History

Postby Andtie » Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:37 am

I'm a high school student studying history amongst other things. In school a couple of weeks ago, we were set the essay question:

"Show your understanding of 20th century history by writing an essay stating who in your opinion were the three greatest leaders of the 20th century, and how and why they impressed you.

As long as they were in power between 1st January 1900 and 31st December 1999 it doesn't matter if they were in power before or after these dates. They can be from any country in the world and they do NOT have to have been democratically elected"

Who would you choose if you were doing this essay?

:big:

Re: History

Postby the other one » Sat Jul 27, 2013 2:02 pm

I'm just too happy not to do this.
I could probably only write about Salvador Allende, Hugo Chávez and Fidel Castro/Che Guevara. But I suppose the USA wouldn't get good away. So maybe this would be a fail, because I suppose the USA should be in a good light, for a good mark.
It would be much easier if the topic was meant ironically.
“Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd.”


Bertrand Russell

Re: History

Postby sarobah » Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:16 am

The most influential leader of the twentieth century was, without a doubt, Adolf Hitler.
It was to the world’s good fortune that he was opposed by the three greatest leaders of the century – Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin. I cannot think of three other political personalities in the entire century who had their strength and determination.
(Stalin was a monster, but sometimes it takes a monster to beat a bigger monster.)

Of the three, Roosevelt was, in my opinion, the greatest. He was absolutely implacable in his resolve to defeat Nazi Germany. And by goading Hitler in declaring war on the United States (a more serious blunder even than attacking the Soviet Union) he was able to convince the American people to give priority to the European war.
The world should not forget that Churchill’s and Stalin’s countries were forced into war. The US could have remained neutral but, under Roosevelt, chose to go to war with Hitler’s Germany.
(I wonder how many Europeans would fight and die for Americans the way 200,000 Americans died fighting to free Europe.)
Words, like Nature, half reveal and half conceal the soul within.

Re: History

Postby Chris12 » Sun Jul 28, 2013 11:56 am

The three greatest people in the twenties century are without a single shred of doubt: Winston Churchill Franklin D. Roosevelt and Joseph Stalin.

I think that Roosevelt is the person that made the united state the superpower that it is today. His actions in the war led America to succeed and surpass Europe. Churchill is the very face of determination and Stalin was a monster but he was also the person that transformed Russia from an outdated backwater to the modern force that would one day destroy Germany. Yes he was a monster but being a monster is just another kind of ''greatness'' just a very negative one.

The greatest person( that I know of) of all time remains first emperor Augustus though, Caesar and Napoleon are good second places.

Sarobah: I agree rooseveld was the greatest of the three but I don't think America should get any special credit for going to war. They weren't forced indeed, they could have remained neutral and they wanted to. The unites states didn't bravely enter world war two to save Europe. they where dragged in kicking and screaming against their will. I find them being part of Versailles makes them very much responsible for the Nazis(But much less so then France and England) and thus staying out of the war doesn't show much responsibility on their part. I find it very important that their desire to sit back and watch the world burn should be mentioned alongside their bravery. I do think America was crucial to the war but Russia damaged Germany a lot more and lost much more.
Last edited by Chris12 on Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: History

Postby Kyle » Sun Jul 28, 2013 12:47 pm

The US was going to get involved sooner or later. FDR always wanted to get involved, it was the American people who wanted to stay out of it.

Anyway, I'm on a different wavelength than others apparently. I would have gone with another Roosevelt, Theodore, Churchill, and Mikhail Gorbachev. I really wanted to say F.W. de Klerk but beyond his influence in ending apartheid I really know very little about him and couldn't say a lot.

Re: History

Postby Andtie » Sun Jul 28, 2013 12:58 pm

Since I started this thread - I should answer it? When I write this essay, my choice will be:

1st - Ian Smith - Prime Minister of Rhodesia 1964-1980 - his war record speaks for itself, he stood up for what he believed in and he warned what would happen if majority rule ever came to Rhodesia and he's been proven right.

