Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Objectivism

2009-12-02T23:50:28Z

AungSein: /* The Central Axiom and its Corollaries */

[[Objectivism]] ([[Latin]] ''ob-'' out of and ''iacio'' I am throwing, and [[Greek]] '''-ισμος''' or ''-ismos'' the doing of a thing) is a school of [[philosophy]] that holds that things in the natural world exist independently of anyone's perception of them or efforts (or lack of effort) to understand them. Objectivism ''also'' holds that ''nothing'' is provably real that one cannot ''demonstrate'' independently of one person's percept of it.

== History of Objectivism ==
Objectivism as a formal discipline began with [[Ayn Rand]], a [[Russia|Russian]]-born émigrée to the [[United States]]. Ayn Rand attended The University of Petrograd where she studied philosophy and history. She graduated in 1924. In her work, showed more than a passing familiarity with the great philosophers of ancient Western civilization. The ancient philosopher she respected the most was [[Aristotle]].

By far the most complete expression of Objectivism in a single volume is in her novel, ''[[Atlas Shrugged]]''<ref name=Atlas>[[Ayn Rand|Rand, Ayn]]. ''[[Atlas Shrugged]]''. New York: Random House Publishers, 1957, 1168 pages, cloth. ISBN 0394415760</ref>. However, her philosophy found expression in innumerable essays, which she published in a number of newsletters and magazines that she edited from time to time: ''The Objectivist Newsletter'', ''The Objectivist'', and ''The Ayn Rand Letter.''

Since her death in 1982, other students of hers, most notably [[Leonard Peikoff]] and Erick Werman, have tried to carry on her work. Whether they have enjoyed any success is a debatable question. For better or worse, the history of Objectivism is largely the history of Ayn Rand herself, and by the time she died, the name ''Objectivism'' was known chiefly to her admirers and to readers of her works.<ref name=Passion>[[Barbara Branden|Branden, Barbara]]. ''The Passion of Ayn Rand''. New York: Anchor Publishers, 1987, 464 pages, paperback. ISBN 038524388X</ref>

== The Fundamental Tenets of Objectivism ==
Objectivism attempts to be a "unified theory of everything worth thinking about." As such it addresses prominent issues in [[metaphysics]], [[epistemology]], [[ethics]], [[Political philosophy|politics]], and [[aesthetics]].

=== The Central Axiom and its Corollaries ===
Objectivism starts with a simple [[axiom]]: ''existence exists''<ref name=Atlas/>, often summed up as the intentionally tautologous 'A=A'. To grasp that axiom is to realize two other, corollary axioms:

# Something exists that someone perceives.<ref name=Atlas/>
# Someone exists who possesses ''consciousness'', which is the faculty of perceiving what exists.<ref name=Atlas/>

=== Metaphysical Axioms and Theorems ===
Objectivism continues with a number of other corollaries:

# A is A.<ref name=Atlas/> This is also known as the Law of Identity and suggests a similar law in [[formal logic]]. But more than that, the Law of Identity holds that A has certain properties, or ''attributes'', that distinguish it incontrovertibly from B or C. If a thing has no attributes, then it is a nonentity--it does not and cannot exist.
# Consciousness exists--the Law of Consciousness. But consciousness implies something independent of consciousness. What one perceives, one does not invent--and furthermore, a thing exists whether one perceives it or not.

From these axioms, several [[theorem]]s necessarily follow, among them the Law of Non-Contradiction. Aristotle stated it thus: "the same attribute cannot at the same time belong and not belong to the same subject in the same respect." Objectivism states it more simply: ''contradictions do not exist.'' Therefore, if one encounters a contradiction, one should check the assumptions he has made, because at least one of them is false.

=== Epistemology ===
[[Epistemology]] (from [[Greek]] words roughly meaning "the word stands on something") deals with what a human being knows and how he knows it. Objectivism states that perception is only the beginning. Perception is sensation extended over time, and perception becomes knowledge only through ''measurement.'' On the other hand, one forms a ''concept'' of something by developing a list of attributes ''without'' the measurements of them. Apply the measurements, and instead of a concept one has an object that fits the concept.

One important result of pure Objectivism is that what one cannot perceive, one cannot know--and what no one has perceived, no one need admit the existence of. Indeed, [[Nathaniel Branden|Branden]]<ref name=BrandenBenHaz>[[Nathaniel Branden|Branden, Nathaniel]]. [http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/articles_essays/benefits_and_hazards.html The Benefits and Hazards of the Philosophy of Ayn Rand]. Association for Humanistic Psychology, 1984.</ref> observed that Objectivism teaches that <blockquote>(A)ny form of irrationalism, supernaturalism, or mysticism, (and) any claim to a nonsensory, nonrational form of knowledge, is to be rejected.</blockquote>

This includes [[God]], a Concept that almost no Objectivist has ever accepted. This might be Objectivism's greatest weakness: that it will not admit that which one cannot perceive directly, but which has affected ''something else'' that one perceives, and that in a measurable way.

=== Ethics ===
[[Ethics]] is about values. What is value? From ''Atlas Shrugged''<ref name=Atlas/>:<blockquote>"Value" is what one acts to gain and/or keep; "virtue" is how one acts to gain or keep it.</blockquote>

The central contribution of Objectivism to ethics is the definition of morality. Again from ''Atlas Shrugged''<ref name=Atlas/>:<blockquote>"Value" presupposes an answer to the question, "Of value to whom, and to what?" "Value" presupposes a ''standard''...A code of values accepted by choice is a code of morality.</blockquote>

Objectivism then declares that the only moral code proper to man has ''man's life'' as its standard of value. Rand, Peikoff, and other students of Objectivism have always drawn a stark contrast between this standard and the standard of those they regarded as their opponents: "the greatest good for the greatest number."

But this does not mean that Objectivism extols what most people mean by ''selfishness''. Objectivism regards that sort of "selfishness" as shortsighted and non-rational. Objectivism requires that a person ''choose'' to be rational in his thinking, and should work to enhance his self-interest ''after determining what that interest is after rational and logical analysis.''

Objectivism makes at least two definitions that non-adherents might find harsh and symptomatic of [[Logical fallacy#Overgeneralization|overgeneralization]]:

# "Sacrifice" is the giving away of a greater value in favor of a lesser value or a non-value.<ref name=Atlas/>
# "Altruism" is sacrifice, as defined above, for the sake of persons other than oneself.

Actually, what Objectivism calls ''sacrifice'', other schools of philosophy call ''waste''. Sacrifice, according to these other schools, is actually the giving of a great value for another, still greater value. Furthermore, the definition of ''altruism'' implies that no man should be obliged, let alone forced, to care or act for the sake of other people.

Indeed, in only one context does Objectivism itself lay any obligation on its adherents to act for the sake of another, and that is in an ''emergency''--which Objectivism defines as an immediate life-threatening casualty event or condition.

Rand, Peikoff, and other adherents to Objectivism held that their greatest objection was to the use of force in social relationships. This leads directly to the Objectivist theory of politics.

=== Politics ===
[[Political philosophy|Politics]] (from the [[Greek]] '''πολις''' a city, from the organization of [[Greece|Greek]] civilization around independent city-states) is the philosophy of [[government]]--the need for it, its proper sphere, and the obligations of its subjects. The central axiom of Objectivist politics is that<blockquote>Force is permissible ''only'' in retaliation and ''only'' against those who initiate its use.<ref name=Atlas/></blockquote>

This is the Law of Retaliation, or ''Lex talionis'' in [[Latin]].

Thus a government ought not compel charity--and in this context, ''compulsion'' is the application of force to induce another person toward an action he might not otherwise take. Nor should the government compel anyone to associate with those with whom he would prefer not to associate. Freedom of association is very important in Objectivist politics.

Objectivism holds that an individual has a fundamental right to life--but this "right to life" means the right to live one's life as his self-interest dictates, not the right to expect someone else either to protect his life or to guarantee his survival.

From these principles, the only economic system with which Objectivism has any sympathy is [[capitalism]], with its emphasis on the rights of the individual. Objectivism rejects the [[welfare state]] as an improper exercise of the government's police power. (But Objectivism also would object strenuously to the body of special tax incentives and other legal provisions and regulations often called "[[corporate welfare]]." Objectivism holds that every individual, and by extension every business, must stand or fall on his, her, or its own merits.)

However, Objectivism also holds that the government ought to reserve to itself a [[monopoly]] on the exercise of force, when necessary, in retaliation against the initiators of force. As a repeated theme in Rand's novels and essays, a government ought to confine itself to three major functions:

# The police power--to protect against criminals.
# The military power--to protect against invasion from without.
# The judicial power--to protect contracts from breach or fraud, and to provide a forum for the settlement of disputes without resort to force.

From the above, one may conclude that Objectivism rejects the [[code duello]] as an improper feature of society, and even as an attribute of [[anarchy]]. In fact, Rand herself specifically stated that government must be a [[monopoly]], because any "competitive [[economy]]" of government would inevitably lead to a state not much different from gang warfare.

However, Rand herself advocated many things the support for which, from a strict read of Objectivism, is doubtful. She repeatedly stated, in a number of essays and in at least one magazine interview, that <blockquote>Just as the [[United States]] had the right to invade [[Nazi]] [[Germany]], so the United States has the right to invade [[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics|Soviet Russia]] or any other slave pen.</blockquote> She justified this aggressive foreign policy stance by drawing up a set of four evil policies that, if any country engaged in all of the same, would make it liable for invasion by a society that did not do these things:

# Execution without a proper, fair trial
# Detention without charge
# Denial of the right of dissatisfied subjects to emigrate
# Censorship

By "censorship" Rand meant not only restrictions on political speech, but in fact any restriction on any form of artistic expression--even on forms of expression that she explicitly despised and suggested that any rational being would despise.

By her theory, then, if people were at least free to leave a society that executed people without trial, then if they did not leave, no country ought to be obliged to relieve their suffering by invasion. But if they ''could not'' leave, then their country would be liable for invasion, because they could not rationally help themselves. The freedom of emigration follows from the freedom of association--and the obligation, such as it was, of other nation-states and their militaries to come to such people's aid follows from the Objectivist ethic of emergencies, defined above.

Of course, any country that invades or otherwise attacks another, either directly or through surrogates, lays itself open to a counterinvasion by the country so attacked. This follows from the principle of the Law of Retaliation defined above.

=== Aesthetics ===
[[Art]], according to Objectivism, serves a need to allow man to ''perceive'' directly that which normally he can only ''conceive''. Art, in short, makes things real. An [[artist]] is any person who presents abstract concepts in concrete ways.

Objectivism's take on art is simple: art should uplift, and present uplifting things. The favorite school of art among students of Objectivism is [[Romantic realism]], the name that Rand gave to a school of art that emphasizes human reason and ideals and primarily portrays people striving to do great deeds, rather than suffering great disasters--in short, being ''proactive'' rather than ''reactive''. Good art, in other words, celebrates that which Objectivism itself celebrates: the ideal rational man. Forms of art that which emphasized emotion over reason, and especially anything that divorced emotion from reason, earned the consistent disdain of Rand and her colleagues. Similarly, Objectivism decries any form of art that shows human beings being reactive and slaves to emotion.

Pornography excited an interesting reaction. Objectivists detested it, on the grounds that sex was too important an activity for public display. But they feared censorship even more, on the ground that a government that stopped prurient content could stop political speech all the more easily. (Neither [[Ayn Rand]] nor any of her associates ever commented on such strictly private efforts as the [[Hays office]].)

== Controversies ==
[[Nathaniel Branden]], Rand's closest-ever associate and confidant, set forth in 1984 a number of defects in Objectivist philosophy, or at least Rand's theory and practice of it:

# A tendency to confuse "reason" with "the reasonable," essentially a problem in informal logic.
# The encouragement of its students to repress all emotion as somehow unworthy, all in the name of being proactive rather than reactive.
# A tendency toward "moralizing," or condemning others for not adhering to a strict emotional discipline.
# The [[Logical fallacy#Conflation|conflation]] of "sacrifice" with benevolence.
# Emphasizing philosophical premises to an unhealthy degree, leading to an often unwarranted judgment of ''character'' by the criterion of ''belief''.
# A dogmatic, inflexible approach to philosophy and its various disciplines, leading to the inability to forgive a mistake in philosophical formulation or application.

In this last context, Branden specifically decried Rand's conclusion that "no woman should aspire to be [[President of the United States of America]]." Rand did say that, and her justification of that stance flowed directly, oddly enough, from her theory of sex.

(In this context, Rand had no patience with the proponents and practitioners of [[feminism]] that were contemporary to her. She once said of them, with questionable justice, that they complained about the sexual objectification of women, when those who complained the loudest were "clearly in no such danger." Yet on the other hand, she regarded homemakers as "uninteresting women," and then suggested that some of them were "[[monster]]s" for advocating, for example, the prohibition of [[abortion]] and restrictions on [[contraception]].)

Rand's surviving friends tend to dismiss Branden's criticism as [[Logical fallacy#Argumentum ad hominem|argumentum ad hominem]] (or perhaps more accurately, ''argumentum ad feminam'') arising out of the rather brutal break-up of Rand and Branden's eighteen-year association. But those arguments tend to commit the same [[logical fallacy]] whereof they accuse Branden. Branden's wife [[Barbara Branden|Barbara]] presents perhaps the most balanced treatment of the Rand-Branden Affair and the ensuing controversy.

Objectivism's unabashed advocacy of capitalism often led to repeated charges that Objectivism was the ally of "big business." (In fact, on the occasion of a 1980 political demonstration called "Big Business Day," ''The Objectivist Forum'' commented quite wryly on the irony of the spectacle of hundreds of anti-business conventioneers using the services of "big business" to attend an event intended to advocate increased regulation of the largest corporations merely because they ''were'' large.) But Branden said quite clearly that the executives of large business companies ''were not'' friendly to Objectivism, because Objectivism advocates a market completely free not only of onerous taxes but also of the myriad special protections that some businesses tended to win from [[Congress]] against their competitors.

For decades, Rand did not appear to excite much enduring controversy, mainly because those who did not hold to her philosophy, or to the political theory that flows from it, generally preferred to ignore her. An early exception was the famous (some say infamous) review of Rand's ''magnum opus'', ''[[Atlas Shrugged]]'', by [[Whittaker Chambers]].<ref name=Chambers>[[Whittaker Chambers|Chambers, Whittaker]]. [http://www.nationalreview.com/flashback/flashback200501050715.asp Big Sister Is Watching You]. ''[[National Review]]'', December 28, 1957. Republished on [http://www.nationalreview.com/ National Review Online], January 5, 2005.</ref> Chambers "[[Atlas Shrugged (criticism)#Whittaker Chambers|panned]]" this novel severely and charged that Rand, and by extension Objectivism ''per se'', owed more to the harsh, "conquering-man" philosophy of [[Friedrich Nietzsche]] than to Aristotle. He also charged that Rand, in her relentless attack upon the [[Communism|Communist]] philosophy of [[Karl Marx]], had almost become that which she professed to despise. Specifically, he suggested that while Marx advocated a [[Socialism|socializing]] elite, Rand advocated a technocratic one, to which all less technically adept men must bow. Chambers' objections mirror those of Branden to the "moralizing" and dogmatic tone of much of Rand's material, in both that novel and her later essays.

But in light of the election and increasingly [[socialism|socialistic]] policy pronouncements and recommendations of [[Barack Obama]] and his administration, Rand's ideas are (as of April 2009) undergoing a serious re-examination. [[Tax Day Tea Party]] participants reported seeing signs saying, "Ayn Rand Was Right" and "Stop Spending, or Atlas Will Shrug." The Ayn Rand Institute reports that sales of ''Atlas Shrugged'' tripled in February 2009 as compared to February 2008. They attribute this brisk increase in sales directly to the recognition by many of Barack Obama and his associates as antitypes of the [[Literary type#Villain|villains]] in the novel, and of his policies as antitypes of some of the more egregious policies of [[Mr. Thompson]] and some of other characters. [[Directive 10-289]] springs especially to mind.

== Can Objectivism develop further? ==
This question is [[Conservapedia:Can Objectivism develop beyond Ayn Rand's original formulation?|debatable]]. Many students of Objectivism are not likely to admit that Ayn Rand's original system had any flaws. Branden, of course, asserted that Objectivism ''was'' flawed, but was not prepared to reject it entirely. He still found its emphasis on logic and of an independent reality important and beneficial.

Objectivism's chief limitation appears to be the unwillingness of its adherents and formulators to consider that anything might exist ''outside'' of perceptual reality, that might nevertheless influence that reality. This either led to, or followed from, the [[atheism]] that is one of this school's most prominent attributes. Branden reports one interesting interaction, however: Rand was not willing to accept the theory of [[evolution]] as more than an hypothesis. She couldn't accept [[Creationism|creation]], but evolution discomfited her nevertheless--perhaps because it blurred the distinction between man and animal.<ref name=BrandenBenHaz/> <ref name=Parille>[[Neil Parille|Parille, Neil]], [http://rebirthofreason.com/Articles/Parille/Ayn_Rand_and_Evolution.shtml Ayn Rand and Evolution], at RebirthofReason.com</ref>

In regard to this last: Diana Mertz Hsieh accuses Branden of distorting Rand on this point, and says that Rand refused to endorse evolution merely because she believed she did not have the required scientific knowledge to make an informed judgment.<ref name=poisonwell>Hsieh, Diana Mertz, [http://www.dianahsieh.com/blog/2005/07/poisoning-well.html Poisoning the Well], 24 March 2007</ref> In actual fact, Branden details that conversation:<blockquote>I remember being astonished to hear her say one day, "After all, the [[theory of evolution]] is only a hypothesis." I asked her, "Ayn, you mean you seriously doubt that more complex life forms, including humans, evolved from less complex life forms?" She shrugged and responded, "I'm really not prepared to say," or words to that effect. I do not mean to imply that she wanted to substitute for the theory of evolution the religious belief that we are all [[God]]'s [[creation]]; but there was definitely something about the concept of evolution that made her uncomfortable.<ref name=BrandenBenHaz/></blockquote>What that something was, Branden never said. [[Neil Parille]] offers this explanation: that evolution cannot explain the development of consciousness, and that some of evolution's proponents, among them [[Ernst Haeckel]], put Rand off by their explicit rejection of the human will.<ref name=Parille/>

== References ==
<references/>

== See Also ==
* [http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=objectivism_pobs Objectivism] from the [[Ayn Rand Institute]]
* [http://www.ios.org/ The Atlas Society -- home of The Objectivist Center]
* [http://wiki.objectivismonline.net/ The Objectivism Wiki]
* [http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/ The Importance of Philosophy]
* [[Logic]]

[[Category:Philosophical systems]]

Talk:Bible Retranslation Project

2009-11-22T13:58:51Z

AungSein: /* Love */ new section

==Word==
I admit that I am not as great a linguist, translator and biblical scholar as Andy is, so pardon my question, but when did "word" ''not'' mean "a short expression of a single concept, which can include a vulgarity or a falsehood"? From what I see, the issue at hand seems to be rather how you actually translate "Logos" (a.k.a. "the '''W'''ord", as opposed to "a '''w'''ord"). If you just want to directly translate it to "Truth", that would sound plausible to me, but redefining "word" to ''really'' mean "Truth" is somewhat pushing it in my eyes.

But like I said in the beginning, this isn't exactly my special field of study, so I'm open for any source Andy or somebody else can show me to understand things better. --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 15:04, 25 December 2008 (EST)

:AlanS, the more you rely on silly sarcasm, the less likely you will be insightful. In response to your comment, the primary meaning of "word" in English at the time of its incorporation in translating John 1:1 was a "command" or series of speech sounds, not false or vulgar. Today its primary meaning in English is quite different from about 400 years ago, as in "he had a word with so-and-so" or "password".--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 17:07, 25 December 2008 (EST)

::Aschlafly, the less you rely on belittling and dismissing other people and posts ("the more you rely on silly sarcasm, the less likely you will be insightful", "I'm not interested in wasting my time with someone suffering from [[evolution syndrome]]"), the more respect people will give you. I assume/hope you don't treat your students like this, so why your fellow editors? I came to this talk page to learn, not to get the wagging finger treatment from you. And I assumed that you, somebody who is going to ''retranslate the Word Of God'', have some experience as a linguist, translator and biblical scholar - no sarcasm intended. Because otherwise, I'd seriously ask what you were thinking when you started this. No offense, but this is a task more talented people than you and I have to study years for, so the thought of somebody with ''no'' experience or training in this field translating the Bible makes me frown to say the least.
::More on-topic, I find your explanation interesting, but I would welcome a source for your claim because I couldn't find any. I'm not here to doubt the you, but I want to verify it. Also, what is your explanation for the newer translations not having updated that word? --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 08:27, 26 December 2008 (EST)

::: AlanS, don't rant on these pages. Contribute, or please leave.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 08:39, 26 December 2008 (EST)

"Word" sounds better in my opinion. Also, which editions are you using as a source for your translating, the original Hebrew and Greek, or one of the many English versions? And how far do you plan on taking this? I personally find it superfluous, but since linguistically I am a prescriptionist, that may just be me.[[User:ENorman|ENorman]] 22:49, 25 December 2008 (EST)

: I don't think "Word" means the same to people anymore as it did a generation ago. As to your second sentence, all early manuscripts were in Greek, and the term used was "logos" as stated.

: I think the table is merely scratching the surface. The English language is devolving quickly, and retranslation of many key terms is worth considering. This exercise itself is illuminating. I'm confident we've all learned something new just from reading the first three examples.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 22:53, 25 December 2008 (EST)

: But evolution isn't real, right? :)

: Joking aside, I'll help you with my basic knowledge of linguistics if you honestly want it. Just want to avoid this degenerating into an exercise in Newspeak or playing with deeper meanings. [[User:ENorman|ENorman]] 22:58, 25 December 2008 (EST)

:: Wow, that's bizarre: where did your comment on evolution come from? No, I'm not interested in wasting my time with someone suffering from [[evolution syndrome]]. If you have an open mind, then I do welcome your efforts; if not, then maybe Wikipedia is a better place for you.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 23:05, 25 December 2008 (EST)

==Logos==
ASchlafly: The word "Logos" does not translate to truth. It is generally translated to "word, thought, principle, or speech." Good luck on rewriting the Bible! [[User:MReynolds|MReynolds]] 22:20, 25 December 2008 (EST)

== Alternative Procedure ==

This project is quite ambitious, and generally, I'd say it is out of the reach of the high-school pupils you're addressing.
Wouldn't it be more effective to write a commentary to the ''gold standard of Biblical translations'', i.e., KJB, to explain its verses to the contemporary audience? The language of the KJB is so vigorous that any alteration just weakens it.
Of course, I'm coming from a German perspective: It took a genius like Martin Luther to come up with a usable German translation for the Bible. He introduced numerous metaphors and proverbs into the German language which still live on. Granted, there are more modern translation - esp. the ''Einheitsübersetzung'' of the EKD (Protestant churches in Germany) and the German Conference of Catholic Bishops. But though it's more exact historically, it lacks the power of Luther's language.
Another thought: The Bible in its old translations has inspired or at least influenced countless works of literature. This influence is more easily spotted using the traditional translations.
[[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 08:59, 26 December 2008 (EST)

: BRichtigen, with all due respect, the greatest works throughout history have been produced by teenagers like my students. Moreover, many of my students likely have a better command of history and linguistics than you do. Try your hand at [[American_History_Midterm_Exam_-_Boys]] and see how you stack up.

