8 ms·

>So too, when we look back, we will understand that the 21st century truly began this year, when the COVID19 pandemic took hold Couldn't one argue 9/11 was the

>So too, when we look back, we will understand that the 21st century truly began this year, when the COVID19 pandemic took hold Couldn't one argue 9/11 was the 'start' of the 21st century? And all the effects and tone it caused that last to this day?

randallsquared 6y ago
All that has faded into the background for Tim O'Reilly, I guess.
mytailorisrich 6y ago
It has been argued that the 20th century ended with the fall of the Soviet Union, and that the 19th century before it ended with WWI. The 20th century was a "short" century. 9/11 was a spectacular event but did not change anything fundamental and was neither the first nor the last Islamic terrorist attack in the West or on the West/US. In fact, the lid had been removed on Islamic extremism in the 90s, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, even if it had been brewing for quite some time before that: Soviet withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989 (leading to the Talibans seizing power), Algerian Civil War started in 1991, highjacking of Air France flight by Algerian terrorists in 1994 (said to be the blueprint for 9/11), attack on US Embassy in Nairobi in 1998, attack on USS Cole in 2000, etc. I think what 9/11 did is to make the American public catch up with the world they were living in because many of them had not realised yet. I'm not sure whether Covid-19 will change anything in the long term. It's too early to say. At the moment the main effect seems to be a significant economic downturn, which could have long term consequences, or not.
- gonzo41 6y ago
  9/11 resulted in a 20 year war. That's a big deal. 9/11 resulted in a generation of soldiers returning into civic life with serious physical and mental scars from that 20 years. Equality is worse, two nations have been destroyed. There are multiple failed states all over the middle east and north Africa. 9/11 was a really big deal. Everything did change that day.
  - mytailorisrich 6y ago
    If we're discussing events significant enough to be considered in a historical context as having changed things enough to warrant the claim that "the 20th century ended then" then no, 9/11 is not fundamentally significant in my view. Soldiers sent to war and suffering happen. In itself it is not historically significant, neither is an invasion in itself. You could argue that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was more significant because it fueled islamist extremism and the US backing of Al Qeada... While the US's invasion of Iraq has its root in the 80s and 90s, with 9/11 being only a convenient pretext, and does not seem to be hugely significant historically. Everything changed when the Berlin Wall fell/the Soviet Union collapsed. The reality is that nothing really changed on 9/11. An emotional perspective is not a historical perspective.
    - Kye 6y ago
      9/11 was significant because of things done in the name of it: endless wars, growth in the surveillance state, militarization of police. Those seem fundamental, and it all happened as a result of 9/11.
      - mytailorisrich 6y ago
        None of what you mention really started with 9/11 or is really significant in a global historical context, and especially if you want to debate when the 20th century ended, which ought to be based on global, key changes. Edit: Arguing that the 21st century started with 9/11 seems both superficial and American-centric to me, like your reply to this comment below. It misses the big picture, the global context.
        Kye 6y ago
        The PATRIOT Act was justified with the intelligence failures that led to 9/11. The militarized police get much of their gear from surpluses sold off from the endless wars justified by people no one would challenge because of "with us or against us" rhetoric following 9/11. Their funding comes from bills justified with "terrorism!" cries from people who feared a stranger with a bomb more than a cop with an armored personnel carrier following 9/11.
