Introduction to the Twentieth Century

"A Vague and Generally Incorrect History of the Twentieth Century"
 
What color pom-poms do they hand out at the A.O.G. cheerleader recruitment training center these days, Vince?

Earnestly Contend

 
Vince Massi said:
CERTAIN POLITICAL MOVEMENTS DOMINATED THE TWENTIETH CENTURY

a) Leninism?
b) National Socialism?
c) Fascism?
d) Maoism?
e) the Cold War?
f) None of the above, apparently.
 
The Rise and Failure of Militant Socialism

Socialist governments own most or all of the productivity: factories, farms, and sometimes residences. Freedom is limited, because dissent decreases productivity. A few nations have voluntarily gone socialist, but usually socialists seize power violently.

The Communists, Nazis, and Fascists all came into power the same way. The government was in chaos, there were food shortages, and unemployment was high. Democracy was impossible, because the people were too badly divided to form a working majority. A strong man (Lenin, Hitler, Mussolini) then seized power, established order, increased productivity, provided food, and created jobs. So why didn't it work?

Because socialism is based on theft. You have to rob the Jews, the wealthy, foreign investments, and other countries in order to finance socialism. Stalemated against Britain in World War 2, the Nazi socialists invaded the Communist socialists in order to steal the farmlands and other wealth of the Soviet Union. Productivity is stressed under socialism because new wealth is always needed and is not always available through theft. You have to limit freedom, because opposition decreases productivity while raising expenses.

Communist North Korea has nothing available to steal, so it steals its own people. The nation is a giant slave labor camp and is still poverty-stricken. Communist China uses capitalism to improve its cities, but most of the nation still lives in poverty.

And in the Twentieth Century, socialists killed more people than the Atheists (who were included with the Communist socialists). World War 2 was a socialist war that killed 3.5% of the human population (To be fair, Timorlane, "The Sword of Islam," killed 4% of the world population, and he did it with a lot less technology). Add on the other deaths under Communism and Nazism, and socialists have killed more people than all the world's religions combined.
 
The Collapse of European Empires

After World War 2, a shell-shocked Europe looked at what it had done. The main cause of the first World War had been the conquest of colonies. Two world wars later, Europe had spent all the wealth it had gained from its colonies and still gone into debt. More efficient aircraft and ships made foreign bases less necessary, and the cost of keeping conquered people in subjection wasn't economically feasible.

The introduction of modern scientific medicine had not won the hearts of the colonies, but it did increase their populations beyond what the colonies could support. Surplus food that could have been sold was often given to the colonies instead.

It was a type of mutual disarmament: if everyone reduced their colonies, the world was better off. Some bitter wars were fought, but the colonies usually won--the Europeans couldn't afford to continue the war because of their World War 2 debts. And, always eager to conquer and enslave new peoples, the Communists were able to raise support from colonials who didn't realize that they would only be changing masters.

And so, it wasn't benevolence or repentance. Europe had advanced the technology of its conquered people but did little good otherwise. Except for vital military bases, Europe dumped their colonies into freedom, helped them a little, and walked away.
 
The Rise of Independence Movements...

...coincided with the collapse of European empires, only worse. Frustrated at watching foreign companies taking their oil, their fish, their minerals, and other wealth, Europe's colonies naturally believed that they were better off being free. And although it is politically incorrect to tell the truth, race was a factor--ethnic groups wanted to rule themselves.

Then, within the newly-freed areas, civil wars broke out as ethnic minorities wanted to form tiny nations that could be easily conquered, and the controlling nation would not agree. Even the Soviet Union (which was essentially a Russian empire) broke apart, and civil wars then broke out in some of the newly-freed republics. And  Canada had a close vote with Quebec barely voting not to secede.

The US did rather well, however. Reluctantly granting independence to Cuba and the Philippines, the US kept the rest of the seized Spanish empire, along with Alaska, Hawaii, and a few purchases.

Surprisingly, Japan also did well. After losing everything but its home islands in World War 2, the Japanese got back much of their empire when the inhabitants wanted to return, and the victorious Allies allowed them to.
 
Brethren, I'm posting tomorrow's article tonight because Hurricane Patricia might cause power outages all day tomorrow. I want to thank the people who are following this thread, and I hope that it is helping you understand some of what we face in 2015- Courteous disagreements and responses are welcome--I ignore scorners, but not people seeking  truth.


