most important event in the 20th century

by scotoma 22 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  scotoma

  June 28 1914 Archduke Ferdinand was killed by a Serbian government sponsored assassination team.

  This was the trigger event of World War I

  Actually some have called it World War (Part 1) followed less than 30 years later by World War (Part 2).

  In retrospect this was a useful date for JW's.

  It has propelled them for 100 years.

  Of course JW's have massaged their predictions about the significance of 1914 over the years.

  Do you feel that JW's would be what they are today without that Great War?

  Do you think that the shooting down of the passenger plane over East Ukraine will be an equivalent moment that pushes Putin into a corner where he will have to fight the west? In other words will we look back on that event as the beginning of World War (Part 3)?
• 

  jgnat

  I think the Bible Students would have found a different rallying cry if Duke Ferdinand had avoided his fate.

  Do you think that the shooting down of the passenger plane over East Ukraine will be an equivalent moment that pushes Putin into a corner where he will have to fight the west? - scotoma

  Notice with all the posturing neither Putin nor Obama are talking about direct confrontation. Neither wants that. After reading Pinker's book, I am pretty confident that we will manage to avoid world-wide wars in our future.
• 

  OneEyedJoe

  I go back and forth on what the effect would've been if 1914 didn't see the start of WWI. Either way, they lost a lot of people in the years that followed, so I suspect that if WWI hadn't happened they would've just moved the date like they did with 1874, and kicked the can down the road until the date coincided with something significant and they would point to it as proof of their divine authority.

  It seems likely that they would've eventually (mostly) fizzled out if they'd kept setting new dates that failed without having gotten one spectacularly lucky guess. However they might've also just morphed into a slightly different cult that could've actually been more successful because of not being tied to some absurd date setting doctrine (think mormons).

  These days, though, it seems like they're really starting to regret the success they had with 1914. I thin they'd really rather move the date, but they're stuck with it because it's got so much importance. The GB's frustration with the date was evidence in CoC when Franz reported that they wanted to move some of the significance of 1914 to the 50's to coincide with sputnik and buy some more time. It can be seen today in tha they're having to resort to obviously flawed and unsupported teachings (the overlap) just to continue to buy time while maintaining urgency. In some ways 1914 has started to act as a 'sell by' date for people. That old milk is really starting to stink, now that we're 100 years beyond it, and I think (hope?) that it'll have a big impact on the cult and see many leave. The cult may end up being worse off in the (very) long run for having gotten lucky with their date setting.
• 

  sir82

  Nothing of note happened in 1843 or 1844 - as a result, the Millerites splintered and faded.

  The same would have happened to the Bible Students if WWI had not happened to start in 1914. The blind squirrel just happened to stumble across an acorn.

  1914 was definitely a significant year, and with enough hand-waving and historical revision, they could make it look like they were (invisibly) right after all.
• 

  steve2

  There are several so-called "watershed" events in human history that define an era and/or lead to significant and profound changes in life quality and experience for the masses.

  For the French, it was the Revolution, for the Americans, their civil war, for many nations, World War One (and not necessarily 1914; the American involvement in the war was a couple of years after 1914).

  Some have viewed World War Two as more significant than the First, in particular the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima.

  The Vietnam War forever changed that part of Asia - and would be their "watershed" event.

  In a similar vein, 9/11 forever changed America - and is now a common reference point.

  Fact is, 1914 did usher in the "Great War" that was to only be called World War One many years later - but is it a signal, stand alone historic event above all others? Churchill who was in his heyday during that war claimed as much.

  Yet, there is a human tendency to pinpoint events that happen during one's own lifetime that signal "the" ultimate change. If we'd been living during the 14th century when the Black Plague ravaged earth's population, we would have been proclaiming with absolute certainty the imminence of the end of the world. Funny that the world keeps turning no matter how much we humans beat up the seriousness of "world conditions".

  Brings to mind the boy who cried wolf.
• 

  scotoma

  jgnat:

  Of course they aren't talking direct confrontation. You don't tell your enemy you are going to attack them. You just do it. Otherwise you lose a strategic advantage.

  Pinker sits in an ivory tower. When powerful nations feel they are threatened they kill. World wide wars need world wide alliances.

  If you attack the member of an alliance they will all join the fight. The attack on Iraq and Afghanistan was a coalition forming an ad hoc alliance.

  It has happened recently and it can happen again.
• 

  scotoma

  steve2,

  I almost forgot about the atomic bomb. But that was an extension of WWII.

  WWIII would take up where WWII ended - widespread use of nuclear weapons.
• 

  SAHS

  Actually, the First World War started on JULY 28, 1914, but according to the book What Does The Bible Really Teach? (2005), pp. 217-218, the Gentile times ended and Jesus began ruling (invisibly) in OCTOBER of 1914. So, technically, the Watchtower Society didn’t really hit the bull’s-eye even with that most important date of theirs.

  And, of course, as we all know, 1914 was originally supposed to be “not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble.” (Zion’s Watch Tower, 1894, July 15, p. 226)

  So, the Watchtower Society didn’t quite hit the target in relation to WW1, and the arrow went assbackwards.
• 

  jgnat

  Pinker got down and dirty with the stats. He also roughly removes our rose coloured glasses of the past. The odds that the US and Russia will engage in overt warfare is remote.
• 

  scotoma

  Jignat;

  I've read just about everything Pinker writes. I am habitually pessimistic. Your comment is obviously optimistic to you. You make a vague estimate of the possibility of overt war between the USA and Russia. Saying the possibility is "remote" lacks a numerical estimate of its probability. Even if the probability of it was .001 I would consider that intolerable when considering the consequences. Remember the USA felt the Japan situation in 1945 was serious enough to use nuclear weapons. And of this date the USA and Russia both have a first-strike policy if they feel they have no other choice.

  On a positive note the US intelligence just made an announcement that they have no proof of Russian involvement of taking down the aircraft.

  "There won't be a Perry Mason moment" is how it was described.

  This is probably because Europeans aren't on board with more sanctions and they want to give Putin a chance to save face.