2nd - Anwar Sadat - President of Egypt 1970-1981 - he gave Israel a good kicking at Yom Kippur and showed the world they are not invincible, and 4 years later he scored an even greater victory by going to Jerusalem to negotiate a peace. He was murdered by his own army in 1981 and his good work has been destroyed.

3rd - Margaret Thatcher - Prime Minister of the UK 1979-1990 - she sent Galtieri home with a flea in his ear, rolle back communism in the UK and made Britain GREAT again - only for Major, Blair and Brown to ruin it?

Re: History

Postby Chris12 » Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:15 pm

Kyle wrote:The US was going to get involved sooner or later. FDR always wanted to get involved, it was the American people who wanted to stay out of it.

Anyway, I'm on a different wavelength than others apparently. I would have gone with another Roosevelt, Theodore, Churchill, and Mikhail Gorbachev. I really wanted to say F.W. de Klerk but beyond his influence in ending apartheid I really know very little about him and couldn't say a lot.


Whether they would enter or not is relevant but not as much as their very open desire to stay out of it.

Aside from the household names like Lincoln or Washington Teddy was actually the first US president I heard of and showed any interest in(We don't learn those fellows here, you see) And the man was indeed a baddass. Don't know how he fared as president but being such a baddass and punching your own asthma in a coma is enough to make him my favourite president :big:

Can't say I agree with what I heard about the iron lady's politicks but I do think she was the last great leader the world has had in quite a while. certainly the last European one.

Oh, i'd also say Nelson Mandela by the way. A shame he most likely won't make the last year :cry:

Re: History

Postby Fesselfan » Sun Jul 28, 2013 10:56 pm

Well, here my three votes which might be quite different to what most people think:

1) Helmut Schmidt: German Chancelor from 74 to 82. No-nonsense pragmatic politican. And, very modest...he still lived in his ordinary townhouse and didnt move to a villa or something. Even hosting there for breschniew back then, instead of going to a villa or hotel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmut_Schmidt
2) Nelson Mandela (actually, I wondered why no one nominated him so far). For his fight against opression- and, as leader, for the ability to reunion a country instead of going for revenge.
3) Kemal Atatürk: Founder of the modern turkey. Managed to create a country where religion and politics are seperated, moreso than in almost any other country. Judging from all the harm done by religion meddling in politics, this cannot be underestimated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustafa_Kemal_Atat%C3%BCrk

Cheers

FF
There are 10 kind of people in the world.
Those who understand binary numeral system, and those who don't.

Re: History

Postby Chris12 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:17 am

Nelson Mandela (actually, I wondered why no one nominated him so far). For his fight against opression- and, as leader, for the ability to reunion a country instead of going for revenge


Right above you 8) :wink:

Re: History

Postby Fesselfan » Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:48 am

Chris12 wrote:
Nelson Mandela (actually, I wondered why no one nominated him so far). For his fight against opression- and, as leader, for the ability to reunion a country instead of going for revenge


Right above you 8) :wink:


Lol...touché!

Cheers

FF
There are 10 kind of people in the world.
Those who understand binary numeral system, and those who don't.

Re: History

Postby Fesselfan » Mon Jul 29, 2013 3:29 am

I still hold my claim...abandoning apartheit without a civil war, that counts as positive. Even if it's not perfect, and (sadly for some) fatal. Just look at situations like in syria, egypt, or in the past, ireland. Overcoming hatred and revenge is perhaps the most difficult part once one oprresion ends.
Cheers

FF
There are 10 kind of people in the world.
Those who understand binary numeral system, and those who don't.

Re: History

Postby Fesselfan » Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:02 am

george1909 wrote:
Fesselfan wrote:I still hold my claim...abandoning apartheit without a civil war, that counts as positive. Even if it's not perfect, and (sadly for some) fatal. Just look at situations like in syria, egypt, or in the past, ireland. Overcoming hatred and revenge is perhaps the most difficult part once one oprresion ends.
Cheers

FF

Well i could agree with that except there is an undeclared racial war afoot in South Africa ..white people are being killed and driven from the land by racially motivated gangs of murdering blacks ..please watch video i have linked in ''general chat'' section. In Ireland where i live we are more accepting and civilized although the IRA done some horrible things by planting bombs in English cities and killing people i cant remember an Irish person ever taking a family and cutting the parents throats after making them watch the hanging their teenage son and burning of their infant, so i am of the view that the ''new South Africans'' who do this are vermin


I think we can agree on the fact that anybody slaughtering other people is vermin, no matter of phenotype, living place and/or religion ;)
Sadly, throughout history, it shows that the capacity of humanity (not every individual, but as a whole) for brutality is almost endless...nobody is immune to that. And the fact that most (at least in the western areas) were able to grow up in a comperativly comfy and peacefull way is a thing to be thankful for.

