TIME Magazine famously chose Albert Einstein as its person of the twentieth century. Some argued that it should have been Hitler based on the TIME's criterion that the person chosen "should have the greatest impact on this century, for better or worse."

I think TIME was right to choose Einstein over Hitler. Hitler was simply another European warlord. Einstein, like Newton before him, gave us a whole new way of understanding the universe. His impact will far outlive the twentieth century.

And yet I wonder whether Einstein was the right choice. Perhaps in retrospect the man who had the greatest impact on the twentieth century, even though it may not have been apparent at the time, was Deng Xiaoping. If it were not for Deng would we be debating whether China was going to be the next super-power? Would the Dell laptop I'm using today bear the label "Made in in China"?

It was the twice-purged Deng who returned to political life after Mao's death, garnered enough support to oust Mao's chosen successor, Hua Guofeng and reform China. It was Deng who opened China to foreign trade and investment, who toured the country after Tiananmen Square and urged a continuation of his reforms.

Deng died aged 92. His long life truly is stranger than fiction.

I do not know whether China will become the world's pre-eminent power but it is now certainly a great power. I doubt that would have happened without Deng.

If anyone can be said to have altered the course of history, for good or ill, it is Deng Xiaoping. He has my nomination for person of the twentieth century.

Here is a link to Deng's Wikipedia entry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deng_Xiaoping

My nomination for person of the last millennium is Charles Darwin but that's another story.

Dear Steven,

My vote goes to Mikhail Gorbachev.

He helped bring an end to both the Soviet Union and
the Cold War. Who can forget the collapse of the
Berlin Wall.

There were many wonderful famous men one could nominate for person of the 20th century.
The first one I thought of was John F Kennedy, a truly inspiring orator and President.

Then I thought of how few women I could find on the list I found on Ask.com.
http://history1900s.about.com/od/people/tp/famouspeople.htm

Surely any woman on that list at that time would have fought harder than most for their cause or career?

So I nominate Margaret Thatcher for my person of the 20th Century.

She was tough and had to make the hard choices in England during her time as PM.
She played a big part in stopping the Cold War, and securing better relations between the US and Russia, thus averting a possible World war 3.

It must have been extremely hard for her in such a man's world!

Steven I'd nominate Deng as well, Hitler left no real legacy since the Germans had no interest in National Socialism after the war and the only Hitler most Western people know is the cartoon version invented by American filmmakers and novelists. Only a relatively small number of people can understand theoretical physics, Einstein is remembered for his "mad scientist" persona and those cheesy photos of him poking his tongue out at the cameraman.
Deng was a real leader, that's the first qualification I'd look for.

I nominate two as equals.
Gandhi and Mandela
Both gave the world the gift of hope and that the thought the impossible can be done.

My nomination goes to the persons responsible for the internet, because it has given everyone with access so much more reach and impact

Just consider the breadth of that impact: online banking,travel & entertainment bookings, gaming, bookshops, medical services/monitoring/testing,news/information sources, education,conferencing --truly the first phase of the singularity.

Only the other-day a teenager asked me: "What would the world have been like without the internet?"-- and I had to Google it before I could give him an answer.

SPQR wrote:

>>My nomination goes to the persons responsible for the internet,>>

You have a point.

TIME gave as its reason for choosing Einstein that the 20th century would be known as the century of science and Einstein represented the scientific field. Their write-up on Einstein focused heavily on his relationship to other scientists who established the fundamentals that made, inter alia, the internet possible.

For example it was Einstein's photo-electric theory, built on the prior work of Planck and Lennard, that established the existence of light quanta - now called photons. Without that understanding there would probably have been no lasers, no electron microscopes and probably no transistors and microchips.

Obviously Einstein did not do all this himself. Just as he built on the work of his predecessors so others built on his work.

However, if I look at the impact of a single person, rather than a group, my vote would still go to Deng.

