis as a stock villian, being both fantastically evil and stylish at the same time, wil probably last for a really long time. It seems hard to believe anybody will come along who fit that role so perfectly.
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:51:57 PM
One thing you are forgetting is how very appealing the Nazis are as villians. In those 18th century wars, there is little to memorably tell the antagonists apart - sure the Sun King often acted like a would-be Hitler, particularly towards the Hugenots, but he did not have the Nazi's sense of deliberate menace. I'm willing to bet Nazis as stock villians will persist for centuries. ;)
Also the 20th century has huge mass media cultural records of historical events - I can't think of any comparison in previous eras. If the Jacobeans had film I'm pretty sure we'd have a stronger impression of insidious Jesuits undermining the Commonweal.
So one other reason the Nazis will be remembered is because of how important they've become in our culture. Just think of the number of films that include the Nazis, or people inspired by them. That record is, I think, the first imprint of the Western memory.
Also I think the question's silly. There's almost never a global answer for this sort of question (one exception I can think of is the Mongols and the Black Death). It's a bit like the BBC's current series on the history of the world :blink:
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 04:02:59 PM
Wait, what? You sorta lost on the first sentence. I was under the impression that the political ideas of both Revolutions predated the revolutions themselves.
I thought we were talking about memory here.
QuoteAnd Hell, in the US we have a hard time agreeing what the American Revolution was actually about.
And yeah right I must have missed that debate last 4th of July.
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:51:57 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 03:47:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 03:44:14 PM
We don't remember the 12th century as the age of windmills. We remember it as as the age of Crusades.
We do not remember the Great Northern War, the War of Spanish Succession, the zillions of other horrible things that happened in the 18th century. We remember the Enlightenment and all the technological and political changes that followed. Because they actually impact us.
One thing you are forgetting is how very appealing the Nazis are as villians.
Yeah but the Indiana Jones movies wont have much relevance in 120 years.
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 01, 2012, 04:13:32 PM
Yeah but the Indiana Jones movies wont have much relevance in 120 years.
I'm willing to bet there will still be a shitload of historical fiction featuring Nazis in the foreseeable future. They make the perfect fodder - totally evil, and wierd with it; plus, stylish uniforms.
Look at how much coverage the goddam Knights Templar gets these days in popular fiction. And they weren't nearly as freaky as the Nazis. :lol:
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:46:38 PM
Advances in medical science, nutrition, the "Green Revolution" in farming, etc., I would assume saved more lives than died in the wars and purges of the 20th. Also, everyday life got considerably less violent for most people. Hence, simutaneous disasters and progress.
But were the disasters even that bad? Sure there were high numbers because populations were higher, but was WWI/WWII worse for Germany than the 30 years war? Were they worse for Europe than the Napoleonic Wars? War became mechanized in a way it hadn't before, but I'm not certain that the experience of war became quantifably worse on a per capita basis. It also became less common.
I'll give you that Nazis as the stock villians will probably last for the forseeable future.
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 04:18:37 PM
Look at how much coverage the goddam Knights Templar gets these days in popular fiction. And they weren't nearly as freaky as the Nazis. :lol:
Meh, the templars were a fad at best that has already run its course. Hitler screwed up the world for less than a decade. He might be an answer on a history test in the future but chances are there will be a more recent global atrocity to keep people's attention between then and now.
Quote from: alfred russel on October 01, 2012, 04:24:23 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:46:38 PM
Advances in medical science, nutrition, the "Green Revolution" in farming, etc., I would assume saved more lives than died in the wars and purges of the 20th. Also, everyday life got considerably less violent for most people. Hence, simutaneous disasters and progress.
But were the disasters even that bad? Sure there were high numbers because populations were higher, but was WWI/WWII worse for Germany than the 30 years war? Were they worse for Europe than the Napoleonic Wars? War became mechanized in a way it hadn't before, but I'm not certain that the experience of war became quantifably worse on a per capita basis. It also became less common.
I'll give you that Nazis as the stock villians will probably last for the forseeable future.
Depends on how you measure "worse".
Certainly, WW2 ended with large parts of eastern Europe essentially ethnically cleansed of Germans - that's pretty significant; I don't recall (for example) the Napoleonic Wars having that effect anywhere. But OTOH the 30 years war resulted in demographic collapse in Germany.
In absolute numbers, the world wars etc. surely killed more people. And the experience of totalitarianism was probably more complete than even in the French Revolution, due to technological and organizational advances.
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 04:49:47 PM
And the experience of totalitarianism was probably more complete than even in the French Revolution, due to technological and organizational advances.
I am just going to presume you are talking about evil autocratic Kings and Tsars here.