: Your put-down aside, your approach does not address the problem of how culture changes the meaning of modern terms used by ''all'' translations of the [[Bible]]. An accurate translation using terms "x, y, and z" becomes inaccurate when culture modifies the meaning of "x, y, and z" to listeners.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 09:27, 26 December 2008 (EST)

::"the greatest works throughout history have been produced by teenagers like my students" A closer examination of the greatest work of history (perhaps we could agree on a list of the TOP 100) will show that the statement is just wrong. In fact, the few cases of teenagers who excelled in their fields are so well known as they '''were''' rare. (There is only ''one'' Mozart...)

::I'm sure that your students have a better command of '''American''' history than I do. And they should speak better English than I do. I don't know about their German, Latin, Dutch or French...

:: ''An accurate translation using terms "x, y, and z" becomes inaccurate when culture modifies the meaning of "x, y, and z" to listeners.'' A reasonable thing would be to explain the meaning of ''x, y, and z'' to the listeners as used in the translations.

:: The Greek originals were in use for a couple of centuries while Ancient Greek was still a living language. Somehow, no one so the necessity to rewrite the originals...

::[[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 09:41, 26 December 2008 (EST)

:::BRichtigen, you're welcome to start a list of the greatest works in history, but I'm confident most will be accomplished by people who were teenagers. Your point about x, y, z, is not clear; the retranslation is precisely designed to explain x, y, z in a more accurate way as culture changes language. Ancient Greek, which I have studied (have you?) was not as vulnerable to cultural changes to language as today's society is.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 10:30, 26 December 2008 (EST)

::::I looked into the claim ''most of the greatest works in history were accomplished by people who were teenagers'', and the more I research, the more absurd it becomes.
::::Take for instance mathematics, one of the fields were prodigies are said to be found quite often. Granted, there are accomplishments by young men (Abel, Galois), and Gauss constructed the regular heptadekagon age 18. But these examples are few, and most times, the works of the teenage mathematician will be overshadowed by the works of the matured one - if he is allowed to life long enough.
::::Another area: Music. Mozart is the child prodigy par excellence, and others tried to imitate his success (Beethoven's father lied about the age of his son...). But there are only few works of teenagers worth listening to...
::::Which ''accomplishments in history'' are you thinking about?
::::And my Greek is negligible, I'm afraid... --[[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 11:07, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::::Addendum: Your class voted on the [[Voted_Most_Influential_Person_in_American_History|most influential person in American history]]. None of the top four made his most important attributions to American history as a teenager... [[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 11:39, 26 December 2008 (EST)
:::::[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=496962 This] paper examines the age at which Nobel-winning economists published their important works, and also the ages at which they began their Nobel-related research. Table 1 lists the age at which they began their Nobel work; the youngest was 21, and the average was 29.3. They also briefly examine other fields: the mean "beginning age" for Nobel-winning physicists was 33.6, for chemists it was 31.6, and for physiology/medicine it was 33.2. Note that these are the ages when they began the work, not when the Nobel prize was awarded, as it often takes a number of years for the true importance of significant work to be recognised. [[User:BrianW|BrianW]] 11:57, 26 December 2008 (EST)

:::::: Well, fine, but few or none of those examples would rank as the greatest "works" in history. And as to BRichtigen's comment above, the issue of the "most influential person" is obviously very different from the issue of the "greatest works."--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 12:22, 26 December 2008 (EST)

::::::: Could you give a few examples of the greatest works in history, preferably done by teenagers? Thanks, [[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 15:58, 26 December 2008 (EST)

== Unique and useful project ==

Whatever the claims of your distractors and critics be, I believe it is a great project and quite suitable to the intended audience of the encyclopedia. You are quite right in spotting that the meaning of words change as the language evolves or change. This is especially true for English which has become the universal language and the de facto official language of the internet.I wonder whether any one has done this before. It may also be beneficial to recruit some one with special expertise in this field. --[[User:MRain|MRain]] 12:06, 26 December 2008 (EST)

: Thanks for your encouragement. I'm not aware of anyone else doing this (or anyone who has "special expertise" in the devolution of modern English). We welcome contributions to the project ... starting with yourself! I'll be adding new items as I discover them.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 12:19, 26 December 2008 (EST)

: I think that this is an interesting project, and a good opportunity to try and get across some of the wordplay in the original language that the KJV and most other translations just lack; things like Gen 15:2 or Num 21:9 to give a couple of simple examples - also there's very often the case when words are conflated - like the "kill" example - it's good you want to distinguish the more murderous הרג from נכה- there are a number of separate roots that get translated inconsistently as "kill" and "slay", but you'll perhaps want also to distinguish הרג from רצח and נכה from שחט? Also the names are often clumsily translated as footnotes, if at all, rather than elegantly worked in - sometimes the transliteration of a name is inferior to its translation (IMHO, naturally). Added to that, the KJV (which is very bad in this respect) is incredibly inaccurate when it comes to plants and animals, and it'd be nice to see a scholarly yet poetic translation that is sensibly consistent. I look forward to seeing the results of this! [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 16:23, 26 December 2008 (EST)

:: Thanks for your insights, Denise, and I look forward to your contributions to this project!--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:26, 26 December 2008 (EST)

::: Sadly I'm rather busy these days (and my Greek is not much good compared to my Hebrew, and my Aramaic is near non-existent), but I'll try and make some helpful suggestions. Do you mind if I add my twopennyworth to the project page, as far as examples of things I'd like to see included or avoided? I'm not necessarily always able to talk with reference to the KJV, and my interests (as you'll have gathered) are linguistic, aesthetic, and exactitude-focused rather than centred around political considerations. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 16:33, 26 December 2008 (EST)

==Divine Right==

Sorry if I offended with the Divine Right translation. My intent was to say that only Christ has the ultimate authority to rule, not to suggest that claims of Divine Right by kings and despots had and validity. [[User:QWest|QWest]] 14:19, 26 December 2008 (EST)

== Bearing arms ==

The text reads: "In Biblical times, as today, the bearing of arms to defend ones family and society was the hallmark of civilisation."

First, I corrected the British spelling in compliance with the MoS. Second, this description of the culture of arms is against the evidence, at least as far as the Greeks. In "History of the Peloponnesian War," Thucydides [http://classics.mit.edu/Thucydides/pelopwar.1.first.html spoke] of wearing arms as a custom of the barbarians, and waxes poetic about the lack of necessity of bearing arms in Greece:
{{cquote|And even at the present day many of Hellas still follow the old fashion, the Ozolian Locrians for instance, the Aetolians, the Acarnanians, and that region of the continent; and the custom of carrying arms is still kept up among these continentals, from the old piratical habits. The whole of Hellas used once to carry arms, their habitations being unprotected and their communication with each other unsafe; indeed, to wear arms was as much a part of everyday life with them as with the barbarians. And the fact that the people in these parts of Hellas are still living in the old way points to a time when the same mode of life was once equally common to all. The Athenians were the first to lay aside their weapons, and to adopt an easier and more luxurious mode of life.}}

Should I correct it?-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 15:56, 26 December 2008 (EST)
:The Greeks believed in false Gods. Surely the correctness of Judaeo-Christian beliefs is obvious? Also, your reference to 'improper' spellings is unnecessary. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 16:00, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::You know I agree with you on that first point Bugler, but I don't think their being pagans affects their beliefs towards weapons. And I'm sorry, I didn't mean "improper" in the pejorative: it's just that the Manual of Style says not to use British spellings.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 16:01, 26 December 2008 (EST)
:::Alex, I'm not that hung up about the spellings so if you wish to copy-edit go ahead. As for the other thing, how about 'hallmark of Judaeo-Christian civilization'? [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 16:07, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::::Good idea! I'll change it, thanks Bugler. Good to see you again.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 17:47, 26 December 2008 (EST)

== Kill vs Murder ==

One of the differences cites Ex. 20:13 and the clarification is to use "murder" instead of "kill". I agree with this clarification. I use the KJV with explanatory notes from the LDS church and the reference for Ex. 20:13 for the word "kill" says in an alternate translation from the Hebrew it means "murder". --[[User:DeanS|DeanStalk]] 15:59, 26 December 2008 (EST)

: Wow, I never knew that. By the way, Dean, does the standard LDS Bible use the [[KJV]] plus explanatory footnotes?--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:27, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::Yes, it's a KJV with explanatory footnotes. The title page says it's the "Authorized King James Version with explanatory notes and cross references to the standard works of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints". There are also footnotes and appendix referring to the "JST" which is the ''Joseph Smith Translation''. These are excerpts from the Prophet Joseph Smith's translation of the Bible. --[[User:DeanS|DeanStalk]] 16:43, 26 December 2008 (EST)

: Hebrew has two distinct words for killing (הרג) and murder (רצח). The Commandment is unambiguously referring to murder.—[[User:JCSalomon|JCSalomon]] 11:16, 23 February 2009 (EST)

Is this suggesting that Christianity isn't a pacifistic religion, and that killing was ok with Jesus? Because although the commandment says "thou shall not murder", there are numerous instances in the New Testament of pacifism being not only approved of, but required to be a Christian. Acts 14:19-22, 1 Corinthians 4:9-13, Acts 7:59-60, Matthew 5:9,21-25 and 38-41 are just a few of the biblical examples that I could find promoting pacifism.--[[User:Bixnood|Bixnood]] 22:54, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

== Rich ==

The entry is blatantly false. You have to look it up. You cant take someone's word for it. Just because it sounds interesting does not make it true. see [http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G4145&t=KJV here]. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 17:00, 26 December 2008 (EST)

: Your link does not explain the meaning of the Greek term, but only its view of the Biblical meaning.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 17:05, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::What about [http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4145 this] and [http://biblestudy.crosswalk.com/mybst/default.aspx?type=library&contentid=114459&category=REF this] and [http://www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=4145&version=kjv this]? --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 17:12, 26 December 2008 (EST)
:::The problem here is that the statement is being assumed true, even though there is no reason to believe that it is, aside from the claim of one user who has agreed to the removal of the item. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 17:21, 26 December 2008 (EST)

:::: The underlying insight is promising, given the very different nature of the "rich" then compared to now. Improvement rather than [[censorship]] is the better approach here. My research reveals that the Greek term really means "fully supplied,"[http://time2changechurches.blogspot.com/2008_02_01_archive.html] as in being pampered or lazy.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 17:33, 26 December 2008 (EST)
:::::Your source is a blog. I gave 4 separate sources that are greek lexicons. Which do you think is more reliable? --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 17:40, 26 December 2008 (EST)
:::::::a footnote to the CP commandments says "Sources should be authoritative works, not merely published opinions by others."--[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 18:09, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::::::Also, Aschlafly, while I share your concern with CPAdmin1's edits, I have to point out that he's right, it's not censorship to remove information because you think it's incorrect. Censorship requires (1) state or state-like action, and (2) removal of information (3) for subjective, viewpoint-discriminatory reasons. Even if he's wrong, it's assuming bad faith to call his deletions censorship.-[[User:AlexanderM|AlexanderM]] 17:49, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::::::::Someone please provide a linguistic source that backs up the claim, or I will remove it. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 18:50, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::::::::: Having checked in my Liddell & Scott, I think it's safe to remove it pending a scholarly source that supports the variant reading. This is a wiki, we can always put it back if more research turns up such a reference. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 18:59, 26 December 2008 (EST)

:::::::::: Not so fast, folks. There is a key insight here that I've just learned from, as have others. The term "rich" DOES change in meaning over time, and the Greek term could not possibly mean what is meant today by "rich". Instead, the Greek term means "fully supplied." Perhaps "idle rich" would be a better translation or, in modern terms, the "complacent" or "lazy miser."--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 19:03, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::::::::::::The experts say that it means rich. Do you know better than the experts? --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 19:11, 26 December 2008 (EST)
:::::::::::: I still don't quite see how your reading squares with the Joseph of Arimathea citation. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 19:18, 26 December 2008 (EST)

::::::::::::: Tim, that is such a liberal argument: "the experts say that it means ...." The "experts" also say that [[global warming]] is a crisis and that more government spending is needed. God gave us all the ability to think for ourselves. Let's use it. Denise, I don't know what you're referencing specifically. If you mean a reference that Joseph of Arimathea was "rich" and yet a follower of Jesus, that would not disprove the translation of "idle rich" or "complacent" or "lazy miser." Indeed, Joseph had the time to intervene as needed.
::::::::::::::What? It is a liberal argument to say that people who have spent their life studying a language know that language better than someone who does can not even speak it. That argument sounds good to me. Are you saying that you have a better understanding of biblical greek than the people who have written those lexicons? --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 21:54, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::::::::::::: Everyone today is "rich" by the standards of Jesus' time, so presumably the term is more nuanced than that common term.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 19:26, 26 December 2008 (EST)
:::::::::::::: Since when is consulting people who have dedicated themselves to studying a subject and trusting them over the layman liberal? That is equivalent to me, having no ability in building anything whatsoever, designing and constructing my house myself as opposed to hiring people who make their living doing that because getting their help is liberal. Your definition of liberal is a bit silly Andy, and seems to fall along the lines of "whoever does not wholly agree with what you, Andy Schalfly, believe. If trusting experts makes somebody a liberal, then I'd rather be a liberal than blindly rush into something as major as translating God's Word passed down to mankind without somebody who knows what they are talking about.[[User:ENorman|ENorman]] 22:15, 26 December 2008 (EST)

::::::::::::::: Folks, blindly follow your chosen "experts" somewhere else. This is a wiki devoted to the pursuit of knowledge. Understand? That means opening your mind and actually using it. Parroting what you perceive to be an "expert" view might help you win the favor of some liberals, but our project is at a higher level than that.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 22:35, 26 December 2008 (EST)

:::::::::::::::::So we should not listen to any experts because to do so would be liberal. In that case, how are we supposed to learn anything. Are we supposed to make up our own facts because we can't trust anyone else's? Should we automatically contradict any expert because to agree with them would be "liberal"? Should I disagree with you because it would be "liberal" to trust your knowledge? If you do not rely on the knowledge of others, it is impossible to progress very far in the area of knowledge. A faulty appeal to authority is a fallacy. That does not mean that every appeal to authority is a fallacy. It is only a fallacy when the subject at hand is not the same subject that the person is an authority on. Obviously an authority can be wrong, but that is the exception rather than the rule. Should I not believe that 2+2=4 because some expert said that it is? If you discredit all authority, then how can you gain knowledge? --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 22:53, 26 December 2008 (EST)

::::::::::::::::::All of your "experts" are simply sites citing the exact same source, Thayer's Greek-English lexicon. To suggest that questioning that ''single'' definition is rejecting all authority is absurd. Healthy skepticism is necessary to any intellectual project such as this. Relying on a single authority as definitive is absurd. The biblical concept of "rich" is far different than the present. Denying that is patently ridiculous, and ignores millenia of economic and social change. That is why this project is necessary. Like Luther's 500 years ago, it is an attempt to ground our knowledge in the original ''meaning'' of God's word. [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 23:01, 26 December 2008 (EST)

(moved discussion here below to "Rich" Issue for easier editing and comment.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:13, 28 December 2008 (EST))

:::::::::::::::: Tim, the essence of this project is to open your mind and think for yourself, and not rely on an argument that "the experts say such-and-such." Yes, some and perhaps all of the unnamed experts are liberals. The process of inducing people to rely on "the perceived view of experts is a misleading one. In courts of law it is generally not allowed without also hearing from an expert with the opposite view.

:::::::::::::::: Most "experts" say there is [[global warming]]. Most experts say that government should raise taxes. Most experts say that government should increase spending. In fact, you can go down the entire list of liberal viewpoints and find that most "experts" support them. Give up your ability to think for yourself, just a little, and you will probably never get it back.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 23:00, 26 December 2008 (EST)

::::::::::::::::: But those are experts in other fields. These are experts IN THE LANGUAGE. This is less being open-minded, and has now been degraded to Ostrich theory. What does the meaning of ONE WORD have to do with what Dr. John Q. Scientist has to say about [[global warming]]? You are basically saying "disregard all science, all research, all facts, make junk up as you go along."[[User:ENorman|ENorman]] 23:07, 26 December 2008 (EST)

The interpretation of "miserliness to the point of laziness and being unproductive" for plousios has implications at Ephesians 2:4 "But God, who is rich (plousios) in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us"[http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Eph&c=2&v=4&t=KJV#conc/4] . Applying miserly and lazy to God is near blasphemy. The original interpretation of simply 'wealthy' is likely the intended and best interpretation. A benevolent God would never be miserly with His mercy, and He certainly isn't lazy or unproductive. --[[User:JohnnyS|JohnnyS]] 21:38, 26 December 2008 (EST)

: "plousios" means "abundantly supplied," not "rich". "Rich in mercy" is an awkward translation at best. The context must be considered to find the right English word for "abundantly supplied."

: Your comment on "unicorn" was silly.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 22:04, 26 December 2008 (EST)

:: I'm happy with "abundantly supplied" as a translation in this case, though it seems a little prolix. Perhaps we could work on a more mellifluous alternative - possibly "over-replete" or something of that ilk, maybe even something with a nuance of luxury rather than mere adequacy. As a side question, does the "abundantly supplied" gloss apply to `ashir as well as to plousios, and if so, why? [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 10:13, 27 December 2008 (EST)

::: I think you are right that "abundantly supplied" is prolix. I think the nuance that needs to be added is the laziness when some humans are abundantly supplied with food and entertainment. I'm not familiar with `ashir but look forward to learning more. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 10:40, 27 December 2008 (EST)

:::: In general, I can recommend Weingreen's excellent work ''[http://www.amazon.com/Practical-Grammar-Classical-Hebrew/dp/0198154224?tag=1672411-20&ie=UTF8 A Practical Grammar for Classical Hebrew]'' for the novice to Biblical Hebrew grammar. It's not a guide to vocabulary, obviously, and it's not in itself sufficient to give the experience and fluency necessary to attempt a translation project of this magnitude, but it's a good place to start. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 10:52, 27 December 2008 (EST)
:::: For vocabulary, [http://www.amazon.com/Brown-Driver-Briggs-Hebrew-English-Lexicon-Francis/dp/1565632060?tag=1672411-20&ie=UTF8 Brown/Driver/Briggs] is the standard reference work, as far as I know. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 11:01, 27 December 2008 (EST)

:::::I think what is needed are more nuanced definitions. The Bible uses the term rich as a blanket reference to those of monetary as well as spiritual wealth, and I think having cotextual definitions for each occurrence would be a generally good idea - such as avaricious (ie desire for riches beyond one's needs) for the cited example and others, and e.g. rich-spirited (or similar) for other occurrences. Plus further definitions as appropriate --[[User:J00ni|J00ni]] 11:49, 27 December 2008 (EST)

== Tetragrammata ==

What is the planned translation of the tetragrammaton? In English translations it's often been rendered as 'Lord', sometimes with all-caps, based on the Jewish custom of the pronunciation "Adonai", used to avoid saying the name; others use YHWH/YHVH/JHWH based on the unvowelled consonants; others go with "Jehovah" based on a Latin form, fairly discredited now, I understand. Still others try and capture the "to be" root of it, opting for "the one who is" or "the eternal". Thoughts? I personally prefer one of the latter forms, though I think there is room for innovation here! [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 17:46, 26 December 2008 (EST)

==Grace==
I think the translation of grace is overly simplistic. To me grace is not merely generosity, but generosity towards those in whom it is undeserved. And is a gift specifically ftom the Lord to mankind, and allows for forgivness of the unrepentant sinner and ultimately is the reason God loves each and every one of His creation irrespective of whether they honour His word.

I appreciate what you are trying to achieve, and it is an honourable cause, it's just that IMO grace has always been a concept requiring more understanding than the word itself conveys, and is a central concept to Christianity itself, and by changing it to 'generosity' may hinder people from seeking its true, deeper meaning.

Grace is one of my favourite concepts to learn about and (attempt to) explain to others as I feel not only the concept, but the word itself, has a beauty to it that shouldn't be tampered with --[[User:J00ni|J00ni]] 19:49, 26 December 2008 (EST)

: Thanks, J00ni, this is a lovely explanation! [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 10:26, 27 December 2008 (EST)

:J00ni, your point is well taken, but the fact remains that there are millions who are misled by the term "grace" in many instances of its use. They may like the sound, but they think it is something other than what was intended.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 22:10, 27 December 2008 (EST)

== Peace ==

The retranslation of "peace" is based on the Greek word. Why is there a citation to the Old Testament on this point? The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, not Greek.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 22:10, 27 December 2008 (EST)

: cf LXX: ''καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς εἰ εἰς '''εἰρήνην''' οὗτοι ἐκπορεύονται συλλάβετε αὐτοὺς ζῶντας καὶ εἰ εἰς πόλεμον ζῶντας συλλάβετε αὐτούς'' - your Greek is likely better than mine, but I don't see the issue with this translation. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 06:35, 28 December 2008 (EST)

: I don't dispute at all εἰρήνη has a meaning of tranquility, but it ''also'' has a meaning of absence-of-war - much as ''peace'' does in English. See also [http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/vor?lookup=ei)rh%2Fnh&lang=greek&group=bilevel these sources] - e.g. “ἢ μέγα φρονει̂ς,” ἔφη, “ἐπὶ ται̂ς ἐψηφισμέναις μὲν πεντήκοντα ναυσίν, οὐδέποτε δὲ πληρωθησομέναις; οὕτω γὰρ ἠρέθικας Φίλιππον καὶ τοιαυ̂τα εἴρηκας, '''ἐξ ὡ̂ν οὐκ εἰρήνη γένοιτ' ἂν ἐκ πολέμου, ἀλλ' ἐξ εἰρήνης πόλεμος ἀκήρυκτος'''.” ([[Aeschines]]) [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 06:46, 28 December 2008 (EST)

:: Wow, you link to a superb online source! It's amazing what is available now on the internet!

