NPR

Capability Brown..

Thomas Crapper

eldanielfire wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 6:53 pm I'd argue Issac Newton indirectly. The way he massively articulated the laws of motion in turn stimulated the Industrial revolution which is the biggest improvement in life for humans in any way in history.

I'd equally argue for James Clerk Maxwell. The way he unified electromagnetic theory is entirely analogous to the way Newton unified mechanics. Newton's work was the theoretical basis for the Industrial Revolution, Maxwell's did the same for electricity, electronics and the tech advances of the twentieth century. He doesn't really get the prominence he deserves imo.

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:39 am It sounds like de Klerk made som bold choices and was genuine and sincere in his actions.

I’ll definitely read up in him.

It still seems odd to praise him above people who really suffered to bring about change.

The question was who most improved the country, not who suffered the most.

eldanielfire wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:23 am

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:39 am It sounds like de Klerk made som bold choices and was genuine and sincere in his actions.

I’ll definitely read up in him.

It still seems odd to praise him above people who really suffered to bring about change.

The question was who most improved the country, not who suffered the most.

A couple of posters have now made this obtuse comment. My statement plainly says that people’s sacrifices brought about the opportunity for the change that came de Klerk’s way. If there hadn’t been heroic and costly resistance by black South Africans the moment wouldn’t have arrived.

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:40 am

eldanielfire wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:23 am

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:39 am It sounds like de Klerk made som bold choices and was genuine and sincere in his actions.

I’ll definitely read up in him.

It still seems odd to praise him above people who really suffered to bring about change.

The question was who most improved the country, not who suffered the most.

A couple of posters have now made this obtuse comment. My statement plainly says that people’s sacrifices brought about the opportunity for the change that came de Klerk’s way. If there hadn’t been heroic and costly resistance by black South Africans the moment wouldn’t have arrived.

Obtuse

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:40 am A couple of posters have now made this obtuse comment. My statement plainly says that people’s sacrifices brought about the opportunity for the change that came de Klerk’s way. If there hadn’t been heroic and costly resistance by black South Africans the moment wouldn’t have arrived.

There has always been a lively debate as to what impact their resistance made, as opposed to the international pressure that brought about negotiations to end Apartheid.

I’m reading a history book* here that makes it clear that apartheid fell for a number of complex reasons. I can see why there’d be debate about it.

It says that de Klerk moved the country towards black majority rule “with great personal courage”. It says that the transition was “a remarkable achievement, for which de Klerk and Mandela deserve the credit.”

Like assfly says, international pressure is given as a key reason for apartheid’s fall.

The book does suggest though, that it was protest and resistance (along with brutal responses to it) that raised awareness overseas of the immoral nature of the system.

* Mastering Modern World History by Norman Lowe

Biffer wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:12 am

eldanielfire wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 6:53 pm I'd argue Issac Newton indirectly. The way he massively articulated the laws of motion in turn stimulated the Industrial revolution which is the biggest improvement in life for humans in any way in history.

I'd equally argue for James Clerk Maxwell. The way he unified electromagnetic theory is entirely analogous to the way Newton unified mechanics. Newton's work was the theoretical basis for the Industrial Revolution, Maxwell's did the same for electricity, electronics and the tech advances of the twentieth century. He doesn't really get the prominence he deserves imo.

Can't argue against any of that. Maxwell is hugely underrated in the wider public for his achievements. Though I still say Newton's work leads to Maxwell.

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 11:22 am I’m reading a history book* here that makes it clear that apartheid fell for a number of complex reasons. I can see why there’d be debate about it.

It says that de Klerk moved the country towards black majority rule “with great personal courage”. It says that the transition was “a remarkable achievement, for which de Klerk and Mandela deserve the credit.”

Like assfly says, international pressure is given as a key reason for apartheid’s fall.

The book does suggest though, that it was protest and resistance (along with brutal responses to it) that raised awareness overseas of the immoral nature of the system.