The Formation of Semi-Permanent Alliances

If you've been following this thread, you know that European nations would often form alliances and then go to war with their allies within a few years. But the course of world history was altered towards the end of the Nineteenth Century when the Anglo-American Alliance was formed.

The former rivals began protecting each other's ships and territories, sharing technology, and even using each other's bases. Two world wars and a cold war strengthened the alliance farther, benefiting both nations. Unofficially, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are part of the alliance. Through NATO and SEATO, World War 2 allies and enemies joined in.

Alliances like this strengthen world peace by making it more difficult to attack one of the allies, and easier for the allies to win if they are attacked. They cut military expenses and make trade agreements more stable. And they usually stop the allies from going to war with each other.
 
I see you're ignoring the Franco-American alliance. Probably because it precedes your "history" by over 100 years.
 
Three major religious events dominated US history during the Twentieth Century.

1) The rise of the fundamentalist movement
2) The progress of the Baptist religion
3) The failure of religious education

World-wide events, especially the success of the Charismatic Movement and the failure of Modernism, also influenced the US.
 
Vince Massi said:
Three major religious events dominated US history during the Twentieth Century.

The effects of WW1 and WW2 on the Christian faith? The decline of liberalim? Existentialist theology? Neo-orthodoxy? The post-WW2 "Death of God" theology? Process theology? Vatican II? Liberation theology (in its Latin American and Black variants)? The rise of ecumenism? Renewed interest in missiology, resulting in such events as the World Council on Evangelism, the Lausanne Conference, or Urbana? The Council on Biblical Inerrancy?

Nah. Real history doesn't involve specific dates, people, or events. That's just stupid.
 
So far I would be more impressed if Vince could make a fart sound with his hand and his armpit.
 
The rise of the Fundamentalist Movement in the US is even difficult for fundamentalists to understand. We'll be spending a few days on this one.

    It helps to realize:

    1) The word "fundamentalist" does not appear in Scripture.
    2) The Bible never defines the word "fundamentalist."
    3) There is more than one definition of "fundamentalist."
    4) God never commanded you to be a fundamentalist.
    5) God never forbade you to be a fundamentalist.
   

 
Vince Massi said:
The rise of the Fundamentalist Movement in the US is even difficult for fundamentalists to understand. We'll be spending a few days on this one.

    It helps to realize:

    1) The word "fundamentalist" does not appear in Scripture.
    2) The Bible never defines the word "fundamentalist."
    3) There is more than one definition of "fundamentalist."
    4) God never commanded you to be a fundamentalist.
    5) God never forbade you to be a fundamentalist.
 

6) God never forbade nor commanded to 'fund' a mentalist.
 
Vince Massi said:
The rise of the Fundamentalist Movement in the US is even difficult for fundamentalists to understand. We'll be spending a few days on this one.

    It helps to realize:

    1) The word "fundamentalist" does not appear in Scripture.
    2) The Bible never defines the word "fundamentalist."
    3) There is more than one definition of "fundamentalist."
    4) God never commanded you to be a fundamentalist.
    5) God never forbade you to be a fundamentalist.
 

Looks like class is out early for the day.

I really need to get started on my seminal work, History of Pedantry in the United States, 1900-Present. Spoiler: It actually culminates in this very thread.
 
Fundamentalist Doctrine

There are five "fundamental" doctrines, all of which are taught in the Bible and rejected by Modernists:

1)The Deity of Christ and his virgin birth
2) The total inerrancy of Scripture
3) Salvation through faith alone, in Christ alone
4) The literal, physical resurrection of Christ from the dead
5) The literal, physical, visible Second Coming of Christ

Now, it's hard to be a born-again Christian and not be a fundamentalist DOCTRINALLY. Yet most Christians reject the title, because there are other issues, such as...
 
He is thinking about what to write next.
It's as if he is composing his Tome on the fly.
It could take years to complete.
 
bgwilkinson said:
He is thinking about what to write next.

Another five points, probably.

Vince is going to get so deep into his outline that he won't be able to write his way out again, without help from a ball of twine and a Ouija board.
 
bgwilkinson said:
He is thinking about what to write next.
It's as if he is composing his Tome on the fly.
It could take years to complete.

Good Heavens, Ransom. You finally got a non-scorner to join you in your sin. It certainly took you long enough.
 
Top