:: The point is that "peace" in English is increasingly taken to mean an absence of war, thanks (or "no thanks") to the influence of the media and politics on culture. Very few people take "peace" to mean "tranquility" any more. But Jesus was not telling the Apostles to oppose Roman wars when He said, "peace be with you." He was speaking about an inner tranquility and lack of fear or anxiety. That's a meaning that needs to be restored against the ravages of the [[devolution of language]], particularly with the rise in anxiety disorders.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 07:16, 28 December 2008 (EST)

::: I don't doubt your assertion that at the moment, the primary meaning of the English "peace" is as you say. However, I do question the recency of this semantic position, and also whether this was not the case with eirene. I'd assume that someone listening to Jesus would have understood the Aramaic term he used to have a hefty flavour of non-war about it (in general, if not necessarily in context). In the same way, a reader of the English would understand that "peace" has multiple shades of meaning, and will select as appropriate. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 07:29, 28 December 2008 (EST)

:::: But virtually no one today understands "peace" to mean "anxiety free," and Jesus never spoke about foreign policy in His time. It's a complete mismatch, I think, due to the cultural changes in the meaning of "peace" to most people.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 08:02, 28 December 2008 (EST)

::::: An absence of interpersonal strife is not just foreign policy. Also, I think that virtually ''everyone'' today uses the adjective "peaceful" to mean "without anxieties or distractions"; it's easy to underestimate people in general. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 08:08, 28 December 2008 (EST)

== Relinquish or Release ==

The term "relinquish" has negative connotations: it means giving up something that may not have been properly yours. I don't see how that is an improvement over "release", which has positive connotations of resulting in a greater good.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 07:21, 28 December 2008 (EST)

: yes, good point, but "release" sounds too much like what one does to a captive. I think possibly something more like "hand over" or "give away" is in line with paradidomi - am I reading it too literally? [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 07:29, 28 December 2008 (EST)

:: "Release" does have that political/legal connotation, but I don't see that as causing a problem in the context. "Hand over" has a negative connotation, and requires a recipient who does not exist in this context; "give away" implies an inappropriate abandonment of something typically having little value, and that doesn't fit.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 08:00, 28 December 2008 (EST)

==Question about implementation==

This is an interesting and worthwhile project - I'm learning a lot from reading about the various interpretations of the terms in question. What I'm wondering, though, is how to best implement the outcome for others to use. My first thought would be to choose a "baseline" version of the Bible as a starting point, like the King James Version, then apply the revised translations that are approved and publish this as a "New Conservative Bible" (since calling it the "Conservapedia Bible" would be immodest, I'd think). This could be done as a searchable electronic copy under a dedicated namespace on the CP site. The text itself would be protected, of course, but the talk pages would allow for background, commentary and suggestions for other improved translations. Does this proposal make sense? --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 15:08, 28 December 2008 (EST)
::::I think that this project could be a good project if it was done better. Currently, I think this project is overreaching. I think in order to do proper Bible translating you need to understand Greek/Hebrew and ANE culture at a bare minimum. I also reasonably believe that in order to do a conservative translating of the Bible you need to understand the Bible exegesis method of Historico-grammatical exegesis which is given here: http://www.godward.org/archives/BS%20Notes/Basic%20rules%20for%20NT%20exegesis.htm So far, I don't see see aforementioned being done in any great depth. That is why I don't think the "New Conservative Bible" will catch on. I think Protestant Christian conservatives will stick with their KJV, NKJV, and NASB Bibles for some time to come. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 15:44, 28 December 2008 (EST)
:::::Conservative, is it 'overreaching' to have a vision? I don't think so. And can man achieve great aims without vision? No. Throughout history, those who have achieved mighty things have been accused of 'overreaching themselves' at the outset. We should have confidence and Hope, and lend support. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 15:53, 28 December 2008 (EST)

:::::: The efficiency of the learning from this project is far greater than in any other medium, much higher than reading a book, attending a seminar, watching television, discussing with people, etc. In merely a few spare minutes or hours, the participants in this project have learned more than they could have after spending 10x or 100x many hours in any other medium. For that reason alone, I feel this project has been more than worthwhile. As Bugler says, let's see where it goes from here. What's there to lose? Nothing, but there is everything to gain in greater [[faith]].--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:05, 28 December 2008 (EST)

::::::: Exactly. Learning about just ''one'' of these misconceptions/mistranslations allows you to better understand tens, hundreds, or even ''thousands'' of biblical passages and principles which use the words under examination. "Logos" is a good example, since it's the basis of all creation in John 1:1. "Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος." Better understanding that one word educates a reader enormously about God, his word, and his creation. [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 16:20, 28 December 2008 (EST)

:::::::: I agree completely. Just one of the insights in the table in this entry can be worth hundreds of hours of personal effort in value. A stronger understanding of these concepts is priceless. Yet it is freely available here for merely the click of the mouse. Can you imagine the value when this table is two or three times as long?--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:35, 28 December 2008 (EST)
::::::::::::Bugler, you are setting up a false dilemma. If you were more aware of exegesis you would know that. One of the principles of sound exegesis is to set the limits of the passage as can be seen by the link I offered before. With that in mind, I certainly did not say I was against having a vision. At the same time, often without adequate preparation the visions people have often fail. I doubt the Normandy invasion would have been successful if the generals merely had a vision apart from adequate preparation. The Normandy invasion was successful though because the generals had a vision which also had sufficient preparation. Now if you think you can retranslate the Bible without being knowledgeable in Greek/Hebrew, Ancient Near East culture, and exegetical principles then go right ahead, but I reasonably think your quest is rather quoxitic as can be seen by your rather poor exegesis of my previous post. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 17:17, 28 December 2008 (EST)

: I'd suggest that first we establish what sort of a translation we want; then we start with a smallish book with fairly simple language, and move to another book when that's completed and polished. I'd suggest Esther as a nice place to start - it's got a good consistent narrative, the Hebrew is not overcomplicated or overpoetic, and we don't want to get any "teething problems" in something like one of the Gospels. An interlinear approach might be best; and I'd really suggest we do our best to work ''in vacuo'' without too much reference to established translations. Do people prefer working with the Masoretic vowels, notes, and breaks, or just from the plain text, allowing for wider interpretation as to the vocalization? How do we arrrange dealing with disputes and variation in text? One talk-page per chapter? I'd like to be able to suggest that we take an LXX approach and work individually and have the translations miraculously agree, but the evidence above suggests this might not be the best plan ;) [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 09:00, 29 December 2008 (EST)

: This is not to say that there won't be opportunities to discuss the translation issues - right from the start there's some interesting questions. As a test run, how do people here render ''ויהי בימי אחשורוש הוא אחשורוש המלך מהדו ועד כוש שבע ועשרים ומאה מדינה''? The word ויהי is not easy to make smooth in English, there are at least two or three standard renditions for אחשורוש, and the country (or province, or state) names are always something of a point of contention. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 09:25, 29 December 2008 (EST)

: (and, with all respect, I think we should leave Daniel and Ezra/Nehemia until we know we have someone who's properly competent in Aramaic). [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 09:42, 29 December 2008 (EST)

::Denise raises an interesting question. While the table-format in the article is educational, is the purpose of this project to begin an all-new translation of the Bible "from scratch", i.e. from the original ancient texts, or is it to start with a pre-compiled baseline like the King James Version and look to bring clarity to selected phrases by reinterpreting them? Conservapedia's own article on the Bible points out differences in the layout and naming of the Old Testament books between the Jewish and Christian collections, so is the scope of this project to look at that as well? I'm totally out of my league here, but asking so that the people who are contributing have a consistent plan to follow. Thanks. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 10:52, 29 December 2008 (EST)

::: Personally, I have no objection to either - but if we're going to have a retranslation as Aschlafly originally proposed I think it's intellectually sterile to re-translate a translation, taking all but one or two assumptions of the translators for granted. If we wanted to do that, I think that he would have suggested a commentary or gloss. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 10:55, 29 December 2008 (EST)

== "Rich" Issue ==

(Undent) Well I have 2 more (different) in hard copy. ''The Complete Word Study New Testament'' Spiros Zodhiates, which says it means "rich" And the ''Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament'' Rienecker and Rogers. which says it means "rich" --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 23:14, 26 December 2008 (EST)
:That doesn't change the obvious fact that "wealth" in Jesus' time is worlds away from "wealth" in the present, and thus its implications and connotations when used in God's word. What confuses me is your motive in attempting to censor this obvious information. [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 23:17, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::Yes, the specific things that we have are completely different, but that doesn't mean that "wealth" was any different. It just means that a person has "an abundance" of material possessions. It doesn't matter whether those possessions are sheep and goats, or if they are gold and silver, or cars and televisions, or lots of digits that represent money in a bank. The point is that the person has many more possessions than they need. The concept is not bounded by time. Solomon had great wealth. Possibly greater than anyone since. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 23:23, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::Anyone care to respond?--[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 11:41, 27 December 2008 (EST)
::Anyone? --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 23:31, 27 December 2008 (EST)

::: Sorry, Tim, I didn't notice your edits in the middle here. The Greek word does not mean "many more possessions than they need" as you suggest. Rather, it means "fully supplied" or "abundantly supplied." The term refers equally well to the person who has just what he needs and no more. In short, it applies to virtually everyone in developed nations, fully fed and entertained. That's why the term "rich" no longer works because very few of the "abundantly supplied" view themselves as "rich" today, yet Jesus is addressing them. The key to the Greek term and the translation is to capture the vice of an unwillingness to try harder due to the complacently of being fully fed and entertained.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 08:11, 28 December 2008 (EST)

::::The word also means rich, the 2 definitions are very close in meaning. Abundantly supplied means more than enough. I agree that many or most of the "abundantly supplied" would not consider themselves rich, but I don't think that they'd consider themselves abundantly supplied either. You say that the greek term is about unwillingness to "try harder," and complacency. That is not true. The word means rich, and abundantly supplied. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] (CPAdmin1)[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] 09:57, 28 December 2008 (EST)

::::: There are many people who are "abundantly supplied" who do not consider themselves "rich". So I disagree that the "2 definitions are very close in meaning" in today's culture. Today nearly all Americans and Europeans are "abundantly supplied" in food, entertainment and other comforts. But very few of them consider themselves "rich". And that's what matters in translating the Bible in a meaningful way. If they have the same misconception about being "abundantly supplied," then that's a good reason to reject that translation also.

::::: When this passage is compared with the Parable of the Talents, see [[Essay:Rich Man and Parable of Talents]], the real meaning of the term translated as "rich" sharpens into focus: it is the person who has what he needs, but buries it in the ground and does not produce more. "Idle miser" fits both insights well.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 16:13, 28 December 2008 (EST)

:::::: If someone says A, meaning to imply B (what Aschlafly calls the "real meaning" - because A is an exaggeration, an ironic contradiction, hyperbole, metaphor, metonymy, or parable), I think that it's better to translate it as A rather than B - then someone reading the translation will have as close a thought-process as possible to someone reading the original and be able to appreciate the devices used. We're not trying to produce a commentary (beyond that which is inevitable). I think that Aschlafly may have in mind more of a commentary - a guide to interpretation and background - rather than a translation; and there's nothing wrong with that. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 05:50, 29 December 2008 (EST)

::::::: I'm unsure what you mean by your comment, Denise. "A" is "fully supplied" rather than "rich", which is a relative term today. The issue is expressing "fully supplied" in a way that avoids awkward and misleading connotations of that phrase, which to most people today would falsely make them think of a retail store.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 08:24, 29 December 2008 (EST)

:::::::: Ah, yes, sorry - I should have been more explicit. A is whatever term meaning ''"having enough" or "having a lot" or "rich" or "not poor" (the choice of which is a linguistic issue)''. B is the implication of laziness, stinginess, or whatever personal qualities, which while they may be conjectured from context and from theological exgesis, are not inherent in the word itself. B is a very interesting thing to have in a commentary, especially if one has useful proof-texts for it from elsewhere that support the point being made. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 08:41, 29 December 2008 (EST)

::::::::: Denise, you make an excellent point, and thanks for your insight. I continue to learn from your comments and contributions.

::::::::: I guess I need to determine if the Greek term was ever used anywhere to describe an "idle miser" before recommending that as a translation. Maybe I could search for the general usage of the word somehow and see if "idle miser" (or an equivalent) shows up.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 09:04, 29 December 2008 (EST)

:::::::::: If you're happy to have ancient greek in with your koine (which is probably OK), the Perseus project is a good place to look. Also searching the Septuagint is a good source of ideas. I get annoyed when people ''unthinkingly'' conflate translation and intepretation - the two are linked and every translator is ''ipso facto'' his own exegete, but it must be done consciously - there are many levels of what ''means'' means, and they must be artistically layered to create a well-reading product. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 09:10, 29 December 2008 (EST)

== אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ ==

I've seen in a few places that this is the general name used for the various forms of Xerxes that ruled Persia. This source cites the one in the Book of Esther as Xerxes I [http://www.answers.com/topic/ahasuerus-1], but I think I've seen him cited as Artaxerses II. He's probably one of the Xerxes or Artaxerxes in the 4th or 5th century, BC (300's-400's). [[User:Mikek|Mikek]] 11:00, 29 December 2008 (EST)

: Oh, interesting - thanks! I'm surprised that Artaxerxes and Xerxes should have similar versions in Hebrew, though - I wish there were more extrabiblical Hebrew historical/political texts. [[User:DeniseM|DeniseM]] 12:20, 29 December 2008 (EST)

==Great article==
Just read it all the way through. It's superb. Thank you Mr. Schlafly! --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 19:20, 1 January 2009 (EST)
:And to Denise and whoever helped put it together. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 19:20, 1 January 2009 (EST)

== Want to help ==
Hi I'm a long time reader and first time poster. I'm very much interested in your bible revisionism project and would like to know how I could contribute?--[[User:JesseC|JesseC]] 18:53, 5 January 2009 (EST)

: You're not off to a promising start. This is not a Bible (note capital "B") "revisionism" project at all. Try Wikipedia, perhaps, if you want to revise the Bible.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:10, 5 January 2009 (EST)
::Revising it into modern English. Poor choice of words. Still how can I help good sir?--[[User:JesseC|JesseC]] 19:14, 5 January 2009 (EST)

::: Just add to a substantive entry, such as this one! You might also find [[Disputed Biblical Translations]] to be of great interest.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:38, 5 January 2009 (EST)

==Powerful new terms==
What an excellent idea! Language changes and develops, and as you point out, crystallising ideas have given rise to many expressions which the Bible expresses, but (in current translations) in an ambiguous, circumlocutory manner. I shall be racking my brains for some more. [[User:MikeSalter|MikeSalter]] 09:24, 8 January 2009 (EST)

: Thanks. This is tremendous potential.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:33, 8 January 2009 (EST)
::Two I'm struggling with a proper term for, which you might think worthwhile, are socialism and gun control. The term socialism might seem anachronistic in a Biblical context, but the meaning - anti-freedom, anti-enterprise, enslaving of human values - will surely be relevant as an example of everything Christ was fighting against. On the other hand, if the term Socialism sums it up best, why not use ity? As for socialistic gun control, might 'weapon control' cut it? I'd value your opinion. [[User:MikeSalter|MikeSalter]] 09:41, 8 January 2009 (EST)

::: Good ideas, but I think we need first to find (or imagine) a biblical passage where a specific issue came up, and thus a proper term could be used. Offhand, I can't think of one yet for "weapon control," but "socialism" is more germane to the Bible and should be added to the table.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:53, 8 January 2009 (EST)

::::Andy, it looks like "censor" is from 1526, according to Merriam-Webster online. See [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censor here]. Not detrimental to the point, just a minor correction! [[User:JLauttamus|Jeffrey W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|Discussion]] 11:39, 8 January 2009 (EST)
:::::In additon, the word [http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/412 censor (or censur)] appears in Latin as well, although I can't find an origin date for this, although the Romans did use the word Censor as a title for [http://www.bartleby.com/61/57/C0195700.html Roman officials] with a particular duty (such as the census)--[[User:Ieuan|Ieuan]] 11:46, 8 January 2009 (EST)

== Translation suggestions ==

I didn't want to change the main page without asking here first. I think it would make more sense to replace "Meek" with "Humble" instead of "God Fearing". The former is much closer to the intent of what Meek meant in this context, and ties better with other phrases such as "the last shall be first". I'd also suggest using using "Leadership" to replace "Government", since it fits the context, and because his actions in New Testament showed the characteristics af a leader inspiring others than a ruler expecting compliance by authority. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 11:18, 10 January 2009 (EST)

== "Cast Lots" ==

The page suggests "gambled" as a correction for "cast lots". Might I suggest "rolled dice" instead? That's pretty much the modern equivalent of casting lots, to my knowledge, and more specific than "gambled". Plus, "gambled" has modern connotations of a trip to Vegas or some such, with all the wildness that entails, and also leaves the reader wondering "what did they do? play blackjack?" [[User:ArthurA|ArthurA]] 14:47, 6 February 2009 (EST)
:When I was young I was told that when it said 'cast lots' it actually meant they played dice as well. It's still gambling, of course, but it's more specific. [[User:ETrundel|ETrundel]] 15:24, 6 February 2009 (EST)

::The modern translation should say "gambling", a word that did not exist for the [[King James Version]] translators.

::"Cast lots" is meaningless to people today. I can't even tell what is meant by it. No, it wasn't modern dice they were tossing either. What did happen was the soldiers gambled for personal gain, just like visitors to a casino today. The word gambling should be used so people see what it was, and how the evil practice is widespread today also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:43, 6 February 2009 (EST)
:::Actually Andy the Romans did have "modern" dice, and throwing dice was common. But throwing dice is gambling!--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 20:23, 18 July 2009 (EDT)

::::Well, fine, then do you agree the passage should be translated as "gambling"?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:27, 18 July 2009 (EDT)
::Personally I prefer the "cast dice", because it is closer to the "casts lots" and is far more specific than just stating "gambling". I feel that any half-intelligent person would infer that casting dice refers to gambling, but perhaps I think the general public is smarter than they are HaHa!--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 20:34, 18 July 2009 (EDT)

:::"Cast dice" doesn't carry the impact of "gambling" for me. "Cast dice" strikes me as odd, puzzling me as to whether they had modern dice. Would they have rolled the dice on an uneven, earthy surface? Seems difficult to imagine, and thus not as effective. "Gambled" gets the point across without raising questions of how.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:48, 18 July 2009 (EDT)

::Interesting interpretation. However for me at least (and perhaps for others) simply saying "gambling" raises the question of how did they gamble, in what way did they gamble? For me at least the "dice" translation allows a person to infer that they were gambling via dice (it is well known Romans had dice). More interesting is that other versions of The Bible have translated Matthew 27:35 as "After they had crucified HIM, they determined who would get his clothes by throwing dice for them" ISV and GOD'S WORD. --[[User:IScott|IScott]] 21:11, 18 July 2009 (EDT)

:::"casting lots" is the phrase used by NIV and Holman, the two most respected recent translations. "Lots" is different from "dice", and given the distinction why not resolve it by using "gambled"?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:14, 18 July 2009 (EDT)

== Love ==

Hello all;

While I'm hesitant about this project as a whole (in Burma, any vernacular Bible at all was pretty amazing - and I was lucky enough to have a teacher who taught me to read it in Greek), there's one thing which I think would be really helpful.

That's the issue of 'love', or 'αγαπη'. It's a beautiful concept, and very famously explored by Paul in 1 Corinthians 13.

If any word has a difficult to pin-down/changed meaning, I'd say it's this one - ever since people started translating Greek into English, four Greek words with very different meanings (storge, eros, philia, agape - as CS Lewis outlined) have been kludged together into the word 'love', which means that we miss a lot of the subtlety of passages like John 3:16, Matthew 22:37-41, 1 John 4:7-22, and the aforementioned 1 Corinthians 13.

I don't exactly know how one would deal with this - if 'love' is too broad, then the KJV's 'charity' is too narrow (charity is more of an act, an expression of agape), and just romanising 'agape' into the text would run counter to its efforts towards clarity. My NRSV (yes, I know, problematic around Isaiah, but I still feel it points towards Jesus in prophecy - it's also got a very handy set of 'textual links') approaches this in what I think is a helpful way - it uses the normal word, then has a little explanation of the Greek and other authorities in the footnote. I think the NIV and many other Bibles do a similar thing.

In this case, it would be -

'For God so loved1 the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.'

1Greek - 'agape'.

Thoughts? I realise that it adds a potential layer of complexity, and detracts from the flow of the text, but I feel it's a nice compromise between ease of understanding and scriptural subtlety - it's a good way of drawing attention to what Paul calls 'the most special way'. [[User:AungSein|AungSein]] 08:58, 22 November 2009 (EST)

American English

2009-11-03T13:25:19Z

AungSein: you're silly

'''American English''' is the [[English]] language as written in the United States. American English tends to be more concise and economical than in the English used in monarchies.<ref>"Color," "labor", "defense" and bank "check" are standard in the U.S.; "colour," "labour," "defence" and bank "cheque" are standard in Britain and the former [[British Empire]].</ref>

Slang varies a great deal between the U.S. and Britain, and there are noticeable differences in pronunciation and accent. Inside the U.S. spelling and grammar are highly standardized, but pronunciation varies by region and social factors (such as race and education). American English derived from British English, but since independence in 1776 has diverged in various relatively small ways. All the major dictionaries published in the U.S. feature American English, often with a note on British differences.

Since 1945 Hollywood has overwhelmed the much smaller film industries in Britain and Canada, familiarizing the British with American English.

In spoken form, American English consists of a number of different dialects. Distinctive dialects of American English include those spoken in the South, New England, and the Midwest, as well as local areas such as New York City, to name only a few. Even these dialects can be broken down further into distinctive dialects, such as the English spoken in Brooklyn, or that spoken in Boston. African American English is itself a dialect.

The Internet has largely erased regional variations, so that the many blogs, twitters and facebooks seem to all reflect one standard language.

