4 key turning points in Western history

[Cypress]

Thank God the obsession and authoritarianism of religion was overthrown by the Enlightenment. Reactionaries like Cypress would put Galileo to death.

You have a substantial amount of work to do to improve your reading comprehension and logical deduction.

I just highlighted the fundamental historical importance of the French Revolution, which was largely atheist in it's orientation.

And you read that as bible thumping.

 

[Geeko Sportivo]

The invention of toilet paper changed everything!

 

[Jack]

I think retraining to go from working on an auto assembly line, to building solar panels or wind turbines sounds like a reasonable expectation.

Asking people to give up their steel mill jobs to work in Walmart only benefits the oligarchs.

--->Didn't really answer the Question of 'Immigration in the Age of Automation'.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Cypress,

According to Kenneth Harl, professor of history @ Tulane University, these are the four most important turning points in the history of western civilization:

1) Emergence of self-government (5th century BCE Greece).

2) Conversation of Europe to Christianity.

3) Discovery of the New World.

4) Industrial revolution.

If you can still edit the OP you might want to make a correction there, if you agree.

It seems you may have meant to say conversion, not conversation.

I agree with Harl, those were all determining factors in western civilization.

I would add WWI, WWII, the development of nuclear weapons, emergence of home computers, cell phones and the internet and their contribution to the rise of extremist hatred.

Also huge: The development of plastics and the disposable product mindset.

 

[Cypress]

Hello Cypress,



If you can still edit the OP you might want to make a correction there, if you agree.

It seems you may have meant to say conversion, not conversation.

I agree with Harl, those were all determining factors in western civilization.

I would add WWI, WWII, the development of nuclear weapons, emergence of home computers, cell phones and the internet and their contribution to the rise of extremist hatred.

Also huge: The development of plastics and the disposable product mindset.

As to technological advances, I would rank invention of the printing press as the most important technical advance, hands down, which profoundly changed western politics and culture.

 

[Melchizedek = Michael]

The invention of toilet paper changed everything!

Corn cobs weren't available?

 

[Cypress]

--->Didn't really answer the Question of 'Immigration in the Age of Automation'.

Here is my personal experience with immigrants: my father and my aunt did jobs Americans and Canadians couldn't or wouldn't do.

If you are asking if immigrants are to blame for America losing it's textile industry, no I don't think so. I think the culprit is capitalists and outsourcing to Vietnam and Bangladesh.


To answer your next question, no I do not believe in unregulated and unlimited immigration.

 

[Jack]

Here is my personal experience with immigrants: my father and my aunt did jobs Americans and Canadians couldn't or wouldn't do.

If you are asking if immigrants are to blame for America losing it's textile industry, no I don't think so. I think the culprit is capitalists and outsourcing to Vietnam and Bangladesh.


To answer your next question, no I do not believe in unregulated and unlimited immigration.

(sigh) 'OwlTwerking' comes to mind.
Let me try again. In the 'Age of Automation', where people are losing Human Jobs to Machines, do YOU think that MORE PEOPLE is an answer to LESS JOBS.

(this has nothing to do with 'Textile Industries' or 'Immigrants are Nice People')

 

[Cypress]

(sigh) 'OwlTwerking' comes to mind.
Let me try again. In the 'Age of Automation', where people are losing Human Jobs to Machines, do YOU think that MORE PEOPLE is an answer to LESS JOBS.

(this has nothing to do with 'Textile Industries' or 'Immigrants are Nice People')

I think more people are needed to keep paying for your social security benefits.

The American fertility rate is only about 1.9 kids for every couple. That is negative growth, without immigration.

That worker to retiree ratio would become unsustainable if we want to keep paying you your full SS benefits.

 

[Jack]

I think more people are needed to keep paying for your social security benefits.

The American fertility rate is only about 1.9 kids for every couple. That is negative growth, without immigration.

That worker to retiree ratio would become unsustainable if we want to keep paying you your full SS benefits.

Yes. That is the Government argument for MORE PEOPLE.
Of course, you could lift the $142,800 cap on Earnings.

"Nine million earners out of 169 million workers earned wages and salaries over the Social Security taxable cap, 4027 people earned over $10 million in 2019 - $2,397 every hour; they will have fully paid their Social Security tax by the time they start work Monday, January 4, the first working day of 2021."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/teresa...through-new-year-days-brunch/?sh=283c59267ea9

I gather I'm not going to get an Answer that involves 'Automation Taking Human Jobs' and 'Immigration adding More People to the Workforce'. I'll stop trying.

 

[Matt Dillon]

By #2 you meant "conversion", right?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

According to Kenneth Harl, professor of history @ Tulane University, these are the four most important turning points in the history of western civilization:

1) Emergence of self-government (5th century BCE Greece).

2) Conversation of Europe to Christianity.

3) Discovery of the New World.

4) Industrial revolution.

Good turning points although those points can be argued against others such as the Roman Empire, the Holy Roman Empire and Moors.

Coincidentally, I've been watching "History's Turning Points" I and II. Each are about an hour episode with 2-3 episodes per Netflix DVD. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0446624/

Watched the Spanish Armada and Rise of the Mob today. The whole Spanish vs. England/Catholics vs Protestants thing was every interesting as was the enormous amount of back luck* suffered by the Spanish along with the plucky git'r'done attitude of the Brits.

There were no saints. Elizabeth was a murderous bitch and Phillip II sent 400 priests from the Spanish Inquisition to forcibly convert the Brits.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

My guess is Professor Harl left it off his list, because he was highlighting truly transformational turning points in western history.