If I look at groups I agree with TIME that the 20th century, and the 19th century for that matter, were the centuries of the scientists and the engineers.

I suspect the 21st century too will belong to scientists and engineers where I include software engineers.

But I cannot think of a single person, as opposed to a group, that had a bigger impact, for good or ill, than Deng

Fritz Haber...

"Fertilizer generated from ammonia produced by the Haber process is estimated to be responsible for sustaining one-third of the Earth's population. It is estimated that half of the protein within human beings is made of nitrogen that was originally fixed by this process..."

"Due to its dramatic impact on the human ability to grow food, the Haber process served as the "detonator of the population explosion", enabling the global population to increase from 1.6 billion in 1900 to today's 7 billion." (both quotes: wikipedia)

Plus, estimates place the process as consuming between 1 and 2 percent of the world's annual energy consumption.

Greatest impact?

Fritz Haber, simultaneously the greatest impact for the better and the worse. Depending upon your opinion of the impact, of course.

WmTrevor suggest Fritz Haber

And you've changed my mind.

Thinking it over I would have to agree. I cannot think of any single person, as opposed to group, who had a greater impact on the 20th century and beyond than Fritz Haber.

In fact China would not be able to support a population of > 1.2 billion without Haber's discoveries.

So I hereby withdraw my nomination and endorse yours :)

Belly,
Gandhi would have shot Mandela dead had they existed in South Africa at the same time.
Gandhi and Mandela are cult figures like Ayatollah Khomeini, Che Guevara or Hugo Chavez, they're more myth than man whose "contributions" are also mythical in nature as opposed to substantial.

Suse,
With her ferocious intellect had Margaret Thatcher stayed with her chosen vocation she would almost certainly have achieved greatness as a scientist, instead she's known merely a notorious politician.
There's no such thing as a female leader, they're figureheads like Mrs Thatcher and Julia Gillard, mascots like Hillary Clinton and Nancy Reagan or totems like Aung San Suu Kyi and Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

What a marvellous Topic - Wish I could have thought of something as noble as this ?

Anyway, my choice would undoubtable be - Aung San Suu KYI. This wise and courageous lady renounced her own personal happiness, for the sake of her countrymen and women. Winning the Nobel Prize for Peace, as a consequence of her sacrifice.

Stunning stuff JOM.
And your ability to redraw history is too.
Gandhi never shot any one, he is revered for his invention of nonviolence.
And you place the man who ended apartheid at another time being an-enemy to a man he would have much in common with.

Wow, I can't get it below about ten or a dozen.

I do like Maggie, but she only sorted out the UK.

Haber is definitely in there as is Einstein, but there are many more.

Na, it is too hard for me to get to just one

Ten solid years of Mrs Margaret THATCHER, at the helm of OZ ? More than likely there'd be no more 'King Hits', squandered public monies. There'd be a doubling of the Defence Forces budget, every single copper would be equipped with a, H&K MP10 - wow, we'd clean up the streets and all the violent crime then ! Sorry there folks, a slight slip in my thinking, caused by both my aspirations and creativity materializing again ?

Someone mentioned Hitler ? Sure in the early thirties he managed to drag Germany from their national depression and give them some hope. Then he managed to plunge the country into a massive world war ?

I'm not entirely sure if Nelson Mandela would be a front runner ? A great man for the Republic of South Africa, though...?

JoM, if you consider Maggie Thatcher as a mere 'figurehead' then what would you call some of the weak men who preceded her, and a few after her as well?
She was so far from a figurehead that it makes your comment seem almost insane!

I look forward to our first black, gay female PM.
Certainly, any future female leaders could only improve on those that went before them...

Well Suse, you had better wait for a conservative. Every lefty female PM, or state premier has been a total catastrophe.

It does appear that almost all lefty ladies have too big a chip on their shoulder, to have any room left to support society.