* Mastering Modern World History by Norman Lowe

I personally think Apartheid fell due to the humiliation saffers received in Lethal Weapon 2. Think about it. Lethal Weapon 2 was released in 1989. Negotiations to end Apartheid started in 1990. This is not a coincidence.

My favorite scene was Murtagh applying for an South African entry visa.

Erich Honecker

Shanky’s mate wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:44 am

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:40 am

eldanielfire wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:23 am

The question was who most improved the country, not who suffered the most.

A couple of posters have now made this obtuse comment. My statement plainly says that people’s sacrifices brought about the opportunity for the change that came de Klerk’s way. If there hadn’t been heroic and costly resistance by black South Africans the moment wouldn’t have arrived.

Obtuse

Reading back over the thread I realize I was out of line here. My original post on the thread was not misconstrued in the way I suggested.

Instead it was badly worded by me and deserved to be challenged.

I apologize for posting like a pompous ass.

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 12:02 pm Reading back over the thread I realize I was out of line here. My original post on the thread was not misconstrued in the way I suggested.

Instead it was badly worded by me and deserved to be challenged.

I apologize for posting like a pompous ass.

Dude, this is the internet. Admit nothing, concede nothing and never apologise!

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 12:02 pm

Shanky’s mate wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:44 am

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:40 am

A couple of posters have now made this obtuse comment. My statement plainly says that people’s sacrifices brought about the opportunity for the change that came de Klerk’s way. If there hadn’t been heroic and costly resistance by black South Africans the moment wouldn’t have arrived.

Obtuse

Reading back over the thread I realize I was out of line here. My original post on the thread was not misconstrued in the way I suggested.

Instead it was badly worded by me and deserved to be challenged.

I apologize for posting like a pompous ass.

Apologise. With an "S".

Nick LaRocca, he, along with his Original Dixieland Jass Band (not a typo), recorded and released the first commercially available jazz record, via the Victor Talking Machine Company label, in 1917

So, blues would predate that, but this incorporates that idiom and leads to soul to rock'n'roll, to hip hop, you name it.

Jesus.

Without him we'd still be sacrificing daughters and banging goats

A lot of credit must be given to PW Botha who actually started the movement to removing apartheid by having the referendum. That measured how ready the country was. He is so often ignored, but he arranged for Mandela to be moved from Robben Island and had direct consultations with him.

https://www.sahistory.org.za/dated-even ... d-aparthei

eldanielfire wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 11:43 am

Biffer wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:12 am

eldanielfire wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 6:53 pm I'd argue Issac Newton indirectly. The way he massively articulated the laws of motion in turn stimulated the Industrial revolution which is the biggest improvement in life for humans in any way in history.

I'd equally argue for James Clerk Maxwell. The way he unified electromagnetic theory is entirely analogous to the way Newton unified mechanics. Newton's work was the theoretical basis for the Industrial Revolution, Maxwell's did the same for electricity, electronics and the tech advances of the twentieth century. He doesn't really get the prominence he deserves imo.

Can't argue against any of that. Maxwell is hugely underrated in the wider public for his achievements. Though I still say Newton's work leads to Maxwell.

Absolutely. Newton leads to Maxwell, both of them lead to Einstein / General Relativity and Schreodinger / Bohr / Rutherford / Quantum Mechanics ( although probably more Newton for the former and Maxwell for the latter).

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 12:02 pm

Shanky’s mate wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:44 am

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:40 am

A couple of posters have now made this obtuse comment. My statement plainly says that people’s sacrifices brought about the opportunity for the change that came de Klerk’s way. If there hadn’t been heroic and costly resistance by black South Africans the moment wouldn’t have arrived.

Obtuse

Reading back over the thread I realize I was out of line here. My original post on the thread was not misconstrued in the way I suggested.

Instead it was badly worded by me and deserved to be challenged.

I apologize for posting like a pompous ass.

Not a problem, I'm sure we have all been misunderstood or misrepresented what we really think at times

Oh and the best scene in Lethal Weapon 2 is:

Carter's Choice wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 12:28 pm

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 12:02 pm Reading back over the thread I realize I was out of line here. My original post on the thread was not misconstrued in the way I suggested.