==History==
The use of English in [[Colonial America]] was established as a result of British settlement of the [[Thirteen Colonies]]. The first large wave of English-speaking settlers arrived in Virginia and New England in the 1607-1660 period. Other waves followed--and indeed immigrants from many other English-speaking countries are still arriving.

In the South the colonists came mostly from the western part of England, and the distinctive accents and dialects of that region shaped the southern accent.

By contrast the migrants to New England (now called [[Yankees]]) came from the east of England, and brought along different accents and dialects.

In the 18th century the Scots arrived, from Scotland and Ulster (Northern Ireland), bringing yet another dialect and a distinctive accent.<ref> Michael Montgomery, "Voices of My Ancestors: a Personal Search for the Language of the Scotch-Irish," ''American Speech'' 2005 80(4): 341-365 in [[EBSCO]]</ref>

During the colonial era, there were also some speakers in North America of [[Dutch]], [[French]], [[German]], [[Spanish]], and [[Swedish]], as well as numerous [[Native American]] languages. To a small extent, they affected American English, chiefly in the addition of some words and place names

By 1800 there were three main dialect areas, with slightly different pronunciations and much the same vocabulary: Northern (New England, New York and due west), Southern (Virginia to Georgia, and due west), and Midland (Pennsylvania and the lower Midwest). As the map shows, the same basic geographical patterns continue into the 21st century.<ref> See [http://www.ling.upenn.edu/phono_atlas/NationalMap/NationalMap.html#Heading2 "A National Map of the Regional Dialects of American English'' (1997)] and [http://www.geocities.com/yvain.geo/dialects.html "Dialect Map of American English
"]</ref>

[[File:Dialect2.jpg|thumb|550px|1997 regional patterns]]

With the arrival of radio in the 1920s, the Midland version became standard American pronunciation.

===Webster===
[[Noah Webster]] not only compiled the first and most influential American dictionary, he also wrote a "Blue Backed Speller" that sold millions of copies and was used by most school children in the U.S. from the 1780s to the 1840s.<ref> See full text at [http://books.google.com/books?id=ZkRAAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:noah+inauthor:webster&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=1 Noah Webster, ''The American spelling book: containing the rudiments of the English language'' (1827) 168 pages] </ref>
Webster's goal was to provide a uniquely American approach to training children. His most important improvement, he claimed, was to rescue of "our native tongue" from "the clamor of pedantry" that surrounded English grammar and pronunciation. He complained that the English language had been corrupted by the British aristocracy, which set its own standard for proper spelling and pronunciation. Webster rejected the long-standing notion that the study of Greek and Latin must precede the study of English grammar. The appropriate standard for the American language, argued Webster, was "the same [[republicanism|republican]] principles as American civil and ecclesiastical constitutions," which meant that the people-at-large must control the language; popular sovereignty in government must be accompanied by popular usage in language. "The truth is general custom is the rule of speaking—and every deviation from this must be wrong." <ref>Joseph Ellis, ''After the Revolution: Profiles of Early American Culture'' (1979) p 172.</ref>

In some ways, compared to British English, American English differs in its grammar, phonology and vocabulary. Many of these differences were amplified by separate attempts in both Britain and the United States to standardize English usage. For example, Webster, and his Webster's dictionary,<ref> Full text online at [http://books.google.com/books?id=0UM-AAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:noah+inauthor:webster&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=1 Noah Webster, '' An American dictionary of the English language‎'' (1846), 1079 pages] </ref> was influential in firmly establishing many of the American spellings now in use today. Webster's dictionaries redefined Americanism within the context of an emergent and unstable American cultural identity. Webster's identification of his project as a "federal language" shows his competing impulses towards conservatism or regularity and innovation. The contradictions of Webster's project comprised part of a larger dialectical play between liberty and order within Revolutionary and post-Revolutionary political debates.

===Roosevelt===
[[File:TRSpelling.jpg|thumb|370px|Roosevelt shoots holes in the dictionary as the spirits of Chaucer, Shakespeare and Dr Johnson moan.]]

During his presidency, 1901-1909, [[Theodore Roosevelt]] failed in efforts to simplify the spelling of 300 common words. He (and other spelling reformers) wanted to replace "dropped" and "chased" with "dropt" and "chast", and replace "through" with "thru" and "thoroughly" with "thoroly." He tried to force the federal government to adopt the system by ordering the Public Printer to use the system in all public documents. The reform annoyed the public, forcing him to rescind the order. Roosevelt explained, "I could not by fighting have kept the new spelling in, and it was evidently worse than useless to go into an undignified contest when I was beaten. Do you know that the one word as to which I thought the new spelling was wrong — thru — was more responsible than anything else for our discomfiture?" Next summer Roosevelt was watching a naval review when a launch marked "Pres Bot" chugged ostentatiously by. The President waved and laughed with delight.<ref> Henry F. Pringle, ''Theodore Roosevelt'' (1932), pp 465-7; H.W. Brands, ''T.R.: The Last Romantic'' (1998) pp555ff</ref>

The [[Chicago Tribune]] also embarked on its own effort to simplify spelling and make it more phonetic.

==Today==
Today American English is simpler and more phonetic than British English. Sometimes as an expression of [[anti-American]] sentiment, however, non-Americans will insist that use of British English is exclusively proper English, the implication being that American English is somehow "non-standard". Linguists reject that nonsense. Both the British and American variants are standard.

Americans have a more open, less formal society that has enabled them to coin and invent tens of thousands of new words and phrases; linguists and lexicographers have a herculean job to keep up, as shown the great compilations by Mathews (1951) and Cassidy (1985- ongoing) demonstrate.

The North American Regional Vocabulary Survey collected lexical data from the 1990s to 2004 from regions throughout the U.S. and Canada.<ref> Charles Boberg, "The North American Regional Vocabulary Survey: New Variables and Methods in the Study of North American English," ''American Speech'' 2005 80(1): 22-60 in [[EBSCO]]</ref>
==Further reading==
* American English and British English" in ''Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language'' ed. by Tom McArthur. (1998) [http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/entry.html?subview=main&entry=t29.e61 online at many libraries]
* Cassidy, Frederic Gomes, and Joan Houston Hall, eds ''Dictionary of American Regional English'' (4 vol 1985- ), A through Sk; final vol 5 is awaited; monumental coverage of the spoken and written language [http://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-American-Regional-English-Introduction/dp/0674205111/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1254425344&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search vol 1]
* Dillard, Joey Lee. ''Toward a Social History of American English'' (1985) [http://www.amazon.com/History-American-Contributions-Sociology-Language/dp/3110105845/ref=sr_1_12?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1254397753&sr=1-12 excerpt and text search]
* Garner, Bryan A. ''Garner's Modern American Usage '' (2nd ed. 2009) [http://www.amazon.com/Garners-Modern-American-Usage-Garner/dp/0195382757/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1254410304&sr=1-3# excerpt and text search]
* Mathews, Mitford McLeod. ''A Dictionary of Americanisms on Historical Principles'' (1951), 1960pp; monumental dictionary of new words added by Americans
* Mencken, H. L. ''The American Language'' (1936) [http://www.amazon.com/American-Language-H-L-Mencken/dp/1605206237/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1254397959&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search of abridged edition]

====references====
<references/>
[[Category:English language]]
[[Category:United States]]

User talk:RJJensen

2009-11-01T20:22:02Z

AungSein: /* William, Mary, etc. */

[[/Archive 1]]
==Trinity==
You reverted my edits to the Trinity page, with the comment "The Trinity is Christian". I was a bit baffled by this, but then realized that I had used the Torah as a source. The Torah is just the Old Testament, and is part of the Christian Bible. I did not realize that my language would be so confusing (I am used to it, my parents converted from Judaism to Baptist Christians). You will find that much of the Hebrew Bible (The old Testament) supports Christian concepts. This is because Christian concepts are universal truths!

Haha, yeah the rain has been murderous all week long! I had the misfortune of planning to drive into Athens today, only to find all the roads underwater! I didn't realize until you messaged me that my talk page has the info intended for my user page, so thank you for your inadvertant help (also, yes, it appears my grammar died while I was writing it!) Are you from the area as well? Always good to meet a fellow southerner who understands the Obama Crisis. There are so many hayseed liberals down here it makes me sick! Don't worry tho, you won't hear me crying out for a confederate south:) Long live a STRONG CONSERVATIVE UNION, with a surplus export of integrity! [[User:RoyP|RoyP]] 20:33, 21 September 2009 (EDT)
::thanks for the update. I'm actually a Yankee now living in Montana, but I have had a strong interest in the South since I studiesd with C. Vann Woodward some years back.[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 20:36, 21 September 2009 (EDT)
:::I can forgive a Yank, I used to be one (Mt. Vernon, Washington)! Unfortunately, that town's Conservative fervor lives solely in the words of one Glenn Beck (that man's done for intelligent conservatism what Sean Penn did for photographers dentistry.) [[User:RoyP|RoyP]] 20:45, 21 September 2009 (EDT)
::::Now, what kind of a snide insult is that? Beck is a thoughtful, honest fighter for the conservative cause, and if people are angered at the government by his exposés, all the better for the nation. Both he, and those of us who respect him, are intelligent people. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 20:59, 21 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::Forgive any intrusion or stamping upon your own loyalties. But surely you must admit that the movement suffers from a lack of Irving Kristol or William Buckley type figures. I long for the days when conservatism nakedly confessed that the intellectuals were the brains of the movement while the power of the people were its fists. OF COURSE a weapon must be weighted properly, with the correct balances, but it is only in retrospect that people might discuss its craftsmanship and the components which constituted it. I would venture to say that anyone slain by Excalibur would comment on anything but the sharpness of its blade, which in this most basic analogy, would comprise the incisive wit of conservatives who have lived and then gone to meet God in heaven. The fires of anger burn with intense heat in the belly of American conservatism, but to stoke these fires, as Beck often does, produces little but flash and smoke. It will be some current or future leader, a Reagan-type, I pray, who shall light his torch with such a flame and bring it to the halls of Congress or to the Obama home and say, "See, this same flame has burned for ages now let it singe you!". God, conservatism, the side of moral right; all are the same, and united they are all consuming. But it must take SOMEONE...a prophet, a politician who does God's work, a priest with God's word in him...someone, SOMEONE must carry that torch. [[User:RoyP|RoyP]] 21:15, 21 September 2009 (EDT)

== Quakerism category ==
Thanks for setting it up! I'll try to contribute a few more new articles to insert. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 14:20, 22 September 2009 (EDT)

== "Revert vandalism" on the Chavez article ==

Does [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Hugo_Chavez&curid=5224&diff=703420&oldid=703401 this edit] really count as "vandalism"? Or would it be more fair of you to qualify it as a different point of view? A point of view that may be criticized, perhaps, one that may or may not be backed up by whatever evidence is cited--but where is the "vandalism"? [[User:Wayne|Wayne]] 08:44, 25 September 2009 (EDT)
::it's vandalism--it was designed to attack and denigrate and damage a CP article. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 10:10, 25 September 2009 (EDT)
:::Introducing a different point of view--with a citation, no less--is denigrating and damaging to the article? Is the article that fragile? [[User:Wayne|Wayne]] 10:25, 25 September 2009 (EDT)
:::that was his goal. to sabotage the article by making it contradictory. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 10:38, 25 September 2009 (EDT)
::::Would it not add to the credibility of the article and the site as a whole to engage with the ideas that the editor brought to the table on their own merits--or lack thereof-- as opposed to dismissing them as vandalism? [[User:Wayne|Wayne]] 12:16, 25 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::vandals seeking to weaken or ruin articles are not welcome here. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 12:20, 25 September 2009 (EDT)

== speedy delete? ==

[[Nonlineardog]]

== Dear Dr. Jensen, ==

i think your edits are far above the average quality here. I am quite liberal (and not American), so i don't always agree with your opinions, however i enjoy to read your articles, since they are written in a quite concise and interesting manner from the right distance of view and i usually learn something about topics i don't know much about.

Regards, --[[User:Stitch75|Stitch75]] 12:45, 5 October 2009 (EDT)
::thanks! :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 13:22, 5 October 2009 (EDT)

Why did you revert my edit calling for a citation? [[User:AZF|AZF]] 17:11, 7 October 2009 (EDT)
::you're making work for other people; if you want to add a citation please do so. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:14, 7 October 2009 (EDT)
:::The person who made the initial assertion was making work for other people. [[User:AZF|AZF]] 17:19, 7 October 2009 (EDT)

==Columbia==
In the 1872 painting; are you sure she holds a school book? Might it be the Bible?--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 00:03, 13 October 2009 (EDT)
::my students always ask that--it says "School Book" on it. you can read it at [http://cprr.org/CPRR_Discussion_Group/2005/11/question-american-progress-by-john_11.html larger image] [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 00:07, 13 October 2009 (EDT)
:::Thank you, a beautiful picture btw.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 00:13, 13 October 2009 (EDT)

== Milton/Paradise Lost ==
1st of all, thanks for the encouragement on my talk page. We now seem to be sort of collaborating on the Milton and PL pages. I came across some public-domain images of Blake's watercolors for PL that would be great to add to that page. How do we go about making that happen? [[User:ChrisFV|ChrisFV]] 17:58, 29 October 2009 (EDT)
:yes--it's fun! I can upload files if you gove me URL's or email to me at rjensen@uic.edu [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 18:04, 29 October 2009 (EDT)
::Here is the site: http://www.pitt.edu/~ulin/Paradise/Blake1808.htm [[User:ChrisFV|ChrisFV]] 20:09, 29 October 2009 (EDT)
:::OK which ones do you want to use? 04:45, 30 October 2009 (EDT)
::::So hard to choose! I think "The Expulsion from Eden" (Book XII) is essential for the PL article. If there is room, my next choice would be "The Downfall of the Rebel Angels" (Book VI), and then "The Temptation of Eve" (Book IX). [[User:ChrisFV|ChrisFV]] 11:24, 30 October 2009 (EDT)
::::: done: see File:Blake-xii.jpg File:Blake-vi.jpg and File:Blake-ix.jpg [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 05:19, 31 October 2009 (EDT)

== William, Mary, etc. ==

Hello Richard;

Just noticed you doing some 17th century history - could I ask for a bit of a hand getting William of Orange's article up? He doesn't have one, at the moment, I think, and 'William and Mary' redirects [[College of William and Mary|here]]. Thanks, and nice articles. [[User:AungSein|AungSein]] 14:45, 1 November 2009 (EST)
::look at [[William III]]. :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 15:16, 1 November 2009 (EST)
::::Pesky Stadtholder ... ;) [[User:AungSein|AungSein]] 15:22, 1 November 2009 (EST)

User talk:RJJensen

2009-11-01T19:45:48Z

AungSein: /* William, Mary, etc. */ new section

William Turner

2009-11-01T15:32:40Z

AungSein: year without a summer

[[Image:Turner..jpg|left|120px]]
'''Joseph Mallord William Turner''' (Covent Garden 1775 - [[London]] 1851) was a [[British]] [[Romanticism|Romantic]] painter and printmaker. In 1802, when he was only 26, he became a full member of the Royal Academy, the youngest member ever so admitted. He traveled constantly in England and abroad ([[Venice]]).

Turner is perhaps the most famous [[English]] Romantic landscape artist. He became known as "the painter of light", perhaps inspired by the '[[year without a summer]]', and the amazing sunsets that resulted from it[http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Year_Without_a_Summer]. The Shipwreck (1805) [http://www.conservapedia.com/Image:Turner_The_Shipwreck.jpg] shows his emphasis on luminosity, and dramatic subjects.

Turner anticipated [[French]] [[Impressionism]].
<center>
 
[[Image:Turner Shipweck of the Minotaur.jpg|Shipweck of the Minotaur]]

''' Shipweck of the Minotaur '''
</center>

* '''Continue to:''' [[William Turner / Gallery]]

== See also ==

*[[English Painting]]
*[[Painting Schools]]
*[[Gallery of Seascapes]]
*[[Antony van Dyck]]
*[[Sir Joshua Reynolds]]
*[[John Constable]]

== External links ==
*[http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/bio/r/reynolds/biograph.html William Turner] Web Gallery of Art.
*[http://www.j-m-w-turner.co.uk/artist/turner-in-venice.htm J.M.W.Turner in Venice]
*[http://www.artcyclopedia.com/feature.html Fame and the Founding Father] By Joseph Phelan.
*[http://www.handprint.com/HP/WCL/artist05.html Joseph Mallord William Turner] Watercolor artists.
*[http://www.artgallery.co.uk/news/the_story_behind_the_fighting_temeraire The story behind The Fighting Temeraire] Britain's favourite painting.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Turner, William}}

[[Category:Painters]]
[[Category:United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Printmakers]]

War artist

2009-11-01T15:06:20Z

AungSein: Created page with 'A war artist is an artist, usually commissioned by a government, who depicts a war, either during battles, its effects on the home front, or its aftermath. Such artists are oft...'

A war artist is an artist, usually commissioned by a government, who depicts a war, either during battles, its effects on the home front, or its aftermath.

Such artists are often commissioned because the war effort is better served by the inspirational benefit of their art, as opposed to their ability to fight on the front line; alternatively, they might be hired to commemorate and immortalise the events. Famous war artists include [[John Singer Sargent]], [[Stanley Spencer]], [[Paul Nash]], and [[Edward Ardizzone]].

[[Category:Painting]]

Stanley Spencer

2009-11-01T15:01:51Z

AungSein: added biography

[[File:Stanley Spencer Self Portrait 1923.jpg|100px|left|Self Portrait]]

[[File:Stanley_Spencer_Helter_Skelter_1937.jpg|thumb|right|'Helter Skelter', 1937. Spencer's muted use of colour is clear here.]]

Sir Stanley Spencer (30 June 1891 – 14 December 1959) was an [[English]] [[war artist]], based largely out of his home town of [[Cookham]], and well known for his depictions of war, events of the Gospels, and his unusual art style.

Educated at the Slade School of Art, Spencer served in the [[First World War]] in the [[Royal Army Medical Corps]]'s 68th Field Ambulance unit - a harrowing experience, that inspired his work at Sandham Memorial Chapel - and the emotional impact of the loss of so many of his comrades is clear in his work from this time, and also arguably led to his divorce from his first wife. During the [[Second World War]], he continued to paint, depicting the quiet, stoic pride of the workers on the Glasgow shipyards<ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/trail/wars_conflict/art/art_frontline_gal_03.shtml BBC history article on WW1 war art]</ref>.

Stanley Spencer had a difficult relationship with the [[Royal Academy|RA]], initially joining them in 1930, leaving after they rejected his work in 1935, but rejoining upon his reception of a [[CBE]] in 1950. He was [[knight]]ed in 1959, but sadly died from [[cancer]] later that year.
==Religious dimensions to Stanley Spencer's work==
[[File:Stanley Spencer Resurrection Cookham 1926.jpg|thumb|left|'The Resurrection - Cookham', 1926. Note the seemingly 'irreverent' depiction of the dead, peeking out from behind gravestones - Spencer here illustrates the simple humanity of events otherwise difficult for humans to comprehend.]]

Many painters have made recourse to religious themes in [[Christian painting|their art]], but Spencer took a fairly unusual approach in this.

Rather than trying to depict [[God]]'s glory overtly in paint, Spencer's work has a strong immediacy, and sense of Jesus' life-bringing presence 'in this world'. Thus, in his portrayal of the [[Second Coming]], he did not paint famous celebrities, important leaders, or allegorical personifications, rising from the dead, but rather depicted ordinary people in the sleepy town of [[Cookham]] being resurrected, thus stressing the universality of the Christian message - Jesus coming for [[Beatitudes|the humble and lowly, as well as for the high and mighty]]. Much of his seemingly non-religious art can be read in a similar way - his 'Convoy Arriving with Wounded', for example, is a testament both to the solidarity of war [[veteran]]s, and also to the salvation of those who did not survive - the symbolism of the opening gate<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2016:19&version=NIV Matthew 16:19]</ref> is clear.

By focussing on images that anyone could relate to, and that were an actual reality for many of the audiences for his work, Spencer's style harks back to New Testament [[parable]]s; their meaning is not immediately obvious, but they are very rooted in ordinary, everyday sights. No special education is needed to understand them, or decipher their meaning - only the day to day experience of common people.

[[File:Stanley Spencer The Last Supper 1920.jpg|thumb|right|'The Last Supper', 1920. Note the awkwardness of the seated figures - unlike Da Vinci's more famous painting of the [[Last Supper]], Spencer sought to emphasise the humanity and normality of those present.]]

==References==
<references/>

[http://www.kwantes.com/SSG%20website/biography.html Biography of Stanley Spencer.]

[[Category:Painters]]

Stanley Spencer

2009-11-01T15:00:00Z

AungSein: /* Religious dimensions to Stanley Spencer's work */ grammar

Stanley Spencer

2009-11-01T14:55:11Z

AungSein: Created page with 'Self Portrait [[File:Stanley_Spencer_Helter_Skelter_1937.jpg|thumb|right|'Helter Skelter', 1937. Spencer's muted use o...'

[[File:Stanley Spencer Self Portrait 1923.jpg|100px|left|Self Portrait]]

[[File:Stanley_Spencer_Helter_Skelter_1937.jpg|thumb|right|'Helter Skelter', 1937. Spencer's muted use of colour is clear here.]]

Sir Stanley Spencer (30 June 1891 – 14 December 1959) was an [[English]] [[war artist]], based largely out of his home town of [[Cookham]], and well known for his depictions of war, events of the Gospels, and his unusual art style.

Educated at the Slade School of Art, Spencer served in the [[First World War]] in the [[Royal Army Medical Corps]]'s 68th Field Ambulance unit - a harrowing experience, that inspired his work at Sandham Memorial Chapel - and the emotional impact of the loss of so many of his comrades is clear in his work from this time, and also arguably led to his divorce from his first wife. During the [[Second World War]], he continued to paint, depicting the quiet, stoic pride of the workers on the Glasgow shipyards<ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/trail/wars_conflict/art/art_frontline_gal_03.shtml BBC history article on WW1 war art]</ref>.

Stanley Spencer had a difficult relationship with the [[Royal Academy|RA]], initially joining them in 1930, leaving after they rejected his work in 1935, but rejoining upon his reception of a [[CBE]] in 1950. He was [[knight]]ed in 1959, but sadly died from [[cancer]] later that year.
==Religious dimensions to Stanley Spencer's work==
[[File:Stanley Spencer Resurrection Cookham 1926.jpg|thumb|left|'The Resurrection - Cookham', 1926. Note the seemingly 'irreverent' depiction of the dead, peeking out from behind gravestones - Spencer here illustrates the simple humanity of events otherwise difficult for humans to comprehend.]]