I would be happy with a black, gay, female Conservative PM,
Hasbeen, I'm not fussy : )

Belly Gandhi was a soldier in South Africa who fought "Kaffir" uprisings, he genuinely disliked Africans, described them as inferior and he wasn't a champion of non violence but civil disobedience, he had no problem with armed struggle.
The Truth About Gandhi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XG2bKiRu48Y
See this is why he's more myth than man, Gandhi is only a peacemaker in the minds of White liberal minded people, the Western Liberal narrative has nothing to do with reality.
As the presenter said "Heroes and idols diminish the worshipper".

Suse,
I agreee, the men who have followed her have been the worst of a bad bunch because they're not as intelligent as she was, Liberal democracy has run it's course, the nation state and therefore politics are finished as a force for change. It wouldn't matter if you had a Gay, Black or disabled premier, they have no people and no nations left to rally to their standard. There are no Western leaders because there's nobody to follow them, that's why we have people like you and Belly living in the past on a diet of mythology and hero worship.

There is no doubt in my mind that Adolf Hitler was the most influential person of the 20th century. His rise to power seen the destruction of 60 million people. He, more than anyone else was responsible for WWII, which as a positive seen the rise of good technology for mankind, and bad, atomic bombs. It seen the destruction of the worlds most powerful empire, the British Empire, and its subsequent impact on millions of people. The complete redesign of Europe was the result of Hitlers efforts. The UN, love it or hate it, partly a result of Hitler. The emergence of the worlds new super powers, USA and USSR and the resultant cold war has its roots in Hitler. You could even say man would never have landed on the Moon if it wasn't for Hitler and German war, rocket technology. His personal hatred seen the destruction of 6 million Jews, this resulted in the acceleration of the formation of the state of Israel and in part the 70 years of Mid East conflicts. There is very little in the world today that can't be traced back to Adolf and his obsession with war and world domination, starting about 95 years ago after his involvement in WWI.
I think WWI was the most significant event to take place in the 20th century. I say that as I think WWII, and Hitler, were a result of WWI and not independent of it, more an extension of it.
The most influential person of all times, in my view, was Jesus Christ, a man who has influenced billions of lives over 2 millennium. The most significant event of all times, in my view, is the Big Bang, for without it none of the above would have happened. Unless you want to accept the existence of God then he/she/it has to be accepted as the most significant person/event of all times.

I agree it's probably Gorbachev for the global physical changes he instigated.

As for Gandhi and Mandela, they were admirable figureheads with Gandhi achieving great change through non-violent means.

On a personal level however, Gandhi was still a child-abusing wife beater who was cruel to his own children and Mandela was on Clinton's terrorist watch-list and refused to repudiate violence as a political tool - so they all have "feet of clay".

Thatcher's legacy (like Reagan's) is well recorded by those who suffered under her regime.

Dear wobbles,

The following link might be of interest to you:

http://www.rferl.org/content/Gorbachevs_Legacy_Examined_25_Years_After_His_Rise_To_Power/1980816.html

No one has nominated Johnny "Tacky Dacks" Howard or The Mad Monk for that matter......I need one of those funny faces to tack on the end of that. LOL etc etc and of course etc.

Dear Paul,

Perhaps posters prefer leaders who successfully pursue
generally commendable elements of nation building
which at their best are outward looking and
compassionate, not inward-looking and narrow.

Paul were you raised by WW2 propaganda officers?
Leaving aside all the other nonsense in your post you should know that the British and Americans at all times maintained superiority over Germany in technology and intelligence capacity. By the end of the war Germany was developing prototypes of technology comparable to what was being developed in the West but for the whole of the war Germans fought with inferior weapons and machinery, relied mostly on horse drawn transport and railways and never developed the advanced tactics in which the allied soldiers were drilled.
By your logic and the way you calculate the lasting impact of statesmen Stalin or Mao would definitely have to be placed above Hitler for you to maintain any credibility.