In a sense, Locke, Hobbes, and the French philosophes were just resurrecting ground which had already been covered before by the Greeks: political rights, political theory, and the nature of the rights of the citizen.

Also, the Enlightenment was just one in a long line of intellectual traditions: Humanism, Enlightenment, Romanticism, Transcendentalism, Existentialism. In that sense, it wasn't really a turning point, it was another cog in the wheel, another link in the chain.


I would say the French Revolution was transformational, but I wouldn't rank it up there with the industrial revolution, or the discovery of the Americas.

Agreed. OTOH, the shot heard around the world changed the course of world events as much as the conversion to Christianity because it became a bastion of democracy and an end to monarchy.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Cypress,

As to technological advances, I would rank invention of the printing press as the most important technical advance, hands down, which profoundly changed western politics and culture.

What about the development of capitalism? Pretty profound difference for multitudes of lives.

 

[Cypress]

Good turning points although those points can be argued against others such as the Roman Empire, the Holy Roman Empire and Moors.

Coincidentally, I've been watching "History's Turning Points" I and II. Each are about an hour episode with 2-3 episodes per Netflix DVD. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0446624/

Watched the Spanish Armada and Rise of the Mob today. The whole Spanish vs. England/Catholics vs Protestants thing was every interesting as was the enormous amount of back luck* suffered by the Spanish along with the plucky git'r'done attitude of the Brits.

There were no saints. Elizabeth was a murderous bitch and Phillip II sent 400 priests from the Spanish Inquisition to forcibly convert the Brits.

good stuff

I recently heard a historian say that the English victory over the Armada was not as miraculous later legend would imply.

The British had better ships, better crews, better tactics, and better cannons from the outset.

 

[Cypress]

Hello Cypress,



What about the development of capitalism? Pretty profound difference for multitudes of lives.

I have think you are right. I would conflate capitalism with the industrial revolution, per the list professor Harl outlined in the OP

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Cypress,

I have think you are right. I would conflate capitalism with the industrial revolution, per the list professor Harl outlined in the OP

Capitalism not only preceded the industrial revolution, it was a contributory factor. Capitalism made the industrial revolution possible.

Prior to capitalism, few people had any money. The development of a market economy set the stage for the mass production of products to sell in that economy.

 

[Cypress]

Hello Cypress,



Capitalism not only preceded the industrial revolution, it was a contributory factor. Capitalism made the industrial revolution possible.

Prior to capitalism, few people had any money. The development of a market economy set the stage for the mass production of products to sell in that economy.

Good point.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

good stuff

I recently heard a historian say that the English victory over the Armada was not as miraculous later legend would imply.

The British had better ships, better crews, better tactics, and better cannons from the outset.

IMO better strategy and tactics made the difference, plus luck.

Was the Spanish Armada sailing into a winter storm bad luck or should they have known it was a dicey season to start a war?

The Spanish had large heavy ships loaded with naval infantry (Marines). They'd grapple along side and board enemy ships. The Brits had smaller, lighter and more maneuverable ships and favored long range cannon attacks.

The Armada, grouped together was impossible to conquer due to size and numbers. The Brits lit up fire ships; a ship loaded with gun powder, lit on fire and allowed to drift by winds and/or current into the Armada where the fire ships would blow up and light several Spanish ships ablaze. The Spanish captains broke formation and fled with their individual ships. This allowed the Brits to attack individual ships piece meal and led to Battle of Gravelines (1588).

Battle of Gravelines – 8 August
There followed an immense naval battle off Gravelines, during which the Spanish fleet were bombarded by the long-range English guns. In rough seas it lasted for nine hours, with great damage being done to the Spanish fleet, which for most of the time were unable to return fire due to a lack of trained gunners.

About 1,000 Spaniards were killed and over 800 wounded. The battle ended in the afternoon when the English fleet ran out of ammunition.

Overall, the Spaniards lost about 2/3s of their 130 ships and about 2/3s of their 30,000 sailors and soldiers. The Brits lost about 100 sailors in combat. Oddly, as the wiki link notes, they later lost up to 8000 from disease (mostly typhus). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Armada

Results count; Spain went home with their tail tucked between their legs and Britain rose to become a global power. Human society turned course.

 

[Cypress]

IMO better strategy and tactics made the difference, plus luck.

Was the Spanish Armada sailing into a winter storm bad luck or should they have known it was a dicey season to start a war?

The Spanish had large heavy ships loaded with naval infantry (Marines). They'd grapple along side and board enemy ships. The Brits had smaller, lighter and more maneuverable ships and favored long range cannon attacks.

The Armada, grouped together was impossible to conquer due to size and numbers. The Brits lit up fire ships; a ship loaded with gun powder, lit on fire and allowed to drift by winds and/or current into the Armada where the fire ships would blow up and light several Spanish ships ablaze. The Spanish captains broke formation and fled with their individual ships. This allowed the Brits to attack individual ships piece meal and led to Battle of Gravelines (1588).


Overall, the Spaniards lost about 2/3s of their 130 ships and about 2/3s of their 30,000 sailors and soldiers. The Brits lost about 100 sailors in combat. Oddly, as the wiki link notes, they later lost up to 8000 from disease (mostly typhus). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Armada

Results count; Spain went home with their tail tucked between their legs and Britain rose to become a global power. Human society turned course.

One of the most remarkable elements of the story I recently heard is that the Spanish could not retreat back through the English Channel, so they had to head north to Scotland into the treacherous waters of the North Sea, then down into the North Atlantic around past Ireland, before making it back to Spain.

Supposedly, more Spanish ships were lost on this ill fated attempt to get back to Spain, than were lost in the battle itself.