ITT: the most significant people for each century starting with the first one ending with the 21st so far, be sure to disagree a lot.
here's an example list drummed up to illustrate what I mean
01-> Jesus 02-> 03-> 04-> 05-> Odacer 06-> 07-> Muhammad 08-> Charlemange 09-> Charlemange 10-> 11-> 12-> 13-> Fibonacci 14-> Edward III 15-> Columbus 16-> da Vinci 17-> Newton 18-> Washington 19-> Napoleon 20-> Hitler 21-> Obama
Aiden Perry
I felt a little disappointed with the 21st century when I saw Obama there.
Tyler Martinez
Paul should be way ahead of Jesus for the 1st century.
Andrew Morales
Putin is probably a better choice.
Owen Morgan
Also put James Watt instead of Washington
James Gomez
we only have less than 1/5th of a century to work with.
Still, I'd choose some fat cat, Gates or Jobs or Zuckerberg or someone like that. Presidents are figureheads, fat cats are the modern actors on the world stage with the most influence on the future of the world.
Lucas Kelly
>20th century isn't Lenin or Stalin Epic.
Jace King
constantine the great on 4
Parker Thompson
WW2 is more important than the soviet union imo. Marx could be on 19 tho.
Jonathan Barnes
I would put Paul over Jesus for 01.
Thomas Cook
"no" how could you even begin to justify that, communism was THE catalyst for the ultra right to rise in the first place And also Communist China, the bastard child of the USSR and Japan
Carson Hernandez
21st Century so far is honestly probably Osama bin Laden. We're still feeling the effects of 9/11 and al-Qaeda.
Evan Young
The main reason for the natsoc upswing in the 20th century was WW1, more specifically the peace treaty. It was the rest of the world contra germany. The nazis are not significant, its just a continuation of the nationalist ideas of the 19th century. Its the world war that is more important, and the world war was a direct consequence of Hitler. It would maybe be more accurate to simply put germany there, but OP is asking for persons.
Brody Russell
>natsoc Please stop using this term.
Camden Baker
>18-> Washington
Washington wasn't really a driving force of anything. I'd say John Locke.
Kayden Scott
I agree with this, but I also think it's too soon to make a call. It wouldn't even be appropriate for Veeky Forums. Maybe Henry II for the 12th century?
Joshua Ortiz
Why tho? Natsoc kind of includes Mussolini, Hirohito and Franco. Nazi is just Hitler.
Adam Gray
Because it was invented by neonazis/other racist trash in an attempt to legitimize Nazism and imply that it has ideological weight. It doesn't.
Call it Nazism. 'Natsoc' is not used to refer to the other regimes you mentioned by any serious academic whatsoever.
Charles Hill
Yeah that's a fair point on the 21st Century, "so far" feels almost like a copout.
Also 13th really should be Genghis Khan. It's hard to understate how huge of an impact he had both short and long-term.
David Clark
>16 da Vinci The guy was impressively intelligent and a visionary, but he didn't really contribute much.
Most of your list is shitty too. I mean, Odoacer? What about fucking Atilla? Theodoric the Great? St. Augustine?
Cooper Walker
Its just a version of national socialism. Im not an academic tho, so what youre saying might be true.
Robert Moore
>the term national socialism was invented by neonazis Are you retarded?
Landon Flores
I didn't type that, retard.
Josiah Bailey
No that was their rhetoric, the upswing was caused by economic downturn and governmental incompetencrle in dealing with social strife which usually caused by, drumroll please, clashes between communists and brownshirts
Ayden Hall
Natsoc is just a shorter way of writing national socialism.
Brody Morgan
>economic downturn Yes. Economic downturn because of the 12.5 billion dollars that germany had to pay as reparation for ww1.
Jonathan Garcia
Nazism is an even shorter way of writing national socialism, since it refers to exactly the same thing. Why don't you use that?
Luke Gray
To clarify: referring to something as 'Nazi' is shorter than referring to something as 'natsoc'.
Aaron Bailey
>18-> Washington >15-> Columbus >16-> da Vinci This is why Americans shouldn't be allowed computers.
Kevin Adams
I'd have Constantine for 4th century, Urban II for 11th century, and change 16th century to Martin Luther.
Kayden Moore
Because nazi makes people think Hitler. As I said one could also consider Mussolini and Hirohito to be natsoc.