Jay
Just to answer your post, which is not on the topic. Please explain how from June 5th 1940 the day after Dunkirk, to December 11th 1941 when Germany declared war on the United States, a period of some 18 months. Please explain how Britain was as you say "maintaining superiority over Germany". Why, following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour did Churchill jump up and down exclaiming "We've won, we've won." before Pearl Harbour did Churchill possibly think Britain was staring defeat in the face.
You also said "Germans fought with inferior weapons and machinery" Please tell me which allied tank other than possibly the Russian T34 was superior to the German Tiger tanks, particularly when they were fitted with 88mm guns. The mainstay of the US was the M4 Sherman also called the "Ronson lighter" as it burst into flames easily. It usually required 5 Sherman's to knock out 1 Tiger tank. The British had the "Tommy cooker"
Jay, which allied rocket was superior to the German's V2? Who's talking nonsense "(Germany) relied mostly on horse drawn transport" really Jay, next thing you know, you'll be telling us the Germans were using bows and arrows as their number 1 weapon. I respect my father and uncles and what they did in WWII, they all said the Germans and the Japanese were a mighty enemy and no push over.

Paul while I agree with you about the Tiger tank, & the 88 as antiaircraft & tank guns, the Germans were still using a great deal of horse transport. They never did build a decent truck, & just imagine what the outcome might have been if they had had a decent bomber.

If they had had a Lancaster equivalent, It could easily have gone the other way. The rockets they had were really only an anti moral weapon at that time.

Just out of curiosity.

How did a discussion on "Person of the Twentieth Century" degenerate into an argument about who had the better trucks in 1940?

That Stevenlmeyer, is one of the things I love about OLO, the threads develop a life of their own.

I suppose it would be annoying if you have a pedantic mind, but if a topic grows branches, I find it much more interesting.

Hasbeen, not that you and I agree often but your comments are spot on. In some things the Germans were brilliant, in others they were crap. Once the Russians turned thing around at Stalingrad and the Yanks got their war production into top gear, the Germans were gone. Material wise, and resource wise, the Germans couldn't match it with the allies. Having said that, they were no push over. if it had been left to the Brits alone they would have gone down, Churchill knew that.
I appreciate Belly's views on Gandhi and Mandela and both were important figures within their own spheres. Probably Gandhi more so than Mandela.
Jay's, Stalin and Mao did exert a very big influence over world events. I don't think either had a "plan" for world domination as Hitler did. If they did they never went to the extreme of trying to implement it. Stalin can't even be held responsible for the Cold War, he didn't even give Moe much of a helping hand in China in 1949. Other than China's involvement in Korea and a bit of support for the Vietnamese Moe did little to spread communism in Asia. I think both Stalin and Moe were much more preoccupied with internal matters than taking on the West, which the did genuinely fear.

Without any doubt whatsoever, the most influential person of the 20th century was Adolf Hitler.

He was a Christian for all his life. Baptised as a Roman Catholic, and practiced his religion even well into the war years (obviously with limitations during that specific time). Germany then was overwhelmingly a Christian nation, and Hitler received massive support from German Christianity. He also received massive support in many different ways, from the Vatican.

He was certainly the most evil Christian to have ever lived, and possibly the most evil person to have ever lived.

Nobody in the 20th century influenced the world more than Adolf Hitler.

I'd like to nominate one other person as the
person of the twentieth century.
Malala Yousafzai. The Pakistani schoolgirl
who defied threats of the Taliban to campaign
for the rights to education.

What she did earns her the right of at least a mention
on this forum. She survived being shot in the head by
the Taliban and has become an advocate for women's
rights, especially the right to education.

More like her are desperately needed to lead the way
and give hope to the many people that so desperately
need it in those troubled areas. It took great courage
to do what she's done.

Foxy, "It took great courage to do what she's done." Could not agree more. There were many individuals in the 20th C that achieved great things, Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King jr, In science and medicine Marie Curie, Dr Jonas Salk, Albert Schweitzer and many more.

