RIP Philo

Who totslly pwned the 20th century?

The most influential person of the 20th century IMHO is Mr A. Hitler, who unwittingly started an unfortunate chain of events while trying to force the world into a totalitarian vegetarian state.

Who's #1 in your books?
Permalink Bluebeard 
March 9th, 2007 2:37am
Toss up between Ghandi, Chaim Weitzman or John Maynard Keynes, all of whom permanently shaped today far more than that man ever did.
Permalink trollop 
March 9th, 2007 3:00am
Who are those sissy boys? We're talking PWNAGE here. Complete and utter cataclysmic shaping of events! C'mon, you can do better than that!
Permalink Bluebeard 
March 9th, 2007 3:09am
Agreed, Hitler just started a war. It ended.
Permalink Send private email no label 
March 9th, 2007 3:10am
It didn't end. He made America and Russia the dominant super powers of the 20th century. America and Russia were sleeping giants before he started WW2. The Cold War was a direct result of this. The Israeli state was born due to his carnage. The race for the atomic bomb. Rocket science. Crackpot racial theories. The list goes on...
Permalink Bluebeard 
March 9th, 2007 3:18am
None of the above. Rockerfeller. He legitimised the robber baron and built the petroleum economy. After all the whole of twentieth century was a capitalist cum-fest. The wars and independences and "democracies" and colonial collpase was the ultimate wet dream of the moneyied.
Permalink Send private email (100 + 85)/2 
March 9th, 2007 3:32am
Teddy Roosevelt.

He started the US on the road to "world power," messed around with all sorts of socio-economic systems internally (e.g. trust busting) and externally (panama canal).

And he stole the Alaska Panhandle from Canada,

_and_ he got his face carved on a big rock!
Permalink Send private email Ward 
March 9th, 2007 4:14am
I don't know about the 20th century, but my bets are on "Allah" owning the 21st.
Permalink hello. 
March 9th, 2007 5:02am
No, the world ends in November 2007 when the CERN supercollider destroys the universe.
Permalink Bluebeard 
March 9th, 2007 5:16am
Hmm. Better cash in my ISA.
Permalink Colm 
March 9th, 2007 7:20am
The rise of "The Corporation", which in 1947 or so got legal recognition as "a person".

But it's a person without the limitations and concerns of a "real" person, who's only goal is profit for its shareholders.

And this "legal fiction" of a person now has a HUGE impact upon the world.

Oh, and it's not Hitler, because I believe someone who "pwn"s something doesn't get his ass kicked into suicide.

Really, there's so many players in this game, with so many agendas, and so many definitions of "winning", it's hard to say.

Probably Bill Gates, though.  Through his insistence on "licensing" instead of selling software, he was able to leverage the success of the IBM PC and his Basic and MS-DOS into allowing PC clones.  And the process of having PC clones has made desktop computing available to everyone.

This has freed "secretaries", completely changed the nature of work, made everybody their own typists, and completely changed people's expectations of what is in the future.  As well as enabled the world-wide-web, which requires a fairly simple but also fairly fast processor to run the Web Browser.
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
March 9th, 2007 10:22am
I pwn all youse!!!!!!!
Permalink electricity 
March 9th, 2007 10:29am
einstein?
Permalink Kenny 
March 9th, 2007 10:36am
Ford?  Toyota?  "The Japanese"?
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
March 9th, 2007 11:11am
STH 1947?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juristic_person#Creation_and_history_of_the_doctrine

To resolve the issue, legal scholars proposed a solution—-a corporation could instead be considered a person, and could therefore be recognized and held subject to the law.[5] English courts adopted this legal fiction, calling corporations artificial persons, as early as the 16th century.[6] The United States Supreme Court first acknowledged it in Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819). In that case, Justice Story wrote that a corporation “is, in short, an artificial person, existing in contemplation of law, and endowed with certain powers and franchises which, though they must be exercised through the medium of its natural members, are yet considered as subsisting in the corporation itself, as distinctly as if it were a real personage.”
Permalink bob 
March 9th, 2007 11:52am
>>> "The Japanese"

MacArthur!  Made Japan what it was after the war.
Permalink Send private email Ward 
March 9th, 2007 12:05pm
Ah.  Correct, 1886, not 1947, my mistake.  It was applying the 14th ammendment to the Corporate "person" that broadened what a Corporation could do.
Permalink SaveTheHubble 
March 9th, 2007 12:25pm
Where are you getting 1886?
Permalink bob 
March 9th, 2007 12:40pm
Libertarians believe corporations as well as governments should be narrowed so that persons and corporations/governments are of equal measure.

Fascists believe corporations should be expanded till they are synonymous with governments. Persons are left at the same level.

Communists believe that corporations should be narrowed till they disappear.

Protestant fundamentalists believe that God trumps corporations, so it doesn't matter how much power corps have in this world.

Catholic fundamentalists believe capital is like the body of Christ and income is like his blood (Corpus Christi and revenue streams, etc).

Islamist fundamentalists believe that they invented joint stock companies way back during the golden age and they are so over them now. Plus hookahs are more efficient than joints for yield delivery.
Permalink Send private email strawberry snowflake 
March 9th, 2007 12:48pm
"Oh, and it's not Hitler, because I believe someone who "pwn"s something doesn't get his ass kicked into suicide."

Hitler may have been a jerk and ultimately a loser but I'm interested in the influence he had on 20th century history. He was the axis around which events spun, even though not the way he intended.
Permalink Bluebeard 
March 9th, 2007 12:57pm
Deng Xiaoping?

If he did not reform China into the current capitalist economic model, it will not own over 340 billion of US dollars.
Permalink Send private email Rick, try writing better English 
March 9th, 2007 6:21pm
> He was the axis around which events spun, even though not the way he intended.

Sort of. He was the result of the forces generated by the Treaty of Versailles. And the crap in the middle east were the result of the Sykes-Picot Agreement, as implemented in the Treaty of Sevres.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes-Picot_Agreement
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_S%C3%A8vres

>The economic problems that the payments brought, and German resentment at their imposition, are usually cited as one of the more significant factors that led to the end of the Weimar Republic and the beginning of the dictatorship of Adolf Hitler, which eventually led to the outbreak of World War II.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles
Also, most of the early "conquests" by Mr H were to regain territories taken away from Germany by the ToV (treaty of versailles, not temple of veeshan).

If Germany hadn't shipped Lenin back to Russia during WW1, it is likely that Russia wouldn't have had their revolution. The result would be no world communism, and no cold war.

If the Ottoman Empire didn't ally with Germany (they wanted to ally with Britain, but Britain was allied with France, who was allied with Russia, and Russia was the enemy of the Ottoman empire), they wouldn't have been broken up after WW1. As a result, there would be no Iraq, Turkey, Kuwait, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan nor Syria. The lack of Israel would have resulted in far less death and destruction in the middle east.

I suspect that the conflict between Japan and the US that ultimately lead to the Pacific portion of WW2 would have happened anyway. Fighting the Japanese invaders is what got Mao a huge head start. Although there wouldn't have been a Soviet Union to support him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Civil_War

Who "pwned" the 20th Century?
Gavrilo Princip. They man who single-handedly started WW1, WW2, the cold war and the troubles in the middle east. He didn't just kill 2 people that day: pulling that trigger set in motion the deaths of around 300,000,000 to 600,000,000 people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavrilo_Princip
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_World_War_I
Permalink Peter 
March 10th, 2007 1:41pm