Many painters have made recourse to religious themes in [[Christian painting|their art]], but Spencer took a fairly unusual approach in this.

Rather than trying to depict [[God]]'s glory overtly in paint, Spencer's work has a strong immediacy, and sense of Jesus' life-bringing presence 'in this world'. Thus, in his portrayal of the [[Second Coming]], he did not paint famous celebrities, important leaders, or allegorical personifications, rising from the dead, but rather depicted ordinary people in the sleepy town of [[Cookham]] being resurrected, thus stressing the universality of the Christian message - Jesus coming for [[Beatitudes|the humble and lowly, as well as for the high and mighty]]. Much of his seemingly non-religious art can be read in a similar way - his 'Convoy Arriving with Wounded', for example, is a testament both to the solidarity of war [[veteran]]s, and also to the salvation of those who did not survive - the symbolism of the opening gate<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2016:19&version=NIV Matthew 16:19]</ref> is clear.

By focussing on images that anyone could relate to, and that were an actual reality for many of the audiences for his work, Spencer's style harks back to New Testament [[parable]]s; they're meaning is not immediately obvious, but they are very rooted in ordinary, everyday sights. No special education is needed to understand them, or decipher their meaning - only the day to day experience of common people.

[[File:Stanley Spencer The Last Supper 1920.jpg|thumb|right|'The Last Supper', 1920. Note the awkwardness of the seated figures - unlike Da Vinci's more famous painting of the [[Last Supper]], Spencer sought to emphasise the humanity and normality of those present.]]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Painters]]

User talk:Jimmysmith55

2009-11-01T14:02:42Z

AungSein: Created page with '{{welcome}} ~~~~'

{{welcome}}

[[User:AungSein|AungSein]] 09:02, 1 November 2009 (EST)

Halloween

2009-10-31T23:55:46Z

AungSein: jiggled it about. explanation of name goes better there, I think

[[Image:Halloween.gif|right|300px]]
'''Halloween''', is a tradition originating in [[Ireland]] and celebrated on the evening of October 31, before All Hallows Day (or All Saint's Day).

In the [[United States]], Halloween is marked by the activity of trick-or-treating. Trick-or-treat traditionally involves the children dressing in costumes, and going to various locations, generally houses, requesting candy at each.

Although a secular holiday, it's date it intentionally close to the Catholic holiday of [[All Saints Day]] - a day of respect for the dead, hence the name - 'all-hallow's-eve' becomes 'halloween', over time.
[[File:Pumpkin carved.jpg|thumb|250px|Carved pumpkin.]]
[[File:Halloween.jpg|200px]]

Colors orange and black are traditionally associated with Halloween as well as costumes of witches, ghosts, famous monsters, skeletons, and devils; also foods like Caramel apples, pumpkins, pumpkin pie, caramel corn, and candies.

== Samhain ==
In the tradition of [[Wicca]], Halloween is also known as ''Samhain''. This is the Wiccan new year and Sabbat (holy day) honoring ancestors. <ref>http://paganwiccan.about.com/od/samhainoctober31/p/Samhain_History.htm</ref>

== References ==
[http://paganwiccan.about.com/od/samhainoctober31/p/Samhain_History.htm]History of Samhain

[[category:Holidays]]

Newt

2009-10-31T23:45:21Z

AungSein: made more sentence-y

Newts are [[amphibians]] with four legs, and a tail. They are outwardly similar to [[lizards]], despite being members of a different class of the animal kingdom - like lizards, they can regenerate limbs, but unlike lizards, they have soft slimy skin instead of scales.

User talk:MarkGall

2009-10-31T23:39:57Z

AungSein: /* Blocking the Colbert vandal */ new section

{{welcome|sig=[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 00:50, 10 June 2009 (EDT)}}

Hello there, Mark! I am truly glad to see that you are adding new pages for Obama's "Czars." So far, so good for a newcomer to Conservapedia!
-[[User:RKLuffy88|RKLuffy88]]

== Czars... ==

<big>Great work, Mark, but can we please consolidate these into one Obama Czar article?</big> --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 22:10, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

:As before, I'm happy to merge them -- I only created seperate pages since it was requested on the main page by DeanS to fill in red links he added to [[Obama Administration]]. What should the new article be titled, and how would you recommend laying it out? --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 16:44, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

::One would have to find the articles, as they are not linked from the Obama Administration page. If you can do that, provide the links, I can move them onto the same page, entitled Obama Administration Czars. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 21:31, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

:::Here they are:
:::[[Alan Bersin]], [[Steven Rattner]], [[Gil Kerlikowske]], [[Paul A. Volcker]], [[Carol Browner]], [[Jeffrey Zients]], [[Cameron Davis]], [[Nancy-Ann DeParle]], [[John Brennan]], [[Dennis Blair]], [[Kenneth R. Feinberg]], [[Cass R. Sunstein]], [[Vivek Kundra]], [[Adolfo Carrion, Jr.]], [[Gary Samore]]
:::These are all linked at [[Obama Administration]] (the sixth section, "czars"), which ought to be updated accordingly. I can go through and clean up the redundant information once your merge is finished. Thanks! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 21:46, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

== String Theory ==

Thanks for adding the attributions to Givental, Lian, Liu, and Yau. Don't ask me why I left out such an important credit.--[[User:Lemonpeel|Lemonpeel]] 12:36, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

*Lotrsw86? --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 05:13, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

::Who/what is Lotrsw86? If you suspect me of having another username, I assure you that's not the case. I hope it's clear from my contributions by now that I'm not a vandal. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 11:12, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

==Math articles==
If you please, try to place an example of a problem within the math articles that are posted. For instance, in your [[Fundamental group]] article there could be a problem within each subtopic, broken down in a step-by-step manner to lead the reader in understanding and solving it. Think this is possible? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 01:42, 4 July 2009 (EDT)

:I like your idea about problems in the math articles. The issue here is that it's difficult to come up with problems on the fundamental group that could really be answered at this level. An exposition at this level doesn't give the reader the knowledge to solve any real problems. I don't even prove what the fundamental group of the circle is -- a proof requires much more theory than is in the article, but the intuition is clear. I could ask for intuitive guesses about fundamental groups, but just about every space that a new reader knows about is given as an example already! I will try to think something up, I'm sure it can be done.
:In the article [[differential geometry]] which I did a bit of work on a couple weeks ago, I inserted "motivating questions" in a few places, to indicate why someone would care about it. I can certainly do this in the fundamental group article. Actually, I was thinking that on the front page [[mathematics]], it would be neat to put motivating questions under all the headers you created, to give a flavor of these areas of mathematics. What do you think of that idea? --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 09:33, 4 July 2009 (EDT)

::I added two problems/solutions to [[fundamental group]]. What do you think? One is for conceptual understanding, while one tests ability to manipulate the definitions. I'll try to add more. What do you think? --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 21:51, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

== big bang ==
You undid my edit; why? The list of astronomers I posted contained many people who are far more knowledgeable than either Arp or Burbidge, as evidenced by their continued research in the field of cosmology. While Arp and Geoff might be fine astronomers, they certainly do not understand the preponderance of data that contradicts their pet theories; if their's are notable names to be attached to an article in opposition to the Big Band Theory, why should the names of proponents not be included?

:You added a useless list of mostly obscure scientists. It did nothing to improve the exposition of the article and created the appearance that the theory is more widely supported among scientists than it actually is. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 16:53, 2 September 2009 (EDT)

==Edit summaries==

Hi, Mark. Could you be more specific than ''reinserted some correct info'' when you edit difficult or advanced articles like [[Infinity]]? Our readers and contributors need to know WHAT is being inserted and WHY. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 10:36, 18 September 2009 (EDT)

:My apologies. I was reinserting some correct information which I had inadvertently removed when taking out some apparent vandalism, and didn't think to state what it actually was. That material's been there for some time so I hope it won't be controversial, but I'll try to pay more attention in the future. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 11:28, 18 September 2009 (EDT)

::Excellent edit summary here. [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Windows_bugs&curid=87465&diff=701666&oldid=701664&rcid=768499] Keep this link for a get-out-of-jail-free card! ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 18:42, 18 September 2009 (EDT)

== Possibility ==

Mark, it just dawned on me that you might enjoy teaching a math course here to high school homeschoolers. Just a thought for you to consider ...--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:42, 19 September 2009 (EDT)

:Mr. Schlafly, I would certainly love to do that at some point. Unfortunately, for now I don't have time to put in the effort it would require to do it well -- I'm busy enough teaching undergrads (who I suspect are much less motivated than the homeschoolers here!) and keeping up with my own work. I'd consider it at some point in the future, perhaps next year so I can develop materials over the summer. I saw that you once tried to start up a [[Conservapedia:Critical_Thinking_in_Math|math course]] here -- if enough interest materializes again, I'd be happy to be an assistant teacher and help out as much as I'm able! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 10:49, 19 September 2009 (EDT)

:: Mark, that's fine and I appreciate your work ethic! Maybe I'll get a math course started sometime early next year, and with your help it can grow.

:: The advantage of teaching with the wiki software is that a course can improve dramatically each time it is taught. I'm seeing that with the Economics course now. Thanks again for your insights and effort.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:35, 19 September 2009 (EDT)

== Templates etc. ==

(Sorry about ping-ponging this thread all over my page, Andy's page, and your page, but it will be finished very soon.)

Thanks for weighing in on this. I've made the "H" change, calculus; I don't think there's any issue about that one.

On the "A" change (topology/Riemann), I've been going back and forth in my mind about how to do this. I don't think that it being an open question or not is really important. These things are really just decorations. Though I think the best description should be along the lines of "You should know what the equation to the left is talking about before reading this article." (Sort of like the "You must be this tall to go on this ride" signs at amusement parks :-) Or maybe it should be stronger, as in "You should know what this is talking about ''and be able to solve it''." Which of course means Riemann is not suitable. And I think the higher homotopy groups would cut me out. :-( My topology study ended at about the point of the higher homotopy groups. :-( In any case, by the "and be able to solve it" criterion, which works for the other 3 templates, pi-1 of S-1 is about right.

In any case, let me know if this is OK, or if you want pi-m of S-n, and we can let Andy re-protect them. Unprotecting the two lower ones ("E" and "M") was not necessary; it was never my intention to modify those, but I was in too big a hurry last night, at 12 minutes past midnight, to deal with such subtleties. [[User:PatrickD|PatrickD]] 09:51, 22 September 2009 (EDT)

:Sure, sounds good to me. \pi_1(S^1) is about the right level. Thanks for fixing this! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 14:19, 22 September 2009 (EDT)

== Incompleteness Theorem ==

Mark:

I'm planning to work on the issues of logic, completeness, undecidability, and the Gödel incompleteness theorem next. Basically, everywhere I look, I see things to do, and I happened to look at the [[Undecidable]] page and the [[Axiom]] page. The latter is fairly straightforward -- the characterization of the axioms of geometry being "challenged" by Non-Euclidean geometry needs to be clarified.

But the "undecidable" stuff needs a lot more care. I'm pretty sure I understand the issues, but I'm not 100% sure, so I want to run it by you. It seems to me that essentially all of the material about "Famous undecidable statements" is wrong. These may be statements that are at the edge of what ZF and ZFC mean, but they don't relate to the Gödel incompleteness theorem. And "undecidablility" is about the Gödel incompleteness theorem, ''not'' about the axioms of ZF.

My understanding is that the Gödel incompleteness theorem says, roughly
:*Any logical system rich enough to express integer arithmetic is "incomplete" in the sense that it is not true that, for every well-formed formula F, either F or not F is a theorem (has a proof in that logic).
The logical systems being analyzed by Gödel are simple logics about integers, with nowhere near the sophistication of ZF or ZFC. The non-provability of AC in plain ZF is not really what the Gödel incompleteness theorem is about. You simply add AC, get ZFC, note that the result is still consistent (that is, you now have a trivial proof of AC because it is an axiom, but you do not have a proof of not-AC) and move on.

Hence, it seems to me that all the things in the article related to AC (Banach-Tarski, Continuum hypothesis, large cardinals, non-measurable sets) belong in a different article, since they distract from Gödel's contribution. Only the halting problem (a result from the closely related field of theoretical computer science) is directly relevant to Gödel. And that's what "decidability" should be about.

Of course, fact that neither AC nor not-AC has a proof in ZF is an example of incompletness, but it's not what Gödel was talking about. That is, plain ZF is incomplete, but incomplete logics are a dime a dozen. Gödel showed that ''no'' logic rich enough for integers could be complete.

Does this make sense?

[[User:PatrickD|PatrickD]] 23:07, 23 September 2009 (EDT)

:Hi Patrick,

:Logic's not my forte (you may have noticed I haven't really touched those articles), but I believe everything you say is correct. I am certain that the only thing on the list of "undecidable problems" which is actually undecidable is the halting problem. "Undecidable" is certainly not the same thing as "not provable within ZF", and choice is independent of ZF, not undecidable. Your statement of incompleteness is also good, and I think understandable.

:If you haven't seen it, there's a nice little book called "Godel's Proof" by Nagel that sketches the proof (in 100+ pages) in a fairly nontechnical way. I couldn't give a formal statement of the theorem, but your summary is more or less the same as the one there. I'm looking forward to seeing the article!

== [[Dirichlet's theorem]] ==

Thanks for explaining the requirement!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:38, 1 October 2009 (EDT)

:No problem... thanks for catching the error in the statement! Can't believe I missed that one. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 00:48, 1 October 2009 (EDT)

== Functors ==

Sorry to mess up your elegant article on mathematical functors with low-class computer stuff, but there are probably more people familiar with the latter usage. :-(

Was the material on contravariant functors OK? I remember learning about this back in college. The cohomology functor is contravariant, right?

[[User:PatrickD|PatrickD]] 15:31, 1 October 2009 (EDT)

:My article's not elegant at all! It's just a cleanup until the CP treatment of category theory gets redone (if ever; I don't think it's a high priority). Thanks for adding the CS definition -- I'd heard the term, but never knew what it was before! I think the ideal situation would be a single page about basic notions in category theory -- definition of category, examples, definition of functor, examples, definition of natural transformation, examples, .... It doesn't make sense to me for functor to have its own page. I'd put things like "pushout square" and "adjoint functor" on their own pages, if they were ever written, but I'm not sure they belong here.

:You're right on about contravariant functors. I probably should've mentioned it. Sometimes these days when people write "functor" they just mean covariant functor, and a controvariant functor from A is just regarded as a covariant functor from A^op (A with all arrows reversed). It's definitely more illuminating this way, and cohomology is indeed an example.

:The other example I'm thinking about adding is Hom(-,V) and Hom(V,-), both functors from Vect_k to Vect_k. Given a fixed vector space V, Hom(-,V) is the functor that sends an object W in Vect_k to the set of linear maps from W to V, which is itself a vector space. The first of these is contravariant and the second is covariant (or the other way, I always get it wrong), and it's easy to write down why. It's a nice pair of examples in an easy-to-understand category. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 17:00, 1 October 2009 (EDT)

== Awesome work! ==

Great job on some of these math articles, especially all that content to diffeomorphism! [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 17:57, 1 October 2009 (EDT)

:Thanks! I'm not really sure what to do with that one -- the notion and examples are obvious to anyone who knows what a smooth manifold is, but not very useful to anyone else. It's a hard thing to motivate. But hopefully the exotic spheres will be news to some. Jump in if you have any ideas to make it easier to read for people with less background!

If you like the geometric style argument we talked about on [[Talk:Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness]], you should check out "Visual Complex Analysis" by Tristan Needham, a doctoral student of Roger Penrose. It's full of cool geometric arguments for complex analysis and Riemann manifolds that I haven't seen anywhere else. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 00:11, 2 October 2009 (EDT)

:I'm a big fan of that book! I was a teaching assistant in a complex analysis course a couple years ago, and almost all of my review sessions (an hour a week) consisted of presenting the arguments from Needham to try to convince the students the theorems were plausible! My intuitions in physics are really bad, I ought to work on seeing things like that. Do you know any physics books along those lines? --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 00:43, 2 October 2009 (EDT)

::Oh, that's awesome! I had the privilege of studying under Dr. Needham at USF, in private sessions my senior year, and I know for a fact that he is working on a similar book for differential geometry. He based the methods of the book off of Newton's Principia, which uses tons and tons of geometric arguments (and a similar lack of rigor!), and Misner Thorne Wheeler is another book recommended by Dr. Needham, and riddled with geometric arguments. Even if you're not interested in GR, it's an excellent resource for differential geometry. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 01:05, 2 October 2009 (EDT)

:::Actually, I had a Fields medalist professor recommend once that we all read Needham's book, that's where I heard about it in the first place. I wish the differential geometry one had come out earlier -- my text had almost no geometry at all. GR is something that I'm hoping to understand better -- I'll definitely give Misner Thorne Wheeler a look. Thanks! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 01:16, 2 October 2009 (EDT)

::::A Fields medalist professor? That's so cool, who is it? [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 01:20, 2 October 2009 (EDT)

==Typo==
Good work MarkGall, you have become a real contributor here.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:29, 3 October 2009 (EDT)

I've learned a great deal from you Mark. Your catching the typo was one of many examples. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:31, 3 October 2009 (EDT)

== Blocking and editing ==

Mark, you've received well-deserved blocking and night editing. Congratulations!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:52, 6 October 2009 (EDT)

:Thanks, I appreciate it! Yet another distraction from those late-night problem sets. Is there a page where I can learn how to block correctly? --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 19:19, 6 October 2009 (EDT)

== Gravity ==

I finally got around to reading the gravity material in [[Talk:Essay:Quantifying_Openmindedness]],
and there are a lot of correct things, a few things that may miss the point slightly, and a few instances of people talking past each other unnecessarily.

First, you are absolutely right that the divergence theorem establishes an exponent of exactly 2 for divergenceless vector fields in flat Euclidean space. But there's no reason to require that the gravitational "field" be divergenceless. In fact, it could be argued that "dark energy" creates the nonzero divergence, if people used a pure classical gravitational "field", which they don't.

Remember that Newton's formula was a mathematically exact consequence of Kepler's laws (ellipses, focus, equal-area law, etc.), which were an exact geometrical formulation from Brahe's not-completely-exact observations. And that all this was done hundreds of years before the divergence theorem. Newton was exactly matching Kepler's laws, and therefore set the exponent to exactly 2. That was exactly the correct thing to do, in terms of the observations available at the time.

But I think the reasoning in terms of geometry and divergences and "the force spreading out over a greater area" isn't right. The notion of forces being inversely proportional to the square of the distance is something that comes from optics and electromagnetism. We know that light power must diminish exactly as the square of the distance because it contains energy, energy is conserved, and the vacuum is completely transparent. But there is no such requirement for the gravitational "field" of the Sun. It doesn't emit energy. If gravity worked differently, Kepler's geometrical laws might have been different, and Newton very well might have made the force inversely proportional to r3. He was fitting data; he knew nothing about divergences or the flatness of space.

Andy also makes the very valid point that a mathematical theory must obey physical observations, and, if it doesn't, that theory needs to be re-examined. So the question might well have been worded as:
*Do you think that is impossible that the correct behavior of gravity is that of Newtonian gravity, but with the gravitational force proportional to 1/r2.00000001, rather than 1/r2?
We could make other similar questions:
*Do you think that is impossible that the formula F = ma (or E = mc2, or E = hν, or any other famous formula) is not correct?
But formulating the gravity question in terms of an exponent of 2.00000001 may not be the right way to formulate the question. It is well known that alternative exponents don't work. This was tried around 1900, to explain the anomalous perihelion shift of Mercury, but it didn't work. There is no one exponent that works for both Mercury and Earth. General Relativity is the accepted better explanation, though it is known that there are problems with that -- quantum gravity, cosmological constant, dark energy, and a peculiar behavior of the Voyager spacecraft.

Now one ''could'' ask whether the person is openminded enough to question the "experts" that have analyzed the Mercury data, and understand General Relativity, and have crunched the numbers. After all, very few people have crunched the numbers; they depend on perceived "experts". So, in view of question 13, this may be a valid question to ask:
*Do you think it impossible that General Relativity is not correct?
But I doubt that many people who doubt General Relativity believe that going back to Newton's theory with a different exponent is the way to go. Unless, of course, they have crunched those numbers.

[[User:PatrickD|PatrickD]] 00:17, 7 October 2009 (EDT)

:You raise some interesting points. To your question "Do you think that is impossible that the correct behavior of gravity is that of Newtonian gravity, but with the gravitational force proportional to 1/r2.00000001, rather than 1/r2?", I might still answer no, on the grounds that if there is divergence in the gravitational field, then I wouldn't consider the force to be Newtonian gravity: you need dark energy, or an object creating a force from outside itself (possibly I'm wrong about this -- would you agree with this statement at least?)
:I agree that a theory must fit observation, and some question along these lines would be fine -- it strikes me as odd to ask things about gravity being an inverse square law, since (at least as I understand physics), outside of the Newtonian context we don't really want think about gravity as a force with such and such strength at such and such distance anyway. And if we're talking about gravity not being an inverse-square law, then to me, we're no longer talking about Newtonian physics anyway. Some of your other suggested formulae I don't know the derivations of -- I bet there's another one that I'd prefer to use for this question.
:I also like your point about trusting experts in science. To some extent, this is necessary -- I'm not sure I have any personal reason to believe in the germ theory of disease, much less general relativity: I'm just taking someone's word for it. Obviously how much we should trust the experts on a particular subject depends on a lot of things. I bet some philosopher of science has thought hard about this -- I'd be interested to read the results! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 00:33, 7 October 2009 (EDT) (hope I didn't forget to respond to anything!)
:Fantastic job on [[complex number]], by the way.

== Pictures, etc. ==

(Now that things have quieted down to the point where I don't have a 75% failure rate when I try to view a page.)

Warning -- long, rambling message!

About gravity:

:... if we're talking about gravity not being an inverse-square law, then to me, we're no longer talking about Newtonian physics anyway.

Yes, someone else had mentioned the point that Newton's law is Newton's law, and Newton said 2.0; case closed. You would have to call it something else. That's why my "straw man" question had been carefully worded "... the correct behavior of gravity is that of Newtonian gravity, but with ...".