Cheers

FF
There are 10 kind of people in the world.
Those who understand binary numeral system, and those who don't.

Re: History

Postby Fesselfan » Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:16 am

Well...you can fill a book bigger than every phonebook with the atrocities which arent in the mainstream media. Maybe that's why.
There are 10 kind of people in the world.
Those who understand binary numeral system, and those who don't.

Re: History

Postby Kyle » Mon Jul 29, 2013 6:24 pm

I thought about Mandela, but most of what I know about him came before he was actually president. I didn't know how literal "leader" was for this. F.W. de Klerk was actually the president when most of the apartheid regime was dismantled.

Also, as George1909 pointed out, Mandela does have a bit of a shady history in the past (though I don't know about what he says specifically, Mandela was on the revolutionary side early on), and aside from his social views, his politics and mine are a long way off, though I'm willing to give someone halfway around the world more leeway on something like that since I don't personally know what goes on in other countries and might be good for them.
Last edited by Kyle on Mon Jul 29, 2013 7:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: History

Postby Mister Mistoffelees » Mon Jul 29, 2013 6:57 pm

in addition check out the huge numbers of white people killed by african americans in the U.S. each year compared to white on black violence. Anyway i know there are people going to call me a ''racist'' but its the truth


Well, George, by bringing a truthy little factoid into a discussion about Nelson Mandela that in fact has nothing to do with your original topic, you not only wander off your own topic, you in fact prove your last point about yourself as perfectly as possible...
Welcome to Snowden! Enter at your own risk...

Re: History

Postby xtc » Tue Jul 30, 2013 2:22 am

I'm not going to enter the arguments concerning specific nominations but surely the point of Andtie's task is not the truth or falsehood of his potential assertions but his analytical abilities in arguing for them using known facts (not easy things to find with history). Perhaps presenting a balanced argument is important unlike some of the ranting that has been going on here.
Boxer shorts are cool,
but little speedos rule!

More by the same author: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=22729

Re: History

Postby Jason Toddman » Wed Jul 31, 2013 7:30 am

As more than one person has already pointed out, it depends on what you mean by greatest.
If you mean the most influential for ill as well as for good, Adolph Hitler, Josef Stalin and Chairman Mao are probably the three chief candidates, since each had nearly ultimate power in their own countries at one time, caused the deaths of millions of people home and abroad, and all engaged in expansionist activities that greatly affected their neighbors. All were also total bastards and hated by more people than they are loved, so power isn't everything.
If by greatest you mean those who have done the most good for the world (or at least for their own countries), the potential choices are almost limited. So, being an American who is a bit biased about the 'American century', my picks would be Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and John F Kennedy; all of whom did much to improve the lives of American citizens despite the latter two also getting us into a major war (though FDR at least didn't cause his and got us through most of it before he died).
TR was an all-around 'good' politician who actually believed in a 'fair shake' for everyone and was perhaps the most scrupulously honest president the US ever had (even though he was a Republican!) as well as one of the most forceful; had he been president in 1918 he might have been able to convince the victorious European powers to amend their demands enough so that the horrible economic conditions in Germany that helped set the stage for WW II never happened.
FDR got us through the Depression (though admittedly making some mistakes along the way) and created programs eliminating the worst of the poverty that afflicted the US at the time.
Kennedy got us into space (though unfortunately also into Vietnam) and inspired a generation to be fit in body and in mind and to look to the stars and a brighter tomorrow.
Were today's politicians of the same caliber of any of these three maybe the 21st century would be a much happier time than it is right now.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...