| 
          | 
        
        
         | 
                     
	  |           
        
        
           elsemissing
             from chicago on 2003-10-26 16:24 [#00919431]
         Points: 192 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
 i'd say in 1871 with the unification of Germany.
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           Zeus
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-10-26 16:25 [#00919433]
         Points: 14042 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
call me crazy... but 1901 is my guess.
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           elsemissing
             from chicago on 2003-10-26 16:26 [#00919434]
         Points: 192 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
so it's that simple.
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           Zeus
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-10-26 16:26 [#00919436]
         Points: 14042 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
glad I could help
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           DeadEight
             from vancouver (Canada) on 2003-10-26 16:26 [#00919437]
         Points: 5437 Status: Regular
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
1919
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           elsemissing
             from chicago on 2003-10-26 16:27 [#00919438]
         Points: 192 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
why 1919?
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           elsemissing
             from chicago on 2003-10-26 16:28 [#00919439]
         Points: 192 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
versailles?
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           Zeus
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-10-26 16:31 [#00919443]
         Points: 14042 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
the 20th century can only be from 1901-2000
  because, where using a number based system. Therefor, the  years that comprise the 20th century, can only be the years  that actually take place in the 20th century.
 
  Now, if you want to go into different names (ie. Renissance  or some similiar term) then ok, because its not a numerical  based system of definition, and can start at any point in  time. But the 20th century is specific recorded dates 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           mappatazee
             from ¨y¨z¨| (Burkina Faso) on 2003-10-26 16:32 [#00919444]
         Points: 14302 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
uh... 1901?
  maybe I don't understand the question...
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           elsemissing
             from chicago on 2003-10-26 16:37 [#00919450]
         Points: 192 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
one can't consider the twentieth century outside of numbers?   as in a "twentieth century way of thinking" or a "twentieth  century idea"  this is just semantics. i mean take wwI and  II these pretty much define the first half of the 2oth c.  but what started it all?  and again, i say the unification  of Germany in 1871. 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           GIR
             from Easton on 2003-10-26 16:38 [#00919455]
         Points: 828 Status: Addict
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
the rise of nationalism(Germany, Italy, Austria-Hungary)
  Id modern politics started with Metternich's council and the  "balance of power", while at the same make weaker third  world countries weak, and dispute over boundaries, therefore  keeping the original states in control over the world. 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           scup_bucket
             from bloated exploding piss pockets on 2003-10-26 16:39 [#00919456]
         Points: 4540 Status: Regular
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
bah...you're right.
  in other news, who cares?
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           Zeus
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-10-26 16:40 [#00919459]
         Points: 14042 Status: Lurker | Followup to elsemissing: #00919450
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
the only reason you are using the term 20th century is  because historians havnt come up with a term for the time  period.
 
  No one called the Renissance "The Renissance" when they  where living in it. 
 
  Historians called it that later. 
 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           elsemissing
             from chicago on 2003-10-26 16:43 [#00919465]
         Points: 192 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
i'm glad you relaize that, so we should agree that whenever  the period we are talking about began is debable.  when woud  you say it began? 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           elsemissing
             from chicago on 2003-10-26 16:44 [#00919466]
         Points: 192 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
debatable
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           Zeus
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-10-26 16:45 [#00919469]
         Points: 14042 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
id probably say, the start of WWI
  but then again, im no historian
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           DeadEight
             from vancouver (Canada) on 2003-10-26 16:45 [#00919470]
         Points: 5437 Status: Regular
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
well actually they have come up with terms... the Modern and  Post-Modern ages... and while those terms aren't entirely  faulty... there is a peculiar unity between them the hasn't  been fully iterated yet... i say 1919... because the  aftermath of world war I left a world full of people whose  conceptions of humanity had been completely destroyed... 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           Zeus
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-10-26 16:47 [#00919475]
         Points: 14042 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
modern and post modern are terms that will change
  i mean, people living in 2058 will call their music  modern... not post post post post post post post post post  modern
 
 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           elsemissing
             from chicago on 2003-10-26 16:47 [#00919477]
         Points: 192 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
yeah but the aftermath was just that an "aftermath," a  result.  The cause could be 1871,no? 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           Zeus
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-10-26 16:50 [#00919484]
         Points: 14042 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
or you could just call 1871 a precursor, or transitional  period 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           eXXailon
             from purgatory on 2003-10-26 17:00 [#00919493]
         Points: 6745 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
the twentieth century will start in the year 3985. 
  we've started counting since I was born in 1984. read the  neo-bible 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           pachi
             from yo momma (United States) on 2003-10-26 17:00 [#00919494]
         Points: 8984 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
1901
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           DeadEight
             from vancouver (Canada) on 2003-10-26 17:02 [#00919495]
         Points: 5437 Status: Regular
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
well if you're thinking that way... why don't you just cite  the big bang as the beginning of the 20th century? obviously  it couldn't have happened without it...
  i reject the idea that the world in 1871 bore any  resemblance to the one we found in 1919...
 
  as for the modern-post-modern tangent: it's hard to gauge  whether or not the term will become elastic and refer to  anything new, in light of the fact that we've only lived  within the context of the modern world... i'd say that if  people in 2058 call there music modern, then they've been  lazy about labeling these things... one of the main reasons  why we're still calling new things modern is that popular  culture is completely divorced from many many of the ideas  being forwarded by the intellectual sphere of our society...  if this continues... than i suppose they may as well keep  the term modern... but i think people are slowly starting to  understand these things 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           elsemissing
             from chicago on 2003-10-26 17:06 [#00919500]
         Points: 192 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
i see your point.  so for you the end of wwI began an era  distinct from all else.  makes sense... the war was the  first modern war and the effects were obviously  astronomical. therefore the new period began because the  after effects of the war started or stopped ways of  thinking.  
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           Zeus
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-10-26 17:08 [#00919501]
         Points: 14042 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
yeah, and I think its also when people began to realise that  the world is much smaller... what happened in germany was  effecting people in the US and etc...
 
  (yeah, i mean, obviously... WORLD war)
  but yeah...
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           Zeus
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-10-26 17:09 [#00919502]
         Points: 14042 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
oh, and there will most definately be a 3rd world war
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           tolstoyed
             from the ocean on 2003-10-26 17:10 [#00919503]
         Points: 50073 Status: Moderator | Followup to Zeus: #00919502
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
what do you mean? dont say that
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           Zeus
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-10-26 17:13 [#00919507]
         Points: 14042 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
sorry... but I beleive it firmly
 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           DeadEight
             from vancouver (Canada) on 2003-10-26 17:22 [#00919524]
         Points: 5437 Status: Regular
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
it has to happen... and i think it will wipe out humanity as  we understand it... it's a question of sooner or later... 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           Zeus
             from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-10-26 17:24 [#00919530]
         Points: 14042 Status: Lurker
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
yeah... but just because there will be a 3rd world war...  doesnt mean it HAS to wipe us out
 
  i think that is inevitable... but I think it could possibly  be avoided alittle longer...
 
  maybe like world war 4 or 5 or something
 
 
  
         
	  | 
        
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
           tolstoyed
             from the ocean on 2003-10-26 17:29 [#00919537]
         Points: 50073 Status: Moderator
  | 
| 
 
     
 
   | 
you think this guy could be responsible for it?
 
  
         
	  | 
        
         | Attached picture | 
	
	 | 
	  | 
	 
	  
  
	  | 
	
        
         | 
           
	  | 
        
        
         
         
Messageboard index 
              
         
	 
	  |