The issue of trusting experts (I'm not about to reconstruct a few thousand years of science experiments in my basement; the Hubble telescope won't fit) is central to the whole question, and is what the "quantifying openmindedness" question should be aimed at. But I have no idea how to phrase that question in the right way.

About complex numbers: Thanks for the kind words. I need all the public support I can get.

I see that my picture request has gotten noticed by an admin (Jpatt). I had been about to ask you, here, to do what you could to get some action, since I'm staying strictly off of admins' talk pages. But Jpatt's "If he provides the pic link, no problem" comment shows that either he doesn't appreciate the difficulty, or else I don't appreciate what "pic link" means. I need to either mail the jpeg to someone (and the normal Conservapedia "email this user" feature doesn't take attachments) or I need to be given access to some web site, somewhere on the planet, that I can upload it to. And no, I'm not going to create a facebook account :-(

About the Riemann mapping theorem: Conformal map displays, that is, graphs of horizontal and vertical lines as mapped under analytic functions, are very pretty to look at. Can you outline for me what the square/circle function would be? I may have known it at one time, but I sure can't remember it now. It sort of goes crazy in the "corners", I believe.

As far as software to create it, I recall that William Beason had once named "winplot", something that I had never heard of. But I looked at the WP page for a random diagram (Argand diagrams from their complex number article, naturally!), and they have some nice pictures, with the usual explanation of how they got them. Answer: Matlab! For example, go to the "geometric interpretation of the operations" section of their "complex number" page. (I won't give the URL; I can't stand the captcha.) Click on a picture; look at the properties. You'll see the actual Matlab code. So we could do this sort of thing. But I don't have Matlab; it's hugely expensive. Further looking around shows that there's a free program from the FSF called GNU Octave. This might be worth checking out. That is, if either of us finds ourselves with an enormous excess of spare time :-) If this works out, we should be able to put something on the [[Tips for writing math and science articles]] page.

There's also a little graphing program I wrote for my own use that might be able to be pressed into service.

About the "imaginary number" fiasco. This guy needs to be watched carefully. Not with a "bot", but with human eyeballs. I think he's a fairly obvious parodist trying to get his jollies by singlehandedly creating another Bible translation / Stephen Colbert phenomenon. He has a zero chance of succeeding in any case; he won't get 2 million Google hits with that kind of garbage. I had planned to revert with an edit comment along the lines of "We have a higher standard of logic here; proving that there is no real number satisfying X doesn't show that there is no complex number satisfying X." His "proof" makes no sense anyway, even though it's a proof of something that can be shown in 1 or 2 lines.

Then I saw that you had jumped in, and figured that I ought to jump in with a redirect.

Oh, I see he's at it again, at 13:00 EDT. I'd rather not engage him personally; I'm keeping a low profile, especially on talk pages.

:Thanks for the tip about graphing. The usual way to construct conformal maps between polygons and a circle is using [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwarz%E2%80%93Christoffel_mapping Schwartz-Christoffel mappings]. Unfortunately this is a bit of a pain to compute, but I think the square <-> circle example is a particularly nice one for people who have seen this before, and might not be too impressed by circle <-> upper half plane or other such. I'll take a look at your suggestions when I have a chance -- I think I may have tried to do this in mathematica once as well. Unfortunately I don't have upload rights to help you, but I'll keep at that talk page.
:I've got my eye on Mr. Conservative Math Project too. I do not think he will be long for this site; I'll ban him if he posts any more nonsense. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 13:38, 12 October 2009 (EDT)

== Userbox ==

I thought you might like this userbox. [[Template:User weapon‎]]--[[User:DuncanB|Duncan]][[User talk:DuncanB|Channel 16]] 21:37, 14 October 2009 (EDT)

:Thanks! It's a bit conflicted with the beliefs expressed in my other userbox, but I can appreciate the sentiment (: --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 21:56, 14 October 2009 (EDT)

== Great block ==

Great block and reversions this evening, Mark! Meanwhile, I'm going to see how Calculus is covered in your superb [[Majoring in Mathematics]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:04, 17 October 2009 (EDT)

:Thanks! I think calculus might not be in there at all yet, but it probably ought to be. Maybe there can be a section called "basic tools" or something at the top, dealing with calculus and linear algebra. The outline of the article is growing faster than I have time to fill it in! Please do add your new suggestions to the page, and I'll keep working whenever I have time. It's the middle of the semester now, and things are getting busy again. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:14, 17 October 2009 (EDT)

== Good Bezout's theorem addition ==

Great addition of Bezout's theorem!

I wonder if we have enough on advanced calculus, though admittedly that is often handled in engineering rather than math departments. Perhaps it is folded into differential geometry in most math departments.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:37, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

== MemeShock ==

Here's the language engineering site I was mentioning:

http://www.facebook.com/search/?q=memeshock&init=quick#/group.php?gid=12621914298&ref=search&sid=26704564.4138542612..1

And here's our dictionary of terms. (3.0 edition)
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=12621914298&v=app_2373072738&ref=search#/topic.php?uid=12621914298&topic=9162

== Bezout, etc. etc. ==

I've been given some nice graphing software (by a former editor on this site!), and I think I can create some nice graphs for your material on Bezout's theorem. My guess would be that the things we would want are
*A parabola and a slanted straight line, showing two intersections.
*Two ellipses, similar but rotated from each other, showing four intersections.
*Two cubics—exaggerated Chebyshev polynomials to show all the kinks—tilted relative to each other, and showing nine intersections.
I have created the third of these.

Do you agree that that's about the quantity and examples that are appropriate? They will have to be uploaded by the same mechanism as before—email to Jpatt.

Now my question. You seem to be interested in putting this stuff (along with a lot of other stuff) in the "majoring in math" article. It seems to me that this material should be in a page by itself. The same could be said for many of the other items. What is your vision for "majoring in math"? Is it OK to make brief mention of all these topics and then point to the various other articles? Or do you want it to be more or less self contained?

On other matters, the vector space stuff looks very interesting. I find myself drawn in many directions at once, with nowhere near enough time to do what I'd like. I've been doing some stuff with deduction/induction (as you may have noticed), and several other topics have caught my attention. And I haven't finished with the "number" hierarchy! I think rationals, reals, and complexes are done, but there are integers and natural numbers still to do. And I'd like to do a really good jobs with Peano's axioms as part of the natural number overhaul. And, of course, put Dedekind's "God made the integers..." quote at the top of the whole thing :-) And I still haven't finished the real analysis, what does "compact" really mean, etc. etc. So little time, so much to do.

Speaking of induction/induction, DWiggins needs watching, as SRFoster did before him. They both seem to have a modus operandi of: put in something that looks plausible but is in fact obviously wrong to any mathematically literate person, then repeatedly argue the point when called out on it. (There are a few people from farther back who also did this sort of thing.)

There are probably some other things to talk about, but that's enough for now. [[User:PatrickD|PatrickD]] 18:00, 31 October 2009 (EDT)

:Those sound like good examples for Bezout -- I didn't really have anything in mind. Thanks for taking the initiative on that one. I'm hoping that Majoring in Math can contain just a paragraph or two about each of these problems, with heavy emphasis on examples and motivation and probably no rigor in even stating theorems. I really would like it to be a more-or-less self-contained presentation, with links to other pages for more detail. I think my blurbs there should be at about the level of the introductory text to full articles on these topics (though many of them don't have full articles, or need them). I do think the scope of that page might be getting a bit out of control for this to be reasonable... I'll try to shorten it up a bit. Is there anything in particular that's already written that you'd suggest splitting off? I'm certainly welcome to any suggestions for that page, as it's still in a fairly early state.

:It looks like you're doing a great job on the "number" articles -- let me know if there's anything I can do to help. I've been doing most of my serious work on Majoring in Math, since I don't think there's too much point in making small improvements to articles that need to be overhauled, and I don't have much time at all for editing these day, so I might as well focus on something. I'm not planning to do much else to [[vector space]] for now -- I just noticed that this fairly fundamental article was in pretty bad shape, so I tossed in a few examples. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 18:16, 31 October 2009 (EDT)

== Blocking the Colbert vandal ==

It was a very nice catch! I was also quite amused at it - I rediscover Conservapedia as a dusty, old, bookmark in my links, see if its still alive, and aha! A vandal! Some things never change - but thanks, it's nice to be back nonetheless. [[User:AungSein|AungSein]] 19:39, 31 October 2009 (EDT)

User talk:JacobB

2009-10-31T22:46:31Z

AungSein: vandal!

{{welcome|sig=--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:26, 7 July 2009 (EDT)}}

== Blocking ==

It is a good idea to look at "Recent Changes" and post to the Admins who have recently been active. Even if you don't see activity from Jpatt or myself, we usually are alerted to messages left on our talk pages. ;-) --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 02:16, 11 July 2009 (EDT)

== Please do not move anything..... ==

We don't allow editors to move articles. The reason being is that it wipes all the editing history. Please undo all your redirects and changes (now), and post to my talk page about what you want done. Admins can move and rename pages, which keeps their edit history intact. Thanks. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 18:53, 14 July 2009 (EDT)

== Christmas Tree... ==

:From the early contributors, all vandal site members and common trolls, yes, it was a joke. I previously deleted this same "debate" 23 Nov, 2007, and it was recreated. Thanks for noticing and posting, Jacob....it's going to go bye bye. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:02, 20 July 2009 (EDT)
::Glad to hear it. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 23:14, 20 July 2009 (EDT)

== Good Work ==
Vandal page for sure. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:01, 8 August 2009 (EDT)

== Awesome work! ==

Awesome work on the [[Gospel of Mark (Translated)]] !!!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:57, 15 August 2009 (EDT)

== Wow ==

Wow, that's fantastic, JacobB, but please don't get too far ahead. Please work on translating before posting more originals. Thanks so much!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:23, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

== Another budding mathematician? ==

I see on your user page you're headed to math grad school... are you applying in this cycle? Good luck! I just started this term. --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 20:00, 28 September 2009 (EDT)
:I'm accepted to a masters program for the spring already, and I'm planning on getting a PhD, hopefully with work on geometric function theory, that's a big area of interest for me. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 20:04, 28 September 2009 (EDT)

== Jesus Seminar ==

All I was doing was giving readers a quick way to find an alternative to the liberal butchering of the Bible. Not sure why that merits a block or a reversion, but if you're set in your decision, then so it goes. Unfortunate it had to come to threats without any dialogue. [[User:DonnyB|DonnyB]] 00:45, 7 October 2009 (EDT)
:It doesn't merit a block or reversion (or perhaps, since I'm new to these privileges, I'm wary of using them). Either way, I don't want this project which attempts to cut up and destroy the Gospels to fit a liberal agenda associated with the Conservative Bible Project, something I'm very involved in. Claiming that the CBP is a conservative version of the Jesus Seminar's blasphemy isn't accurate. Since they are nothing alike, it would be like putting a "See Also: Antarctica" on a page dealing with skirts. That's why it was reverted.
:The block threat was made because I think you realize this, and made this, your first ever edit, in bad faith. But, I'm not sure, and it's wrong it arbitrarily block people. I hope I'm wrong, that you will contribute constructively. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 00:50, 7 October 2009 (EDT)
::Fair enough, perhaps I didn't quite understand Jesus Seminar well enough and found the CBP a similar alternative. But yes, I plan on contributing constructively, and hopefully you'll give me a second chance to make a good first impression :). [[User:DonnyB|DonnyB]] 00:54, 7 October 2009 (EDT)

== Size of Mark ==

I notice you've been dividing various books to keep the size down. Do you think you could split Mark as well, as it's growing very large as it's translated? [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 19:40, 7 October 2009 (EDT)

== Question ==

Hello, I was Darmientie, and was banned and told to make a new account. I was just wondering why you asked me to do this. Thanks.
:Correct format for names is first name, last initial, or some variation of that. So I blocked that account, you changed your name - problem solved! Welcome to Conservapedia. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 20:36, 7 October 2009 (EDT)

== Vandal wave ==

Did we get everyone? I think you beat me 14-10, even if I count the one where I accidentally changed your block. Good work! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 00:26, 8 October 2009 (EDT)
:I think that's all of them, and I think I changed a few of your blocks as well. These 503 errors are killing me! [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 00:28, 8 October 2009 (EDT)

== Conservative Bible Project ==

Greetings, friend.

This is [[User:TerryH]]. This Project has been done in a willy-nilly fashion for too long. I certainly appreciate the yeoman's work you have been doing, i.e. putting up the tables having the KJV original verses, ready to be translated. I wanted to get that in before I told you something else: Under the authority of Mr. [[User:Aschlafly|Schlafly]], I am taking command of this Project.

My qualifications are these: I am well-enough versed in ancient Greek to pick up a Greek text (in fact, it's the Greek New Testament, 28th ed., by Nestle and Aland, published by the German Bible Society) and read it almost as fast as I can read English. I've also begun to study Biblical Hebrew. Beyond that, I've been an administrator on CP for a long time, and the administration feels that it needs to have one of their own in command, instead of seeing uncoordinated efforts being made.

The best way to illustrate my qualifications is with a sample. In one week, I translated all of the Gospel According to Matthew. You can read my work [[Matthew 1-9 (Translated)|here]], [[Matthew 10-19 (Translated)|here]], and [[Matthew 20-28 (Translated)|here]].

So much for my own qualifications. Now I'd like to know yours, and how you see yourself functioning in this Project.

I appreciate your defenses of this Project. You have the "fire in the belly" of a good soldier.

Let me set forth, as well, my philosophy of translation. We need to translate the Bible into good ''idiomatic'' English. That means that we not only translate Greek words into English words, but also Greek idiom into English idiom. You can see examples in Matthew 27. For example: "The last error will be worse than the first" should read, I maintain, "If that happens, we'll have a worse problem."

Or: "The crowd marvelled, saying, There has not been such so seen in Israel" should read, "The crowd said, "Wow! Nothing like that has ever been seen in Israel!" See the difference? How do I defend that? Well, the Greek word rendered "to marvel" conveys the sense of someone staring at a thing, letting his jaw drop to the floor, and finally saying, "Wow. Just, wow."

I'll have more to say on some other Talk pages. But first, I need to hear from you. Reply either here or, best of all, on ''my'' Talk page.

In Him,

--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 21:44, 13 October 2009 (EDT)

:::: hey, I left an apology on the debate page, didn't mean to behave immaturely. We may disagree, but there is no reason to become uncivil about the issue, and so I apologize for losing my cool. Here's to more civil discussion and spirited debate in the future [[User:Pnino|Pnino]] 00:23, 16 October 2009 (EDT)

==Blocking==
If you please, I want you to hold off on the blocking regarding the CBP, with the exception of vandalism. Asking a question regarding who is qualified to make these edits, or placing a correct word which may contradict conservative thought is not grounds to remove someone. If there is any questions, refer them to project leader TerryH or ASchlafly. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 19:08, 21 October 2009 (EDT)

User talk:MarkGall

2009-10-31T22:46:22Z

AungSein: vandal!

User:AungSein

2008-11-17T19:09:25Z

AungSein: At last! (looking back at my old bad grammar makes me embarassed)

Hello. I am a university student in the UK (although I come from [[Burma]] but not from [[Myanmar]]!). I hope to be able to help this project.

Freedom House

2007-08-11T15:55:44Z

AungSein: New page: Freedom house is an NGO based in Washington D.C, whose aim is to promote human rights. on its mission statement, it said that it wished to "''function ... as a catalyst for freedo...

Freedom house is an [[NGO]] based in [[Washington D.C]], whose aim is to promote human rights. on its mission statement, it said that it wished to

"''function ... as a catalyst for freedom, democracy, and the rule of law through its analysis, advocacy, and action.''"<ref>http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=2</ref>

While it has been criticised by some as too closely connected to the [[US government]] (approximately 90% of its 2000-2003 funding came from the [[State Department]]), it has an excellent record of boldly speaking out against human-rights abusers; its opposition to the South African [[apartheid]] government was one of the major factors leading to the bipartisan [[Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act]] of 1989, and the political commentator John R. Miller praised it, saying that it had

"''unwaveringly raised the standard of freedom in evaluating fascist countries, Communist regimes, and plain old, dictatorial thugocracies ... those fighting for freedom in countries lacking it are encouraged or discouraged by what Freedom House’s report covers. And sometimes — most importantly — their governments are moved to greater effort.''"<ref>http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=ZmVmZDg5MmM5ODBmM2YyNzM3NTMwZjBjNGQxNDhjMTE=</ref>

==References==
<references/>

Conservapedia:Critical Thinking in Math

2007-08-11T15:44:52Z

AungSein: /* Draft Curriculum */addition

"Critical Thinking in Math" is an experimental course with four independent purposes in mind:

*sharpen the analytical skills of students and improve their math [[College Board]] scores

*awaken an interest in [[mathematics]] by students who did not realize they had extraordinary aptitude for math, the future [[Bernhard Riemann]]s

*encourage adults to keep their mind sharp through mathematics, and fend off mental decline

*help parents who would like to teach math to their [[homeschooled]] children

The experiment is to use only fundamental or elementary techniques to accomplish the above results. No tools beyond about 9th grade math is required, and motivated students younger than 9th grade will not have difficulty with the concepts.

This course seeks the contributions of both teachers and students to make it is effective as possible. It will be begin in September. Possible topics include:

*a comparative look at different techniques of proof

*major problems that remain unsolved using elementary techniques

*a look at the history of the development of math

*an analysis of what skills [[College Board]] exams test, and how to improve those skills

Please feel free to add other topics and suggestions, and add your name below as a teacher or student interested in this field:
--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:08, 5 August 2007 (EDT)

== Draft Curriculum ==

*different methods of proof: constructive, induction, contradiction, existence
*Goldbach's Conjecture and Fermat's Last Theorem
*Types of math problems presented in [[College Board]] exams, [[math contests|American math contests]] and UK math contests [http://www.wpr3.co.uk/UKMT/jmc.html][http://www.wpr3.co.uk/UKMT/imc.html][http://www.wpr3.co.uk/UKMT/smc.html]
*Interesting problems in number theory and Euclidean geometry
*greatest mathematicians in history, and why
*Axiom of Choice, why it has been controversial, and its use in Wiles' proof of Fermat's Last Theorem
*Set theory in general
*Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorems are interesting; they are applicable not only in maths and logic, but also move into philosophy.
*Hilbert's program (although of course the above renders null its aims!)
*Formal mathematical logic
Students on the course
*I would like to join this. Is it alright if I live in the UK? Your profile suggests that you live in the US, but I am always eager for maths. [[User:AungSein|AungSein]] 18:13, 5 August 2007 (EDT)

:: That's fantastic. Of course you're welcome in the UK. You have great colleges there, and produced some fantastic physicists. Please help build a curriculum (see above). Lord willing, maybe we can make some inroads into some unsolved problems.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:29, 5 August 2007 (EDT)
[[category:mathematics]]
::: Well I come from Burma, but the colleges and university there are good. Your point about unsolved problems is good, too - have you heard of the folding@home project? It is a different concept, I know, but perhaps relevant - maybe what one brilliant mathematician might struggle at, us many lesser minds might gain insight into! I would also recommend for point 3 the UKMT papers [http://www.wpr3.co.uk/UKMT/jmc.html][http://www.wpr3.co.uk/UKMT/imc.html][http://www.wpr3.co.uk/UKMT/smc.html] - I do not know about how it is in the USA, but they are typical here. [[User:AungSein|AungSein]] 20:06, 5 August 2007 (EDT)

:::: Your additions to the above curriculum are superb! Thanks much, and thanks also for the links to those U.K. tests. I just printed one out am reviewing it. Questions look challenging but doable, which is what we want. Lord knows that students can really improve after practicing on lots of those types of tests. We also have high school contests in the U.S. here: [[Math contests]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:37, 5 August 2007 (EDT)

::: AungSein, a second student in this class took the UKMT Junior contest you cited, and she marked 17 correct, 5 wrong, and 3 non-answered. How did you do on that test?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:54, 6 August 2007 (EDT)
*I'm interested in this math critical thinking class too. --[[User:Luke314|Luke314]] 16:38, 9 August 2007 (EDT)

:: Fantastic! Welcome and Godspeed. Please click "Watch" on this page so that you can easily see updates as September approaches. This will be a great learning experience. Feel free to make suggestions on the curriculum.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:42, 9 August 2007 (EDT)

Human rights

2007-08-07T18:08:04Z

AungSein: expanded, tidied

'''Human rights''' are an intellectual concept that states that all humans have specific rights, entirely by virtue of their status as human beings.

The U.S. [[Declaration of Independence]] says that people are "endowed by their [[Creator]] with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are [[Life]], [[Liberty]] and the pursuit of [[Happiness]]."
<ref>http://www.law.indiana.edu/uslawdocs/declaration.html]</ref>

This is based on the statement that every person is entitled to "life, liberty and the pursuit of [[property]]", which was altered to "happiness" to avoid conflicts with [[slavery]] (slaves could not own property).

The [[United Nations]] issued, in 1948, a [[UDHR|list of human rights]] they deem inherent and inviolable.<ref>http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html</ref> However, a number of [[totalitarian]] regimes continue to violate human rights, even when they have ratified the list. Many organisations and [[NGO]]s such as [[Amnesty International]], [[Human Rights Watch]], and [[Freedom House]] are dedicated to reporting on and exposing human rights violations.

==References==

<references/>

[[category:political terms]]

User talk:Sakowin

2007-08-07T17:59:44Z

AungSein: welcome

{{welcome}}
[[User:AungSein|AungSein]] 13:59, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

Algorithm

2007-08-07T17:58:52Z

AungSein: heuristics

An '''algorithm''' is a procedure for carrying out a task which, given an initial state, will terminate in a clearly defined end-state. It can be thought of as a recipe, or a step-by-step method, so that in following the steps of the algorithm you are guaranteed to find the solution or the answer. The name is derived from a corruption of [[Muhammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī|Al-Khwārizmī]], the Persian astronomer and mathematician, wrote a treatise in Arabic in 825 AD, entitled: ''On Calculation with Hindu Numerals''. This was translated into Latin in 12th century as ''Algoritmi de numero Indorum'' The title translates as "Al-Khwārizmī on the numbers of the Indians", with ''Algoritmi'' being the translator's rendition of the original author's name in Arabic. Later writers misunderstood the title, and treated ''Algoritmi'' as a Latin plural of the neologism ''Algoritmus'' or ''Algorithmus'', and took its meaning as 'calculation method'. In the Middle Ages there were many variants on this, such as alkorisms, algorisms, algorhythms etc.