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 01, 2012, 04:29:26 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 04:18:37 PM
Look at how much coverage the goddam Knights Templar gets these days in popular fiction. And they weren't nearly as freaky as the Nazis. :lol:
Meh, the templars were a fad at best that has already run its course. Hitler screwed up the world for less than a decade. He might be an answer on a history test in the future but chances are there will be a more recent global atrocity to keep people's attention between then and now.
It's already been almost 70 years - we are more than 1/3 of the total time from the fall of the Nazis to your 120 years in the future from now. No lessening of interest in the Nazis yet.
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 04:49:47 PM
Certainly, WW2 ended with large parts of eastern Europe essentially ethnically cleansed of Germans - that's pretty significant;
I am not sure to whom that would be signficant in 2012 never mind 2132.
QuoteI don't recall (for example) the Napoleonic Wars having that effect anywhere. But OTOH the 30 years war resulted in demographic collapse in Germany.
Other than history buffs, who would care about such a thing?
QuoteIn absolute numbers, the world wars etc. surely killed more people. And the experience of totalitarianism was probably more complete than even in the French Revolution, due to technological and organizational advances.
Nobody is arguing it didnt have an impact on the generation that experienced it or in the couple of generations that followed it. But it strikes me that the points you are raising wont necessarily resonate 100 years on. Hell I have had staff at this office that didnt understand a reference to the Wall coming down....
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 04:49:47 PM
Depends on how you measure "worse".
Certainly, WW2 ended with large parts of eastern Europe essentially ethnically cleansed of Germans - that's pretty significant; I don't recall (for example) the Napoleonic Wars having that effect anywhere. But OTOH the 30 years war resulted in demographic collapse in Germany.
In absolute numbers, the world wars etc. surely killed more people. And the experience of totalitarianism was probably more complete than even in the French Revolution, due to technological and organizational advances.
In terms of raw numbers, of course the 20th century set a high bar because there were more people. That is why I was discussing per capita rather than just raw numbers.
The ethnic cleansing in Europe was a major factor in WWII, but are we forgetting that where we live was ethnically cleansed too? :P The question of the experience of totalitarianism is an interesting one...certainly technology gave the state tools to exert control, but then larger populations also gave people a degree of freedom through anonymity as well. The average individual arguably had more economic and personal freedom under Stalin than when tied to the land through serfdom and with behavior monitored through the local priest in a village.
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 04:52:52 PM
It's already been almost 70 years - we are more than 1/3 of the total time from the fall of the Nazis to your 120 years in the future from now. No lessening of interest in the Nazis yet.
I think you are wrong about that. I see many fewer cultural references to WWII than before. When you and I were growing up WWII was a theme in many movies and TV shows. Now it barely registers.
Once the last of the WWII vets dies we will probably hear about WWII about as much as we hear about WWI - ie not that often. Muslim Jihadists have taken over from Nazis as the bad guys of choice for popular culture. Those of us who can have a heated debate about WWII are a dying breed.
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 04:10:30 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 04:02:59 PM
Wait, what? You sorta lost on the first sentence. I was under the impression that the political ideas of both Revolutions predated the revolutions themselves.
I thought we were talking about memory here.
QuoteAnd Hell, in the US we have a hard time agreeing what the American Revolution was actually about.
And yeah right I must have missed that debate last 4th of July.
Perhaps you did miss the stuff were people claimed the founders wanted the country to be a Christian nation. Of course that is wrong, but a lot of people believe it.
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 01, 2012, 04:13:32 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:51:57 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 03:47:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 03:44:14 PM
We don't remember the 12th century as the age of windmills. We remember it as as the age of Crusades.
We do not remember the Great Northern War, the War of Spanish Succession, the zillions of other horrible things that happened in the 18th century. We remember the Enlightenment and all the technological and political changes that followed. Because they actually impact us.
One thing you are forgetting is how very appealing the Nazis are as villians.
Yeah but the Indiana Jones movies wont have much relevance in 120 years.
Eh, the three Musketeers is fairly well remembered.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 05:09:50 PM
Eh, the three Musketeers is fairly well remembered.
Sorta but hundreds of other beloved 19th century literary characters are not. Besides we still have to get to the 2040s for it to be 200 years since those characters were invented.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 05:08:56 PM
Perhaps you did miss the stuff were people claimed the founders wanted the country to be a Christian nation. Of course that is wrong, but a lot of people believe it.
Yeah they are debating the political and ideological legacy. You know, the very stuff I said they remembered.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 05:09:50 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 01, 2012, 04:13:32 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 03:51:57 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 03:47:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 03:44:14 PM
We don't remember the 12th century as the age of windmills. We remember it as as the age of Crusades.