Alexander Jenkins
But German national socialists never called themselves "Nazis", just like communists never called themselves "commies". Why do "serious" academics often refer to national socialists as "Nazis" but rarely refer to communists as "commies". You see the Third Reich being called "Nazi Germany" more often than you see the Soviet Union being called "Commie Russia" in academic textbooks
Joseph Myers
>As I said one could also consider Mussolini and Hirohito to be natsoc. My point is that 'natsoc' is a meaningless term, and even if used to refer to 'national socialism' and not Nazism, in no way describes Mussolini's regime (fascist) or that of Japan.
Lucas Flores
I love when /pol/yps pretend to understand what they're writing about. You idiots give yourselves away every time.
'National Socialism' is not a serious ideology. There was nothing even remotely socialist about Nazism, that's why the 'real' term is not used. But you would know this if you had any idea what socialism was.
That you even need to ask the question reveals how little you know.
Benjamin Robinson
only political/religious figures, not inventors or the like, who might have deserved it more . . -5: Buddha -4: Alexander the Great -3: Qin Shi Huangdi -2: Wu Han -1: Augustus 1: Saint Paul 2: no idea, Trajan or Marcus Aurelius maybe? 3: Shapur I 4: Constantine 5: Atilla 6: Khosrau 7: Muhammad 8: Xuanzhong 9: Charlemagne 10: Otto I 11: Mahmud of Ghazni 12: Saladin 13: Genghis Khan 14: Timur 15: Babur 16: Charles V 17: Louis XIV 18: not really sure, Peter the Great or Frederick the Great maybe 19: Napoleon 20: Stalin 21: Putin
Jeremiah Stewart
Are you a fucking idiot?
>Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei
Use your brain and you can derive "nazi" from that. It's not the original term.
Julian Ward
...
Jeremiah Miller
...
Josiah Anderson
Imbecile.
Read my posts again. You have terrible reading comprehension.
Wyatt Martin
>Because it was invented by neonazis/other racist trash in an attempt to legitimize Nazism and imply that it has ideological weight.
patently and demonstrably false, goebbels yourself.
Benjamin Roberts
>Imbecile.
>it's another retard trying to act smart while spewing falsehood thread
You can think the nazis are bad without having to lie through your teeth, my friend.
Evan Gonzalez
This.
Jayden Martinez
Hitler was a kid who wanted a rematch. Stalin put a grave on the idea of communism forever.
Adrian Johnson
For 20th century should be Gavrilo Princip.
Austin Mitchell
>samefagging this blatantly Leave /pol/yp.
>patently and demonstrably false, goebbels yourself. Wrong. As a term used to signify an ideological doctrine, it's a complete and total fabrication made by neonazi scum such as yourself.
Chase Howard
>yfw Nazi stands for National Zionism
Michael Cox
And who won WW2? Stalin.
Joseph Bennett
Wrong. WW2 was won by the American People.
Austin Murphy
-5 should be Socrates or maybe more deservedly, Plato
Benjamin Butler
As far as the 20th Century goes, my first guess was Einstein. But, Hitler's a heavyweight candiate himself. But, thinking about it more, I gotta say Archduke Franz Ferdinand. The simple act of his assassination completely changed everything so badly, that the effects could be argued are still being felt today.
If not him, then at least the clumsy bastard that bumbled his way like a retard all the way until he lucked out & got close enough to do Ferdy in.
Jason James
That little rematch costed the lives of about 60 million people, caused the birth of the UN and the EU, made nuclear weapons into a thing, gave USA the title of Official World Policeā¢, gave birth to the computer, decolonized Africa, created israel including all the middle eastern wars, etc.
Anthony Wright
Replace Putin with and that's a pretty solid list.
Julian Howard
Nazi is literally just a short form for national socialist you aspie, I don't need to support the nazis to understand this.
Landon Perez
>no idea, Trajan or Marcus Aurelius maybe? Or Commodus if we're talking turning points
Jaxon Garcia
>post I am pretty sure nazis ate bread. Are we gonna ban bread, too? Contemplate an early death, please.
Otherwise you have idiots in the future who think "nazi" is a sovereign word and not just an abbreviation. Natsoc is more reasonable to use and doesn't give much room to misinterpret. And if neonazis invented it then that's one good thing they did, if not to say wtf i love neonazies now.
Brody Scott
>Nazi is literally just a short form for national socialist you aspie, I don't need to support the nazis to understand this. I wasn't referring to the word Nazi. This is why I mocked you for having awful reading comprehension; this is the third time you've made this mistake. Stop replying to my posts.