There are two main current usages:
# In elementary education, where an 'algorithm' is used for calculation, such as the decomposition algorithm, or the equal addition method of subtraction. Many of these algorithms are, in fact derivations from methods in Al-Khwārizmī's original treatise.
# In computing, where an algorithm is the methodology which underlies a computer program. This tells the computer what specific steps to perform (in what specific order) in order to carry out a specified task, such as calculating employees’ paychecks or printing students’ report cards.

All algorithms must adhere to two rules -

*They must work for any given input or network.
*They must have a single start point, and a single finish point.

There is, another, a second type of algorithm - whereas most algorithms provably evaluate the most desirable end-state (for example, it is possible to mathematically prove that Dijkstra's algorithm gives the shortest route from one point to another), others are known as 'heuristic algorithms'. These are algorithms that, although giving a fairly good result, cannot provably give the best solution. While this may seem inferior, some problems are very different or even impossible to map out using normal algorithms, so heuristic ones are superior.

==Examples of Algorithms==

===Dijkstra's algorithm===

Dijkstra's algorithm finds the shortest path through a [[network]], from one point to another.

#Start by labelling the first [[node]] (1,0,0). The first number, the ordinal value, denotes the order in which the arcs were labelled, the second, the label value (the distance travelled thus far), while the third, the working value, denotes the possible distance to that point.
#Then, update the working values for nodes separated to the current node(s) by one [[arc]], by adding the weight of the arc to that node to the label value of the node at the other end. This value may decrease during the progression of the algorithm, as new, shorter, routes are found.
#Choose the node with the lowest working value, and promote its working value to the label value, and write in its new ordinal value. For example, if this was the second node labelled, its complete annotation would now read (2, x, x), where 'x' would be the distance between it and the first node.
#Now return to the second step. If there are no more nodes to be added, the algorithm has finished.

===Planarity algorithm===

The planarity algorithm is used to determine whether a given shape is 2-dimensional or not. It has found particular use in road and circuit board design to avoid cross-overs.

#Identify a [[Hamiltonian Cycle]] in the network.
#Redraw the network with the Hamiltonian cycle on the outside.
#Identify any crossings between lines.
#Choose an arc with crossings to stay inside the cycle. Move any arcs with crossings to the outside.
#Repeat from step 3 until there are no more crossings. If this step is completed, it shows that the shape is planar (2-d). If it cannot be completed, the shape is 3-dimensional and not planar.

===Critical path analysis===

Critical path analysis is used to determine the fastest/most efficient way of completing a series of tasks, which often depend upon each other.
===Kruskal's algorithm===

Kruskal's algorithm is used to find the minimum spanning tree in an network that you can see all of.
===Prim's algorithm===

Prim's algorithm is used to find the minimum spanning tree when only some of a network is visible.

===Bin-filling algorithm===

The Bin filling algorithm is used to find the most efficient way of combining several differently sized objects into a space(s) with a certain size. An example would be the problem of packing objects into the boot of a car; the bin-filling algorithm is in fact a mathematically formulated version of the rule of thumb 'put the big things in first'; but in can be used for many other problems - loading cars onto ferries, sending messages via [[routers]] on the [[internet]], etc. It is a heuristic algorithm, as it does not give a provably maximal solution (the only way to do this, until Vijay Vazirani invented a new form of [[approximation algorithm]], was to arrange the objects in every conceivable order).
==See also==
*[[Computability]]
*[[Genetic algorithms]]
*[[Evolutionary algorithm]]
[[category:mathematics]]

Mathematics

2007-08-06T20:26:30Z

AungSein: +algorithmic topology

Mathematics is the study and practice of rigorous inference about abstract structures. It includes many practical results concerning quantity and measure, such as calculations involving numbers, financial accounting, geometric construction of building, astronomical calculations, calendar dating, telling time, engineering, physics, chemistry, etc. but also more abstract issues such as establishing the conditions under which certain kinds of equations and formulas have solutions. [[Applied mathematics]] concerns the use of mathematical methods for practical purposes. [[Pure mathematics]] involves reasoning about abstract structures. The main areas are:

* [[Algebra]]. Broadly, speaking algebra concerns 'addition' and 'multiplication', but in the widest possible sense. The objects that are being added or multiplied can be numbers, as in [[Number theory]], but they can also can be more general structures such as [[matrices]], [[functions]], [[polynomials]], [[vectors]] or many others. Concentrating on addition and multiplication does not exclude subtraction or division, since subtraction is formally considered to be addition of an [[additive inverse]] and division is considered to be multiplication by a [[multiplicative inverse]]. That is, subtracting 3 from 2 is rigorously defined to adding the number -2 to 3. Minus two is called the additive inverse of +2. Similarly, dividing 3 by 2 is formally defined in terms of multiplying 3 by (1/2), where 1/2 is the multiplicative inverse of 2. Abstract algebra is the study of [[algebraic structures]] such as [[Group (mathematics)|groups]], [[Ring (mathematics)|rings]], and [[Field (mathematics)|fields]].

* [[Analysis]]. Analysis is concerned with limits and other infinite processes. This subject includes the theory of limits of sequences and series and all forms of [[calculus]], including the calculus of several variables, [[vector calculus]] and [[tensor calculus]]. Also included is [[numerical analysis]], the study of error propagation in algorithms carried out to finite precision. Additional topics in analysis include [[real analysis]] and [[complex analysis]].

* [[Geometry]] and [[Topology]]. Geometry was defined by [[Felix Klein]] as the study of [[invariants]] under [[group]]s of [[transformation]]s. For example, the [[Euclidean transformation]]s are [[translation]], [[rotation]] and [[reflection]]. The quantities that are not altered by these transformations are things like angles and distances, so these are the subjects of interest in [[Euclidean geometry]]. Other types of transformations, such as the [[affine transformation]]s, define other types of geometry. Topology is concerned with the connectedness of objects, rather than the distance between them. It is sometimes called 'rubber sheet geometry', as it concerns properties (that is, [[arc]]s between [[node]]s in [[network]]s) of objects that would be preserved even if a diagram of them were to be stretched or shrunk. Topology began with [[Leonard Euler]]'s consideration of the [[Königsberg Bridges Problem]], which also introduced [[Graph Theory]]. [[Beck's map of the London Underground]] in 1933 used a topological distortion of the locations of the subway stations in order to produce a more useful and artistic map.

* [[Logic]] and [[set theory]]. All of mathematics can be expressed in terms of [[set]]s. Sets are defined by a collection of [[axiom]]s called the [[Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms]]. One of the axioms, the [[Axiom of Choice]], has been the subject of much discussion.

[[Category:Mathematics]]

Talk:George H. W. Bush

2007-08-06T20:23:54Z

AungSein: Undo revision 261474 by Special:Contributions/AungSein (User talk:AungSein)again, whoops!

{{Protected|TK}}

== He is considered by many to be one of the greatest presidents ==
I'll freely admit that Bush Senior looks a LOT better now that we've seen Junior at work, but, seriously. You can say that about EVERY president except Millard Fillmore and it'd be true. Are there any non-Democrat presidents Conservapedia DOESN'T like? --[[User:Scrap|Scrap]] 01:40, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

I agree with you on most of your statement (except for the part about Junior at work.) We should avoid that kind of talk about Presidents. --[[User:Additioner]] 15:05, 25 April 2007

George, Sr. was a one term president, George, Jr, is polling equal to Jimmy Carter. I would not consider that one of the great political families. [[User:crshedd|crshedd]] May 6, 2007

*Well thank goodness they didn't do polling back in the days of the Adams men, eh? --[[User:TK|Sysop-TK]] [[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]] 08:31, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

== Voodoo Economics... ==

Please read the articles. It is mentioned in the campaign section. Please refrain from repeating slogans. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 15:47, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

:No need to be snippy, TK, I didn't mean to hit a nerve. I don't see any mention of "voodoo economics" in the campaign section. I respectfully request that you restore the reference to the GHWB article.

:*Done. Sorry if you thought directness was snippy. I will try to watch that. --~ [[User:TK|Sysop-TK]] [[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]] 01:31, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

If by "directness" you are referring to your snide suggestion that I read the article, you are misusing the word. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, I would suggest you assume the contributor has read the article. Your comment was evidence that you had not read the article. I thought I was being rather charitable in referring to your comment as "snippy". And what exactly did you mean by "repeating slogans." Rather snide, wouldn't you say? Or condescending? Patronizing? --[[User:NItramNos|NitramNos]] 13:08, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

==Locked?==
Is this article locked? --[[User:Will N.|Will N.]] 08:41, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

*Yes, Will. That is why I added the template saying so is pasted right above. --[[User:TK|Sysop-TK]] [[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]] 08:43, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

== Link ==

The North American Free Trade Agreement link doesn't work, as the article is titled [[NAFTA]] on conservapedia. The next time edits are allowed, it would be good to change this. ;-) [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 13:26, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
Didn't Bush have a daughter named Robin, buried at his library? (added by [[User:Conserveidiocy]]

Talk:George H. W. Bush

2007-08-06T20:22:38Z

AungSein: Undo revision 261472 by Special:Contributions/Conserveidiocy (User talk:Conserveidiocy)question, no cite

Impeachment and removal

2007-08-06T20:13:08Z

AungSein: wrong again ...

'''Impeachment and removal''' are the two steps in taking a high government official from his position. It is typically used in cases of [[malfeasance]] (see also [[recall election]]).

The first step, ''impeachment'', is a formal accusation by a simple majority of the House. This vote leaves the accused in office, while he is "tried" by the Senate. A two-thirds majority there results in removal from office.

Sixteen federal officials have been impeached (i.e., charged) by the
House of Representatives, but the Senate has removed (i.e., convicted) only seven. [http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0764613.html]

The [[United States House of Representatives]] has "sole power of impeachment." The House has to vote on articles of impeachment. If they pass by a majority, the President is not yet removed from office, until (and unless) the next step is completed.

The impeachment case is sent to the [[United States Senate]] for trial. If the Senate votes by a two-thirds majority to convict, then the person will be removed from office.

In impeachment cases against the [[President of the United States|President]], the Chief Justice of the [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] shall preside.

==Impeachment in 19th Century America==

By 1804, Jeffersonian [[Democratic-Republicans]] had control of [[Congress]] and set their sights on removing Federalist Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase. The House of Representatives impeached him, and trial began with the Senate as the jury. His prosecutor was [[John Randolph]], a partisan Jeffersonian who was distantly related to the Federalist Chief Justice [[John Marshall]]. 25 out of 34 Senators were Jeffersonians, so conviction and removal of the Federalist Chase for his political biases seemed likely.

But the effort failed. During the trial Randolph himself criticized Jefferson over a separate issue, the infamous [[Yazoo land fraud]] in [[Georgia]], an issue that split Jeffersonians. Meanwhile, the case against Chase amounted to little more than some intemperate remarks he made while sitting as trial judge in a grand jury proceeding. The Senators were unimpressed, and at most 19/34 voted to convict on any of the charges, far short of the requisite 2/3rd.
The independence of the judiciary was established by this failed effort to remove a Supreme Court justice. However, the episode did encourage future justices not to engage directly in politics. No effort to impeach a Supreme Court justice has since made any progress.

==Andrew Johnson==

After the [[Civil War]], President Andrew Johnson became the enemy of Radical Republicans who controlled Congress. President Johnson vetoed their legislation and even called their leaders "traitors". Flush from winning the war, the likes of Republican Senators Thaddeus Stevens (PA) and Charles Sumner (MA) were not about to back down. Sumner, after all, was the fellow who once delivered an unconscionably disrespectful speech against elderly South Carolina Senator Andrew Butler, whereupon his outraged nephew [[Preston Brooks]] beat Sumner senseless with a cane.

When the House of Representatives impeached President Johnson by an overwhelming vote of 126 to 47, his ouster appeared to be a fait accompli. President Johnson had violated the Tenure in Office Act by dismissing his Secretary of War, and he had been intemperate in his name-calling of key senators. In addressing the jury of 54 senators, the prosecutor referred to President Johnson as an "accidental Chief" and "the elect of an assassin." Witnesses testified for both the prosecution and the defense.

The prosecutors – called “managers” in impeachment trials – were confident of victory. Manager Thaddeus Stevens described President Johnson as the "wretched man, standing at bay, surrounded by a cordon of living men, each with the axe of an executioner uplifted for his just punishment." Manager John Bingham brought the public galleries to their feet with his oratory: "May God forbid that the future historian shall record of this day's proceedings, that by reason of the failure of the legislative power of the people to triumph over the usurpations of an apostate President, the fabric of American empire fell and perished from the earth."

2/3rd vote was necessary for conviction, and it all turned on Senator [[Edmund Ross]] of Kansas. Like real jurors, he spoke to no one during the proceedings and no one knew which was he was leaning. But he voted "not guilty," and President Johnson was acquitted by one vote. The Radical Republicans were defeated, and never again enjoyed their unprecedented power.

==Impeachment in recent history==

In 1974, no impeachment proceedings had occurred since the Johnson trial over a hundred years earlier). Most Americans thought of impeachment as something quaint and bizarre in the history books.

In the House of Representatives decided to begin impeachment proceedings against [[Richard M. Nixon]], on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice in connection with the Watergate affair. At the time, congressmen and their staffs were unfamiliar with the law and proceedings involved with impeachment, and needed to research the question.

On July 27, 1974 the Committee on the Judiciary voted to recommend three articles of impeachment. The articles concerned his obstruction of justice during the Watergate investigations. Before his near-certain impeachment and conviction could occur, Nixon resigned from the presidency on August 9, 1974. Thus, Nixon was never actually impeached.

==Bill Clinton==

President [[Bill Clinton]] was impeached by the House of Representatives on December 19, 1998, on charges of [[perjury]] and [[obstruction of justice]] relating to testimony he had given in a [[civil lawsuit]] a former Arkansas government employee had brought for [[sexual harassment]]. He was acquitted by the Senate on February 12, 1999 on a party-line vote.

President Clinton was doing well in the polls and ready to pick his successor for the White House by late 1998. His leadership enabled the Democratic Party to do surprisingly well in the mid-term elections, and President Clinton was seeking to leave a lasting legacy.

The House of Representatives impeached him for making false statements under oath, which is perjury, and trial was scheduled for the Senate in 1999. First Lady Hillary Clinton accused her opponents of being part of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" against her husband. The Democratic Senators all lined up behind President Clinton, promising to vote for acquittal.

Republicans enjoyed a majority in the Senate but lacked votes anywhere close to the requisite 2/3rd majority to convict. President Clinton was a lame-duck at that point anyway, and the real battle was over his ability to influence politics beyond his term.

The managers of the impeachment presented their case, but the Senate prevented them from calling key witnesses such as Clinton’s closest aids. The procedural rules hamstrung the trial and served to protect the president. Without the presentation of the full case, President Clinton easily survived the final vote.

But the victory was Pyrrhic. The Democratic presidential nominee in 2000, Al Gore, felt he had to distance himself from Clinton and that probably made the difference on Election Day. Since then, Clinton has had little success in campaigning for candidates, recently failing with Governor Gray Davis in California in the recall. Hillary Clinton, pollsters choice to run in 2004, apparently feels it is too soon to make an attempt. The political ramifications of the impeachment trial continue.

==Popular usage==

In colloquial English, speakers frequently fail to distinguish between the accusation by the House, and the (possible) subsequent removal by the Senate. Thus when someone says, "That official was impeached," you may not know whether they meant ''charged but not convicted'' or ''removed from office''.

Two US presidents have been ''impeached'' but neither was removed from office.

[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:United States History]]

Impeachment and removal

2007-08-06T20:12:11Z

AungSein: Undo revision 261465 by Special:Contributions/Conserveidiocy (User talk:Conserveidiocy) I don't think that they'll want this here (btw, are normal users allowed to revert articles?)

'''Impeachment and removal''' are the two steps in taking a high government official from his position. It is typically used in cases of [[malfeasance]] (see also [[recall election]]).

The first step, ''impeachment'', is a formal accusation by a simple majority of the House. This vote leaves the accused in office, while he is "tried" by the Senate. A two-thirds majority there results in removal from office.

Sixteen federal officials have been impeached (i.e., charged) by the
House of Representatives, but the Senate has removed (i.e., convicted) only seven. [http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0764613.html]

The [[United States House of Representatives]] has "sole power of impeachment." The House has to vote on articles of impeachment. If they pass by a majority, the President is not yet removed from office, until (and unless) the next step is completed.

The impeachment case is sent to the [[United States Senate]] for trial. If the Senate votes by a two-thirds majority to convict, then the person will be removed from office.

In impeachment cases against the [[President of the United States|President]], the Chief Justice of the [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] shall preside.

==Impeachment in 19th Century America==

By 1804, Jeffersonian [[Democratic-Republicans]] had control of [[Congress]] and set their sights on removing Federalist Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase. The House of Representatives impeached him, and trial began with the Senate as the jury. His prosecutor was [[John Randolph]], a partisan Jeffersonian who was distantly related to the Federalist Chief Justice [[John Marshall]]. 25 out of 34 Senators were Jeffersonians, so conviction and removal of the Federalist Chase for his political biases seemed likely.

But the effort failed. During the trial Randolph himself criticized Jefferson over a separate issue, the infamous [[Yazoo land fraud]] in [[Georgia]], an issue that split Jeffersonians. Meanwhile, the case against Chase amounted to little more than some intemperate remarks he made while sitting as trial judge in a grand jury proceeding. The Senators were unimpressed, and at most 19/34 voted to convict on any of the charges, far short of the requisite 2/3rd.
The independence of the judiciary was established by this failed effort to remove a Supreme Court justice. However, the episode did encourage future justices not to engage directly in politics. No effort to impeach a Supreme Court justice has since made any progress.

==Andrew Johnson==

After the [[Civil War]], President Andrew Johnson became the enemy of Radical Republicans who controlled Congress. President Johnson vetoed their legislation and even called their leaders "traitors". Flush from winning the war, the likes of Republican Senators Thaddeus Stevens (PA) and Charles Sumner (MA) were not about to back down. Sumner, after all, was the fellow who once delivered an unconscionably disrespectful speech against elderly South Carolina Senator Andrew Butler, whereupon his outraged nephew [[Preston Brooks]] beat Sumner senseless with a cane.

When the House of Representatives impeached President Johnson by an overwhelming vote of 126 to 47, his ouster appeared to be a fait accompli. President Johnson had violated the Tenure in Office Act by dismissing his Secretary of War, and he had been intemperate in his name-calling of key senators. In addressing the jury of 54 senators, the prosecutor referred to President Johnson as an "accidental Chief" and "the elect of an assassin." Witnesses testified for both the prosecution and the defense.

The prosecutors – called “managers” in impeachment trials – were confident of victory. Manager Thaddeus Stevens described President Johnson as the "wretched man, standing at bay, surrounded by a cordon of living men, each with the axe of an executioner uplifted for his just punishment." Manager John Bingham brought the public galleries to their feet with his oratory: "May God forbid that the future historian shall record of this day's proceedings, that by reason of the failure of the legislative power of the people to triumph over the usurpations of an apostate President, the fabric of American empire fell and perished from the earth."

2/3rd vote was necessary for conviction, and it all turned on Senator [[Edmund Ross]] of Kansas. Like real jurors, he spoke to no one during the proceedings and no one knew which was he was leaning. But he voted "not guilty," and President Johnson was acquitted by one vote. The Radical Republicans were defeated, and never again enjoyed their unprecedented power.

==Impeachment in recent history==

In 1974, no impeachment proceedings had occurred since the Johnson trial over a hundred years earlier). Most Americans thought of impeachment as something quaint and bizarre in the history books.

In the House of Representatives decided to begin impeachment proceedings against [[Richard M. Nixon]], on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice in connection with the Watergate affair. At the time, congressmen and their staffs were unfamiliar with the law and proceedings involved with impeachment, and needed to research the question.

On July 27, 1974 the Committee on the Judiciary voted to recommend three articles of impeachment. The articles concerned his obstruction of justice during the Watergate investigations. Before his near-certain impeachment and conviction could occur, Nixon resigned from the presidency on August 9, 1974. Thus, Nixon was never actually impeached.

==Bill Clinton==

President [[Bill Clinton]] was impeached by the House of Representatives on December 19, 1998, on charges of [[perjury]] and [[obstruction of justice]] relating to testimony he had given in a [[civil lawsuit]] a former Arkansas government employee had brought for [[sexual harassment]]. He was acquitted by the Senate on February 12, 1999 on a party-line vote.

President Clinton was doing well in the polls and ready to pick his successor for the White House by late 1998. His leadership enabled the Democratic Party to do surprisingly well in the mid-term elections, and President Clinton was seeking to leave a lasting legacy.

The House of Representatives impeached him for making false statements under oath, which is perjury, and trial was scheduled for the Senate in 1999. First Lady Hillary Clinton accused her opponents of being part of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" against her husband. The Democratic Senators all lined up behind President Clinton, promising to vote for acquittal.

Republicans enjoyed a majority in the Senate but lacked votes anywhere close to the requisite 2/3rd majority to convict. President Clinton was a lame-duck at that point anyway, and the real battle was over his ability to influence politics beyond his term.

The managers of the impeachment presented their case, but the Senate prevented them from calling key witnesses such as Clinton’s closest aids. The procedural rules hamstrung the trial and served to protect the president. Without the presentation of the full case, President Clinton easily survived the final vote.

But the victory was Pyrrhic. The Democratic presidential nominee in 2000, Al Gore, felt he had to distance himself from Clinton and that probably made the difference on Election Day. Since then, Clinton has had little success in campaigning for candidates, recently failing with Governor Gray Davis in California in the recall. Hillary Clinton, pollsters choice to run in 2004, apparently feels it is too soon to make an attempt. The political ramifications of the impeachment trial continue.

==Popular usage==

In colloquial English, speakers frequently fail to distinguish between the accusation by the House, and the (possible) subsequent removal by the Senate. Thus when someone says, "That official was impeached," you may not know whether they meant ''charged but not convicted'' or ''removed from office''.

One US president was''impeached'' (President Clinton) and one (Andrew Johnson) escaped impeachment by one vote. Neither were removed from office. While impeachment has been frequently discussed during George W. Bush's term, it was considered a waste of time by the time a possible legislative majority could be assembled. Some of the reasons discussed for Bush's impeachment were lying about the reasons for going to war, improper use of executive powers, and many more. Probably one of the most compelling reasons that Bush escaped impeachment is that his Vice President was considered to be worse.