Instead it was badly worded by me and deserved to be challenged.

I apologize for posting like a pompous ass.

Dude, this is the internet. Admit nothing, concede nothing and never apologise!

Good on you Fujikiwi. That’s a graceful step down.

lilyw wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 9:51 am Padraig Pearse - in his own lifetime achieved almost nothing on a national scale; however his actions in 1916 & his execution led directly to Irish independence 5 years later.

Michael C actually achieved something.

Achahoish wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 9:22 pm Oliver Cromwell

Cemented the precedence of parliament over the monarchy.

Cemented the Union of Great Britain and Ireland ( for a few centuries anyway)

Theflier wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 2:34 pm Jesus.

Without him we'd still be sacrificing daughters and banging goats

Religion always takes away the fun times.

Trump’s mum left Scotland and this improved things for us immeasurably

Uncle fester wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:58 pm

lilyw wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 9:51 am Padraig Pearse - in his own lifetime achieved almost nothing on a national scale; however his actions in 1916 & his execution led directly to Irish independence 5 years later.

Michael C actually achieved something.

The War of Independence could be successfully waged because of public support. That support was a result of 1916, it wasn't nearly as widespread beforehand.

Sandstorm wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 7:32 pm

Theflier wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 2:34 pm Jesus.

Without him we'd still be sacrificing daughters and banging goats

Religion always takes away the fun times.

Meh... they just swapped the roles.

Theflier wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 2:34 pm Jesus.

Without him we'd still be sacrificing daughters and banging goats

And 2000 years later the priests are siring daughters and banging kids.

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 11:22 am I’m reading a history book* here that makes it clear that apartheid fell for a number of complex reasons. I can see why there’d be debate about it.

It says that de Klerk moved the country towards black majority rule “with great personal courage”. It says that the transition was “a remarkable achievement, for which de Klerk and Mandela deserve the credit.”

Like assfly says, international pressure is given as a key reason for apartheid’s fall.

The book does suggest though, that it was protest and resistance (along with brutal responses to it) that raised awareness overseas of the immoral nature of the system.

* Mastering Modern World History by Norman Lowe

FujiKiwi - I would highly recommend Playing the Enemy by John Carlin which is a great book to read given that its told from a rugby perspective.

I'm not making it up when I say that it changed my outlook on humanity and it shows the self defeating nature of hatred and bitterness and the importance of forgiveness. I read the book during the RWC 2019 and its why I was not unhappy to see the Springboks win.

Speaking of Apartheid, it's not so well remembered / known that one of our PMs most people seem to love to hate (for domestic, economic reasons - biggest defeat by a majority party in the early 90s) was a key figure in pressuring Commonwealth nations to condemn it.

https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local ... 44293.html

lilyw wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:36 pm

Uncle fester wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:58 pm

lilyw wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 9:51 am Padraig Pearse - in his own lifetime achieved almost nothing on a national scale; however his actions in 1916 & his execution led directly to Irish independence 5 years later.

Michael C actually achieved something.

The War of Independence could be successfully waged because of public support. That support was a result of 1916, it wasn't nearly as widespread beforehand.

Actually the rebels were roundly derided after 1916 and the destruction of Dublin city centre. It was the British decision to court martial them in secret with dodgy evidence and then spread the executions over an extended period of time that bought them sympathy and support. So really you should be giving credit to Maxwell.

Uncle fester wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:13 pm

lilyw wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:36 pm

Uncle fester wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:58 pm

Michael C actually achieved something.

The War of Independence could be successfully waged because of public support. That support was a result of 1916, it wasn't nearly as widespread beforehand.

Actually the rebels were roundly derided after 1916 and the destruction of Dublin city centre. It was the British decision to court martial them in secret with dodgy evidence and then spread the executions over an extended period of time that bought them sympathy and support. So really you should be giving credit to Maxwell.