gpderetta 6y ago
I would say that 9/11 was the end of the '90s, in particular of the optimistic post cold-war period.
- sbarker 6y ago
  No, that was April 5, 1994... The end of the '90s
perthmad 6y ago
Nah, I agree with Hobsbawm in "The Short Twentieth Century" that the previous century ended in 1989, with the fall of the Berlin wall. Since then we've been observing the heyday of neoliberalism, fueled by a lack of a serious contender.
- brakmic 6y ago
  Neoliberalism effectively stopped any history. We are living in a Neoliberal Atemporality. Or more precisely: we have lived through it and are now about to leave it. Not sure what will follow next, but one thing is certain: the history is about to reboot itself.
sebwi 6y ago
Well, one can certainly debate that. There are discussions among historians about "the long 19th century" (1789-1914) [1] and the "short 20th century" (1914-1991) [2]. Maybe in the far future, people will talk about our times as part of a "short" or a "long" century as well. Does it really matter in the end though? I would just take these statements with a grain of salt. It's symbolism to create a feeling of urgency, a common spirit to take action or just a way to form identity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_nineteenth_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_nineteenth_century [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_twentieth_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_twentieth_century
JasonFruit 6y ago
Any history is best understood by those who lived it, and best contextualized by their great-grandchildren. I don't think we're capable of answering the question you pose for another hundred years or more.
Spooky23 6y ago
Perhaps, depends on who writes the history. I think 2001-2019 will be like 1900-1914, a prelude to the real story. 9/11 represented the first challenge to America’s post Cold War dominance and leadership. IMO, 2020 marks the beginning of the end of US leadership and a new path.
throwaway_USD 6y ago
>Couldn't one argue 9/11 was the 'start' of the 21st century? There was one major US political event in the 21st Century before 9/11 and arguably even lead to 9/11. People tend to forget the 2000 Presidential Election between Gore/Bush. It seems common place for a candidate to lose the popular vote but win the Election, which was the case between Gore/Bush, but we hadn't seen that prior to Gore/Bush since 1888. Not to mention the shenanigans (electronic votes in swing states like FL going to the opposite candidate, entire truck loads of missing ballots)...it ended in a lawsuit and the SCOTUS deciding the election. Politics/news coverage was set down a path of partisanship we have never recovered from and has only gotten worse. But to your point there is a chance 9/11 is stopped or never happens under Gore, and if 9/11 happened anyway, the response for sure would have been different and Iraq/Afghanistan wars likely never happen (perhaps an entire generation doesn't go off to the longest war in American history).
- MuffinFlavored 6y ago
  > It seems common place for a candidate to lose the popular vote but win the Election, which was the case between Gore/Bush I know the education of the average HNer is a bit higher than the average person off of the street. How is the electoral college perceived here? I've heard a great argument from a conservative friend: it prevents densely populated cities like LA + NY for speaking on the needs/wants of the entire country.
  - Juliate 6y ago
    On the other hand, it effectively makes the voices of each and every citizen of the USA not equals among themselves.
    - TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
      That's the point. Otherwise highly populous states would steamroll smaller states, causing tremendous political tension and long-term could trigger a war.
      - 6y ago