We do not remember the Great Northern War, the War of Spanish Succession, the zillions of other horrible things that happened in the 18th century. We remember the Enlightenment and all the technological and political changes that followed. Because they actually impact us.
One thing you are forgetting is how very appealing the Nazis are as villians.
Yeah but the Indiana Jones movies wont have much relevance in 120 years.
Eh, the three Musketeers is fairly well remembered.
Not really. My bet is a small number of people could accurately describe the plot twists in the book never mind the names of the three and of the young lad who plays the hero. At best there is a misremembered distortion based on whichever movie a person might have seen and a chocolate bar.
Damn now I want a chocolate bar.
Mmmm, chocolate. :mmm:
The golden age of warfare, which ended the golden age of civilization.
Quote from: Valmy on October 01, 2012, 05:13:33 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 01, 2012, 05:09:50 PM
Eh, the three Musketeers is fairly well remembered.
Sorta but hundreds of other beloved 19th century literary characters are not. Besides we still have to get to the 2040s for it to be 200 years since those characters were invented.
I thought he said 120 years.
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 01, 2012, 05:16:50 PM
Not really. My bet is a small number of people could accurately describe the plot twists in the book never mind the names of the three and of the young lad who plays the hero. At best there is a misremembered distortion based on whichever movie a person might have seen and a chocolate bar.
Film has superseded the written word. Unless there's a new and better technology that comes around, Spielberg's movie franchise will still be the definitive "Indiana Jones".
The character itself may fade to obscurity, but that's hardly a given. People still recognize Robin Hood, Hamlet, Hercules, Noah, etc.
Globalisation, ideology becoming more important than nationalism, really good music.
Agreed that the Nazis are going nowhere, they are just the perfect villains. WW2 was the last proper war and so it shall remain, therefore it will always be well remembered... unless we wipe ourselves out of course.
Quote from: crazy canuck on October 01, 2012, 05:06:20 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 01, 2012, 04:52:52 PM
It's already been almost 70 years - we are more than 1/3 of the total time from the fall of the Nazis to your 120 years in the future from now. No lessening of interest in the Nazis yet.
I think you are wrong about that. I see many fewer cultural references to WWII than before. When you and I were growing up WWII was a theme in many movies and TV shows. Now it barely registers.
Once the last of the WWII vets dies we will probably hear about WWII about as much as we hear about WWI - ie not that often. Muslim Jihadists have taken over from Nazis as the bad guys of choice for popular culture. Those of us who can have a heated debate about WWII are a dying breed.
Naturally it will not be as all-dominant as it was in the decades immediately after the war. However, I think you are wrong that it will fade into total insignificance in the popular mind.
Certain events resonate down the centuries, not just because they are significant in themselves, but because they make a good narrative - they contain images that captured the imagination at the time and continue to inspire and fascinate centuries later.
Take WW1 versus WW2. WW1 is arguably just as, if not more, significant in some ways - it undermined the long 19th century of european peace-through-colonial-dominance, it set the stage for and directly inspired WW2, its carnage was terrible - but
as a narrative, it sucks. Its causes are unclear and debated by historians to this day, it lacks easily identifiable villians and heros, and the battles are perceived as essentially grinding slogs, and the war settled nothing and was fought over no points of essential principle, and lacked any great orators to invest it with meaning. In short, other than as an image of pity and horror, it lacks force as a historical narrative.
That's why (for example) you can still get heated debates over the American Civil War, but passions over the (later and larger) WW1 are more muted.
The debate about the origins of WWII are very much colored by the ideological conflict of the cold war. The spectrum goes from Hitler was Evil, to Fascism is Capitalism and thus Evil, to Fascism is Communism and thus Evil, to Fascism is Evil, to the natural expression of German National Interest to Churchill was Evil. Ok Pat Buchanans thesis of it's Churchill wot done it isn't exactly mainstream in any sense.
We can't do the history properly because the cold warriors and their ideologies are still among us.
My guess is that the 20th century will be remembered for all the things that have made the world smaller - the logistics of the US army, the proliferation of airlines and mass tourism, the Internet including social networks, cell phones and smart phones, outsourcing as an economic phenomenon etc. How it will be seen, of course, depends on what comes after.
Politically I think it will be remembered for the devolution of the various colonial empires and the conflicts that brought, and for the rise of China (whether it continues it's trajectory or not). If something terrible happens to or in the US in the next 50-75 years, I'm sure the roots of that will be seen to be in the 20th century as well.
As for the Nazis, I agree with Malthus that they'll survive for a while in the popular memory.