Nope - the Rising played out essentially as Pearse expected it to (especially after Volunteer decision not to participate). He was never going to win militarily - it would only work when the public were brought on board. The British simply played their expected part (both in the executions & the internments in Wales). Without 1916 there would have been no War of Independence & Carson would have killed even the vestigial Home Rule Bill that existed prior to WW1.

lilyw wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:36 pm

Uncle fester wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:58 pm

lilyw wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 9:51 am Padraig Pearse - in his own lifetime achieved almost nothing on a national scale; however his actions in 1916 & his execution led directly to Irish independence 5 years later.

Michael C actually achieved something.

The War of Independence could be successfully waged because of public support. That support was a result of 1916, it wasn't nearly as widespread beforehand.

While the attraction to pick out leaders from the rising/war of Independence is obvious surely whoever lead Ireland to the relative prosperity (if that can be narrowed down to a single person) it enjoys now is a better candidate?

tc27 wrote: Tue Sep 29, 2020 2:12 pm

lilyw wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:36 pm

Uncle fester wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:58 pm

Michael C actually achieved something.

The War of Independence could be successfully waged because of public support. That support was a result of 1916, it wasn't nearly as widespread beforehand.

While the attraction to pick out leaders from the rising/war of Independence is obvious surely whoever lead Ireland to the relative prosperity (if that can be narrowed down to a single person) it enjoys now is a better candidate?

I gave serious consideration to TK Whittaker & Sean Lemass - the architects of Ireland's "pivot to modernity" from the '60s onwards; however I decided to go with Pearse on the grounds that all subsequent leaders only had the ability to make those decisions because we were independent. If 1916 (& hence 1922) hadn't happened then we would likely have suffered the same fate as NI - a long decline through benign neglect in which our best & brightest flocked to London (in even greater numbers than they did) and policies were pursued that were not designed with our interests primarily in mind.

(I know that there is a superficial parallel to Brexit. However while part of the UK Ireland had no independent decision making power at all (it took Scotland another 80+ years to achieve even a small fraction of the autonomy that we got in 1922 and then further enhanced in 1948), unlike the freedom that the UK enjoyed while a member of the EU.)

Trouble with Lemass is that if you want to give him credit for the "pivot to modernity", you also need to give him blame for being the minister in place for the Anglo-Irish trade war, which helped put us in such a dire position in the first place.

I'll throw a curveball for Ireland

How about Tony Ryan for economic impact?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Ryan

William I, Prince of Orange, also known as William the Silent of the House of Nassau.

Led the Dutch uprising against the Spanish in what became known as the 80 years war. When independence finally came it created the Dutch republic and started an era of economic prosperity and navy dominance equalled only by the English.

It also gave England William III when the Dutch Republic became the last country to successfully invade England during what is now known as the Glorious Revolution.

And it was during the early stages of the Dutch Republic that Abel Janszoon Tasman, a Dutch seafarer, explorer, and merchant, best known for his voyages of 1642 and 1644 in the service of the Dutch East India Company, was the first known European explorer to reach the islands of Van Diemen's Land, Fiji and New Zealand

FujiKiwi wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 9:52 am Isn’t it true that Muldoon screwed over the country in his own way and then Douglas et al came and screwed us all over again in a different fashion? I was a kid then and have never read up on what was going on the way I should have.

Few days late - as I've only just arrived in this place, but I think it falls under needed change (due to the Muldoon years/restricted economy etc), but the dude went too far and then that chick from the Nats quadrupled down and it had an negative effect socio-economically for a long time.

A little left field for NZ is Matiu Rata who was the driver behind the Waitangi Tribunal. And I know I'm baiting Sen here a bit, but trust me I think the case can be made - this was the impetus NZ needed to have a proper look at our race relations, and we developed a framework for moving forward which has led to a much more united country (although the economic reforms created some ghettos in the early 90s). Furthermore, it also reestablished social progressiveness (we gave women the vote and then turned more and more conservative over the century) in the country leading to Homosexual Law Reform and eventually marriage equality etc.

Also set the stage for the anti Aparthied protests in 1981 - since this features highly in this thread.

That is a great call FB.