>>Who do you nominate for person of the twentieth century?<<

Douglas Adams (PBUH). Clearly, hands down, Adams is the winner.

But as for the runners up:

1st runner up: Albert Einstein

2nd runner up: Karl Popper

And in no particular order, all the people considered for an honourable mention:

Imre Lakatos
Erwin Schrodinger
Niels Bohr
Werner Heisenberg
Satyendra Nath-Bose
Richard Feynman
John Bell
David Bohm
Hugh Everett

Isaac Asimov
Philip Kindred Dick
Ray Bradbury
Eric Blair

J.R.R Tolkien
C.S. Lewis
J.K. Rowling
Diana Wynne Jones

Terry Pratchett
Robert Rankin
Neil Gaiman
Robert Lynne Asprin

Cheers,

Tony

Tony is that a list of your friends and neighbors?
Douglas Adams, Yogi Bear's sidekick Boo Boo would have more chance of winning such an award than Dougie Adams, as for the rest of your list, you left off Huckleberry Hound. A nice gee up there Tony. LOL.

>>Douglas Adams, Yogi Bear's sidekick Boo Boo would have more chance of winning such an award than Dougie Adams<<

The 6th level of Hell is the level for heretics, and that's where I'm headed.

The 7th is for the violent: all those young thugs doing coward punches end up there.

I believe the 8th is for frauds: the sub-prime mortgage collapse will have sent a lot of merchant b(w)ankers to an unfortunate circle.

And the 9th, of course, is for the treasonous: Judas, Cain, Brutus and other charming figures from literary history end up there.

But there is a 10th circle of hell. Dante didn't publish that bit because he couldn't get it past the censors. You don't want to know what happens to people who are banished to the 10th circle. The 10th circle is the eventual resting place of those who don't appreciate the Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy. I'd like to imagine that it includes a functional Total Perspective Vortex.

Cheers,

Tony

To All, before you cast your vote for the person of the twentieth century, I would like to point out a couple of little known "facts" about the leading contenders.

Albert Einstein
Einstein couldn't drive a car, in fact he was a worse driver than my Aunt Sally, and Auntie was a shocker of a driver. The average competent drivers IQ is 105, I ask, well then what was Einstein's?
Einstein when buying cloths, like a suit, would purchase 7 identical suits. Why? because he couldn't be bothered choosing daily what to wear. No fashion sense.
Einstein's favorite ice cream flavor was pistachio, I can understand a person liking vanilla, or chocolate or even strawberry, what kind of sick mind has a favorite ice cream flavor of pistachio?

Adolf Hitler
Hitler's only true friend, not counting Eva Braun and she committed suicide, was his dog Blondie. Hitler once commented how cruel it was to keep a goldfish in a bowl. The man obviously had a lot of compassion for animals.
Hitler was having it off with his niece, she committed suicide.
What did Adolf Hitler and Joe Starlin have in common? Both their wives committed suicide. Didn't have much luck with the ladies did old Adolf. Could be worth the sympathy vote.

If the category was to nominate the Prophet of the twentieth century I would wish Douglas Adams (PBUH) to be shortlisted if only for the Meaning of Liff books...

However, as it is for mere mortals and not even for worthiness but for impact (good or bad) I would like to add an Honorable Mention along with my earlier nominee.

A person whose contribution from 1920 daily impacts billions of people (for good and bad) in many more billions of ways through the theft of our autonomy:

Police officer William Potts of Detroit, Michigan

for the creation and introduction of the four-way, three-colour traffic light.

WmTrevor

>>Police officer William Potts of Detroit, Michigan

for the creation and introduction of the four-way, three-colour traffic light.>>

Surely you've got this the wrong way around.

The purpose of traffic lights is not "impact" but rather "avoiding impact."

:)

As Ricky Ricardo might have said, "Lucy, I'm homonym."