randallsquared 6y ago

All that has faded into the background for Tim O'Reilly, I guess.

mytailorisrich 6y ago

It has been argued that the 20th century ended with the fall of the Soviet Union, and that the 19th century before it ended with WWI. The 20th century was a "short" century. 9/11 was a spectacular event but did not change anything fundamental and was neither the first nor the last Islamic terrorist attack in the West or on the West/US. In fact, the lid had been removed on Islamic extremism in the 90s, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, even if it had been brewing for quite some time before that: Soviet withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989 (leading to the Talibans seizing power), Algerian Civil War started in 1991, highjacking of Air France flight by Algerian terrorists in 1994 (said to be the blueprint for 9/11), attack on US Embassy in Nairobi in 1998, attack on USS Cole in 2000, etc. I think what 9/11 did is to make the American public catch up with the world they were living in because many of them had not realised yet. I'm not sure whether Covid-19 will change anything in the long term. It's too early to say. At the moment the main effect seems to be a significant economic downturn, which could have long term consequences, or not.

gonzo41 6y ago
9/11 resulted in a 20 year war. That's a big deal. 9/11 resulted in a generation of soldiers returning into civic life with serious physical and mental scars from that 20 years. Equality is worse, two nations have been destroyed. There are multiple failed states all over the middle east and north Africa. 9/11 was a really big deal. Everything did change that day.
- mytailorisrich 6y ago
  If we're discussing events significant enough to be considered in a historical context as having changed things enough to warrant the claim that "the 20th century ended then" then no, 9/11 is not fundamentally significant in my view. Soldiers sent to war and suffering happen. In itself it is not historically significant, neither is an invasion in itself. You could argue that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was more significant because it fueled islamist extremism and the US backing of Al Qeada... While the US's invasion of Iraq has its root in the 80s and 90s, with 9/11 being only a convenient pretext, and does not seem to be hugely significant historically. Everything changed when the Berlin Wall fell/the Soviet Union collapsed. The reality is that nothing really changed on 9/11. An emotional perspective is not a historical perspective.
  - Kye 6y ago
    9/11 was significant because of things done in the name of it: endless wars, growth in the surveillance state, militarization of police. Those seem fundamental, and it all happened as a result of 9/11.
    - mytailorisrich 6y ago
      None of what you mention really started with 9/11 or is really significant in a global historical context, and especially if you want to debate when the 20th century ended, which ought to be based on global, key changes. Edit: Arguing that the 21st century started with 9/11 seems both superficial and American-centric to me, like your reply to this comment below. It misses the big picture, the global context.
      - Kye 6y ago
        The PATRIOT Act was justified with the intelligence failures that led to 9/11. The militarized police get much of their gear from surpluses sold off from the endless wars justified by people no one would challenge because of "with us or against us" rhetoric following 9/11. Their funding comes from bills justified with "terrorism!" cries from people who feared a stranger with a bomb more than a cop with an armored personnel carrier following 9/11.

gpderetta 6y ago

I would say that 9/11 was the end of the '90s, in particular of the optimistic post cold-war period.

sbarker 6y ago
No, that was April 5, 1994... The end of the '90s

perthmad 6y ago

Nah, I agree with Hobsbawm in "The Short Twentieth Century" that the previous century ended in 1989, with the fall of the Berlin wall. Since then we've been observing the heyday of neoliberalism, fueled by a lack of a serious contender.

brakmic 6y ago
Neoliberalism effectively stopped any history. We are living in a Neoliberal Atemporality. Or more precisely: we have lived through it and are now about to leave it. Not sure what will follow next, but one thing is certain: the history is about to reboot itself.

sebwi 6y ago

Well, one can certainly debate that. There are discussions among historians about "the long 19th century" (1789-1914) [1] and the "short 20th century" (1914-1991) [2]. Maybe in the far future, people will talk about our times as part of a "short" or a "long" century as well. Does it really matter in the end though? I would just take these statements with a grain of salt. It's symbolism to create a feeling of urgency, a common spirit to take action or just a way to form identity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_nineteenth_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_nineteenth_century [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_twentieth_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_twentieth_century

JasonFruit 6y ago

Any history is best understood by those who lived it, and best contextualized by their great-grandchildren. I don't think we're capable of answering the question you pose for another hundred years or more.

Spooky23 6y ago

Perhaps, depends on who writes the history. I think 2001-2019 will be like 1900-1914, a prelude to the real story. 9/11 represented the first challenge to America’s post Cold War dominance and leadership. IMO, 2020 marks the beginning of the end of US leadership and a new path.

throwaway_USD 6y ago

>Couldn't one argue 9/11 was the 'start' of the 21st century? There was one major US political event in the 21st Century before 9/11 and arguably even lead to 9/11. People tend to forget the 2000 Presidential Election between Gore/Bush. It seems common place for a candidate to lose the popular vote but win the Election, which was the case between Gore/Bush, but we hadn't seen that prior to Gore/Bush since 1888. Not to mention the shenanigans (electronic votes in swing states like FL going to the opposite candidate, entire truck loads of missing ballots)...it ended in a lawsuit and the SCOTUS deciding the election. Politics/news coverage was set down a path of partisanship we have never recovered from and has only gotten worse. But to your point there is a chance 9/11 is stopped or never happens under Gore, and if 9/11 happened anyway, the response for sure would have been different and Iraq/Afghanistan wars likely never happen (perhaps an entire generation doesn't go off to the longest war in American history).

MuffinFlavored 6y ago
> It seems common place for a candidate to lose the popular vote but win the Election, which was the case between Gore/Bush I know the education of the average HNer is a bit higher than the average person off of the street. How is the electoral college perceived here? I've heard a great argument from a conservative friend: it prevents densely populated cities like LA + NY for speaking on the needs/wants of the entire country.
- Juliate 6y ago
  On the other hand, it effectively makes the voices of each and every citizen of the USA not equals among themselves.
  - TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
    That's the point. Otherwise highly populous states would steamroll smaller states, causing tremendous political tension and long-term could trigger a war.
    - 6y ago