[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:United States History]]

List of dictators

2007-08-06T13:29:29Z

AungSein: /* Eastern Asia ("Far East") */ tidied Burma section

: ''For a list of [[Ancient Rome|Roman]] dictators, see [[Roman dictator#Roman dictators|Roman dictator]].''
: ''See also the [[#See also|related lists]] at the end of this article.''

The following is a list of national leaders ([[Head of state|heads of state]] and/or [[Head of government|heads of government]]) commonly regarded as modern [[dictator]]s. This usage usually carries a pejorative sense and refers to a ruler who:

* is an [[absolute ruler]] of a [[state|sovereign state]];
* governs outside the otherwise accepted [[rule of law]];

* commonly (but not necessarily) gained power through [[fraud]] or a [[coup d'état]], or resorts to them to stay in power;
* may develop a [[cult of personality]];
* may be autocratic, oppressive, despotic or tyrannical.

Some so-called "[[Dictator#"The benevolent dictator"|benevolent dictators]]" may be viewed as beneficial and their leadership seen as a "necessary evil".
The modern usage of the term 'dictator' developed largely in response to instances of autocratic rule in [[republic]]s, so traditional [[monarch]]s are not usually described as dictators in historical commentary. Also excluded from this list are those who held [[absolute power]] during national [[State of emergency|emergencies]], but restored the rule of law soon thereafter. Otherwise those included have been widely cited by historians or described by the [[Mass media|media]] as dictators. Any controversy surrounding such characterisation is mentioned in the notes.

The list is sorted according to when each dictator began their years in power. This refers to any years in office as a head of state, government or the like before their dictatorship was established. Any years of elected and judicial rule may be indicated parenthetically.

==Africa==
{|class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Country !! Years in power !! Notes
|-
|align=center|[[Gamal Abdel Nasser]] ||align=center| [[Egypt]] ||align=center| 1954–1970 || Prime Minister of Egypt 1954-1962; President of Egypt 1956-1970. Part of a group of officers in control of Egypt after the coup against British supported [[Farouk of Egypt|King Farouk]] in 1952; In February 1954, Nasser forced {{fact}} President [[Muhammad Naguib]] to appoint him prime minister and give up most practical power to him; later in that year Naguib resigned and Nasser became president by self-appointment; elected by popular vote (as only candidate) in 1956, and subsequently. Many personalistic elements to Nasser's rule, but nominal parliamentary system under Nasser's 1956-1970 presidency {{fact}}, until his death in 1970.
|-
|align=center|[[Ahmed Sékou Touré]] ||align=center| [[Guinea]] ||align=center| 1958–1984 || President of Guinea. Widely described as a dictator (see [http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/DIAINS.html], [http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/world/awards2003/profile_jazz.shtml]) with estimates of up to 50,000 extra-judicial killings during his rule (see [http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat6.htm]) and 250,000 Guineans fleeing his rule ([http://www.africanet.com/africanet/country/guinea/history.htm]).
|-
|align=center|[[David Dacko]] ||align=center| [[Central African Republic]] ||align=center| 1960–1966 1979–1981 || President of the Central African Republic. Banned opposition (see [http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ad36]); Gained power by coup in 1979, though subsequently stood for election (see [http://www.african-geopolitics.org/show.aspx?ArticleId=3638]).
|-
|align=center|[[Modibo Keita]] ||align=center| [[Mali]] ||align=center| 1960–1968 || Schoolteacher and first president of Mali. Forced socialization and extensive protectionism severely harmed the economy and continued the country's dependence on aid donors. Discontent with these policies led Keita to implement his own "Cultural Revolution" and establish a network of people's militias to inform on and punish dissent. In the last few years of his presidency, full powers were vested in an extralegal "National Committee for Defense of the Revolution". He was deposed in a military coup.
|-
|align=center|[[François (Ngarta) Tombalbaye|François Tombalbaye]] ||align=center| [[Chad]] ||align=center| 1960–1975 || Head of State 1960-1962; President of Chad 1962-1975. Never fought a contested election; imprisoned opposition leaders. Launched a "Cultural Revolution" in the early 1970s encouraging ''[[authenticité]]''.
|-
|align=center|[[Félix Houphouët-Boigny]] ||align=center| [[Côte d'Ivoire]] ||align=center| 1960–1993 || President of Côte d'Ivoire. Ruled until 1990 with all opposition banned, but not considered particularly repressive. Relocated the official capital to his home village of [[Yamoussoukro]] and constructed the [[Basilica of Our Lady of Peace of Yamoussoukro]], the largest religious structure in Africa.
|-
|align=center|[[Milton Obote]] ||align=center| [[Uganda]] ||align=center| 1962–1972 1980–1985 || Prime Minister of Uganda 1962-1966; President of Uganda 1966-1971 and 1980-1985. Suspended the constitution and declared himself President and Prime Minister in 1966.
|-
|align=center|[[Hastings Kamuzu Banda]] ||align=center| [[Malawi]] ||align=center| 1963–1994 || Prime Minister of Malawi 1963-1966; President of Malawi 1966-1994. Banned all opposition in 1966; declared himself [[President for Life]] in 1971; exiled and killed opposition leaders. Ordered that a letter bomb be sent to exiled opposition leader [[Attati Mpakati]]; suspected of being involved in the car crash deaths of senior Congress Party leaders; violently crushed an attempted rebellion. Aged 98, he allowed and lost a free election in 1994.
|-
|align=center|[[Kenneth Kaunda]] ||align=center| [[Zambia]] ||align=center| 1964–1991 || President of the Republic of Zambia 1964-1991.Elected 1964, banned all political parties in Zambia, viewed himself as "WAMUYAYA" (eternal President).Accused of torturing political opponents.Defeated by Frederick Chiluba in 1991.
|-
|align=center|[[Houari Boumediene]] ||align=center| [[Algeria]] ||align=center| 1965–1978 || 
President of Algeria from [[19 June]] [[1965]] to his death, ([[27 December]], [[1978]]); Chairman of the Revolutionary Council until [[12 December]], [[1976]]). In June 1965, Boumédienne seized power in a bloodless coup. Initially lacking a personal power base, he was seen as a weak ruler. But after a botched coup attempt against him by military officers in 1967 he tightened his rule, and then remained Algeria's undisputed ruler until his death in 1978.
|-
|align=center|[[Modibo Keita]] ||align=center| [[Mali]] ||align=center| 1960–1968 || Schoolteacher and first president of Mali. Forced socialization and extensive protectionism severely harmed the economy and continued the country's dependence on aid donors. Discontent with these policies led Keita to implement his own "Cultural Revolution" and establish a network of people's militias to inform on and punish dissent. In the last few years of his presidency, full powers were vested in an extralegal "National Committee for Defense of the Revolution". He was deposed in a military coup.
|-
|align=center|[[Jean-Bédel Bokassa]] ||align=center| [[Central African Republic]] ||align=center| 1966–1979 || President of the Central African Republic 1966-1976; Emperor Bokassa I of the Central African Empire 1976-1979. Bokassa overthrew the autocratic Dacko in a swift coup d'état and assumed power as president of the Republic and head of the sole political party, the Mouvement pour l'évolution sociale de l'Afrique Noire (MESAN). Bokassa abolished the constitution of 1959 on [[January 4]] and began to rule by decree. He proclaimed himself emperor in 1976 (see [http://www.african-geopolitics.org/show.aspx?ArticleId=3638]).
|-
|align=center|[[Gnassingbé Eyadéma]] ||align=center| [[Togo]] ||align=center| 1967–2005 || President of Togo. Gained power in a coup; never fought a contested election until 1998; banned, tortured and killed opposition. Fostered a cult of personality that was reinforced after he was the sole survivor of an airplane crash in 1974. In late 1991, troops loyal to Eyadéma closed a constitutional conference that had shifted most executive power to a new transitional government and banned Eyadéma's RPT party. January 1993 saw a mass exodus of residents to neighboring states after security forces fired on pro-democracy demonstrators. Further repression followed a purported 1994 coup attempt (see[http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/mar/data/togoewechro.htm]).
|-
|align=center|[[Omar Bongo]] ||align=center| [[Gabon]] ||align=center| '''1967–present''' || As vice president, he acceded to the presidency following the death of President [[Léon M'ba]]. In 1968, Bongo decreed a one-party state under his [[Gabonese Democratic Party]] and was thrice elected unopposed in the 1970s and 1980s. He became very wealthy during the country's oil boom. Open elections were held in 1990 and Bongo was re-elected in 1993, 1998 and 2005. Observers have criticized the elections as unfair and corruption watchdogs have accused the president of [[nepotism]]. Riots resulting from the mysterious death in 1990 of prominent dissident [[Joseph Rendjambe]] in a government hotel room were put down by French troops.
|-
|align=center|[[Moussa Traoré]] ||align=center| [[Mali]] ||align=center| 1968–1991 || Chairman of the Military National Liberation Committee 1968-1969; Head of State 1969-1979; President of Mali 1979-1991. Seized power in a coup; banned all opposition; installed a police state; established one-party state in 1979.
|-
|align=center|[[Francisco Macías Nguema]] ||align=center| [[Equatorial Guinea]] ||align=center| 1968–1979 || President of Equatorial Guinea 1968-1979. Elected in 1968 but declared himself [[President for Life]] in 1972; "extreme personality cult"; over a third of population fled his regime. Banned fishing and sanctioned the deaths of most of his pre-independence political rivals, including ex-prime minister [[Bonifacio Ondó Edu]] and foreign minister [[Atanasio Ndongo Miyone]]. Declared an atheist state by Spanish dictator [[Francisco Franco]]. As many as 50,000 civilians were killed, in particular those of the [[Bubi]] ethnic [[minority]] on [[Bioko]] associated with relative wealth and [[intellectual]]ism.
|-
|align=center|[[Gaafar Nimeiry]] ||align=center| [[Sudan]] ||align=center| 1969–1985 || Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council 1969-1971; President of Sudan 1971-1985. Gained power in a military coup, banned opposition, dissolved southern Sudanese government, imposed sharia law. Executed several leading communists (the most prominent being [[Abdel Khaliq Mahjub]] and [[Joseph Garang]]) after a botched 1971 coup attempt.
|-
|align=center|[[Mohamed Siad Barre]] ||align=center| [[Somalia]] ||align=center| 1969–1991 || Chairman of the Supreme Revolutionary Council 1969-1976; President of Somalia 1976-1991. In 1969, during the power vacuum following the assassination of President Abdirashid Ali Shermarke, the military staged a coup and took over. Barre was to rule for the next twenty-two years. He attempted to develop a personality cult; large posters of him were common in the capital Mogadishu during his reign, many of which can still be seen today. He dreamed of a "[[Greater Somalia]]" and tried unsuccessfully to annex the [[Ogaden]]—legally Ethiopian territory—in 1977 to realize this end (see [[Ogaden War]]).
|-
|align=center|[[Anwar Sadat]] ||align=center| [[Egypt]] ||align=center| 1970–1981 || President of Egypt 1970-1981. Unelected, suppressed opposition in what was termed "[[The Corrective Revolution]]". Assassinated.
|-
|align=center|[[Idi Amin]] ||align=center| [[Uganda]] ||align=center| 1971–1979 || [[President of Uganda]], later (1976) declared as [[President for Life|for Life]]. Deposed in 1979 after declaring war on [[Tanzania]].
|-
|align=center|[[Mengistu Haile Mariam]] ||align=center| [[Ethiopia]] ||align=center| 1974–1991 || Chairman of the Provisional Military Administrative Council ([[Derg]]) in 1974 and 1977-1987; President of Ethiopia 1987-1991. One-party state; repression of opposition; tens of thousands of extra-judicial killings.

|-
|align=center|[[Olusegun Obasanjo]] ||align=center| [[Nigeria]] ||align=center| 1976-1979 || Head of the Federal Military Government of Nigeria between 1976 and 1979. Elected President of Nigeria in 1999. Chairman of the [[African Union]] 2004-2006.
|-
|align=center|[[Jean-Baptiste Bagaza]] ||align=center| [[Burundi]] ||align=center| 1976–1987 || President of Burundi. Widely described as a military dictator (see [http://www.africanews.com/article265.html], [http://www.electionworld.org/history/burundi.htm]).
|-
|align=center|[[Albert René]] ||align=center| [[Seychelles]] ||align=center| 1977–2004 || President of Seychelles. Deposed the elected president Sir [[James Mancham]] and promulgated a one-party constitution after a period of rule by decree. Created the [[National Youth Service]] (NYS), a compulsory educational institution that included traditional curricula interlaced with political indoctrination and paramilitary training.
|-
|align=center|[[Daniel arap Moi]] ||align=center| [[Kenya]] ||align=center| 1978–2002 || President of Kenya. Changed constitution to establish a ''de jure'' one-party state; resorted to repressive rule, including torture and imprisonment without trial.
|-
|align=center|[[Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo]] ||align=center| [[Equatorial Guinea]] ||align=center| '''1979–present''' || Chairman of the Supreme Military Council 1979-1982; President of Equatorial Guinea 1982-present. Deposed his uncle in a violent coup; opposition is banned in all but name.
|-
|align=center|[[José Eduardo dos Santos]] ||align=center| [[Angola]] ||align=center| '''1979–present''' || President of Angola. One-party state; did not stand for election until 1992 (see [http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/2000/Angola_Marques_00/Angola_Marques_00.html]).
|-
|align=center|[[João Bernardo Vieira]] ||align=center| [[Guinea-Bissau]] ||align=center| 1980-1984 and '''2005-present''' || become president by a coup. killing and exiled opposition. faoumes for the [[Guinea-Bissau Civil War]].
|-
|align=center|[[Samuel K. Doe]] ||align=center| [[Liberia]] ||align=center| 1980–1990 || Chairman of the People's Redemption Council 1980-1984; President of Liberia 1984-1990. Gained power in a military coup that killed President [[William R. Tolbert, Jr.]], a [[Reform movement|reformer]]. Promoted [[Krahn]] chauvinism and "died a multi-millionaire and proud owner of mansions and estates" (see[http://www.theperspective.org/2004/oct/bookpeople.html]).
|-
|align=center|[[Robert Mugabe]] ||align=center| [[Zimbabwe]] ||align=center| '''1980–present''' ||
Gained power through election, and repeatedly re-elected, but criticized for steps used to maintain power. From 1999 on, used police and militant groups like the War Veterans Association and [[Border Gezi Youth]] to enforce [[ZANU-PF]] policies and to prevent opponents from voting; called "king" by his aides.[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1709488.stm] Arrested and tortured opponents and human rights activists; gave amnesty to murderers of his political opponents in 2000; ignores court rulings.[http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,410850,00.html] Criticized as dictator by [[Desmond Tutu]][http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1754307.stm] and [[Vladimir Putin]][http://www.namibian.com.na/2005/July/world/05C16ABC4A.html].
|-
|align=center|[[Hosni Mubarak]] ||align=center| [[Egypt]] ||align=center| '''1981–present''' || President of Egypt. Did not stand in a contested election until 2005, when a highly-restricted democratic process was allowed.
|-
|align=center|[[Jerry Rawlings]] ||align=center| [[Ghana]] ||align=center| 1981-1992 || Gained power in a military coup during 1979 but handed it over. Re-took power in another coup of 1981. Elected President in 1992 and again in 1996 before standing aside as per the constitution.
|-
|align=center|[[André Kolingba]] ||align=center| [[Central African Republic]] ||align=center| 1981–1993 || Chairman of the Military Committee of National Recovery 1981-1985; President of the Central African Republic 1985-1993. Gained power in a coup; persecuted opposition; allowed (and lost) free elections in 1993. Attempted second coup in [[2001]].
|-
|align=center|[[Paul Biya]] ||align=center| [[Cameroon]] ||align=center| '''1982–present''' || He served under President Ahmadou Ahidjo and became Prime Minister in 1975. Ahidjo resigned on [[November 6]] [[1982]] and Biya became president. After years of totalitarian rule, he allowed the creation of opposition parties in 1990 but his re-elections have been marked by widespread fraud and intimidation.
|-
|align=center|[[Hissène Habré]] ||align=center| [[Chad]] ||align=center| 1982–1990 || Chairman of the Council of State 1982; President of Chad 1982-1990. Gained power in a coup; abolished post of Prime Minister; executed opposition leaders.
|-
|align=center|[[Thomas Sankara]] ||align=center| [[Burkina Faso]] ||align=center| 1983-1987 || President of Upper Volta 1983-1984; President of Burkina Faso 1984-1987. Gained power in coup. Lead millitary regime. Overthrown and killed in coup.
|-
|align=center|[[Maaouya Ould Sid'Ahmed Taya]] ||align=center| [[Mauritania]] ||align=center| 1984–2005 || Deposed the military head of state, [[Mohamed Khouna Ould Haidalla]], on December 1984 and declared himself Chairman of the Military Committee for National Salvation. Deposed by [[Ely Ould Mohamed Vall]] in a bloodless coup d'état. 
|-
|align=center|[[Ibrahim Babangida]] ||align=center| [[Nigeria]] ||align=center| 1985-1993 || Annulled the most free and fair presidential election in the history of Nigeria, leading to the death of the presidenstial candidate [[Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola]].
|-
|align=center|[[Zine El Abidine Ben Ali]] ||align=center| [[Tunisia]] ||align=center| '''1987–present''' || President of Tunisia. Although he announced [[Pluralism#Plualism in politics|political pluralism]] in 1992, his Democratic Constitutional Rally (formerly Neo-Destour party) continues to dominate the national politics and there is no genuine open political debate. In 1999, although two unknown alternative candidates were permitted for the first time to stand in the presidential elections, Ben Ali was re-elected with 99.66% of the vote. A controversial constitutional referendum in 2002 allowed him to seek re-election and contemplate the possibility of remaining in office until 2014. On [[October 24]] [[2004]], he was again re-elected, officially taking 94.48% of the vote. Certain books, periodicals and internet sites are banned or blocked. The [http://www.tunisiatv.com National Television] frequently show his actions during a week, but often the President only appears in passing on television.
|-
|align=center|[[Omar Hasan Ahmad al-Bashir]] ||align=center| [[Sudan]] ||align=center| '''1989–present''' || President of the Revolutionary Command Council for National Salvation 1989-1993; President of Sudan 1993-present. Took power in a military coup and increasingly centralized power into himself. Widely believed to be implicated in the [[Darfur]] [[Janjaweed]] [[pogrom]]s.
|-
|align=center|[[Idriss Déby]] ||align=center| [[Chad]] ||align=center| '''1990–present''' || Head of State 1990-1991; President of Chad 1991 to date. Gained power in a coup; continues to suppress opposition and press (see [http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/tcd-summary-eng]).
|-
|align=center|[[Sani Abacha]] ||align=center| [[Nigeria]] ||align=center| 1993–1998 || Chairman of the Provisional Ruling Council 1993-1998. Seized power in a coup; persecuted opposition; never stood for election. Jailed Chief [[Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola]], the presumed winner of the annulled 1993 presidential election; presided over execution of activist [[Ken Saro-Wiwa]].
|-
|align=center|[[Yahya Jammeh]] ||align=center| [[The Gambia]] ||align=center| '''1994-Present''' || President of The Gambia. Gained power in coup d'état. Right to the press and free speech supressed. Stood for three elections (1996, 2001, and 2006); last election deemed unfair by opposition.
|-
|align=center|[[Laurent-Désiré Kabila]] ||align=center| [[Congo-Kinshasa]] ||align=center| 1997–2001 || President of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Overthrew [[Mobutu Sese Seko]] in coup. No elections held during ongoing, interstate [[First Congo War|First]] and [[Second Congo War]]s.
|-
|align=center|[[Charles G. Taylor]] ||align=center| [[Liberia]] ||align=center| 1997–2003 || President of Liberia 1997-2003. Elected, but widely described as a dictator (see[http://www.guardian.co.uk/sierra/article/0,2763,221878,00.html], [http://www.cij.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewNews&newsID=9], [http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/127/48.0.html]). Linked to "[[blood diamonds]]" and illegal arms trading. Believed to have interfered frequently in the internal affairs of neighboring states while a [[warlord]], before his election to the presidency.
|-
|align=center|[[François Bozizé]] ||align=center| [[Central African Republic]] ||align=center| '''2003–present''' || President of the Central African Republic 2003 to date. Gained power in a coup and suspended the constitution, though he has restored some democracy (see [http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/28/1456242]).
|-
|align=center|[[Ely Ould Mohamed Vall]] ||align=center| [[Mauritania]] ||align=center| '''2005-present''' || Chairman of the Military Council for Justice and Democracy. Gained power via a military coup. Though he has said to relinquish power to an elected government in 2007.
|}

==The Americas==
===North America===

{|class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Country !! Years in power !! Notes
|-
| align=center|[[Agustín de Iturbide]] || align=center|[[Mexico]] || align=center|1822 - 1823 || Shortly after the Mexican War of Independence, he was declared Emperor of Mexico in 1822. Repressive, cracked down on free speech and any opposition. Desposed when popular opposition forced him to abdicate.
|-
| align=center|[[Antonio López de Santa Anna|Antonio López de Santa Anna]] || align=center|[[Mexico]] || align=center|1833 - 1855 (intermittent) || President or Provisional President of Mexico 1833-1837, then 1841 to February 1844, June to December 1844, March to September 1847 and finally 1853-1855. When [[Anastasio Bustamante]] led a coup overthrowing and killing President [[Vicente Guerrero]], Santa Anna seized power and then was elected President in 1833. At first he gave a free hand to his vice-president [[Valentín Gómez Farías]], a liberal reformer. Later he dismissed Gómez Farías, declared the Constitution suspended, disbanded the Congress and worked to concentrate power in the central government. He was overthrown and restored to power several times before his final overthrow in 1855.
|-
| align=center|[[Porfirio Díaz]] || align=center|[[Mexico]] || align=center|1879 - 1910 || Interim president 1876-1877; President of Mexico 1877-1880, 1884-1911. ''De facto'' ruler 1880-1884. Gained power in a coup, after his Revolution of Tuxtepac overthrew his predecessor, Lerdo. He did not run for reelection after his first term in order to keep his one-term promises that he made during his revolution. However, he retook the presidency a few years later and did not leave from power until the [[Mexican Revolution|Revolution of 1910]] kicked him from the Presidency. His rule saw the rapid modernization of Mexico, progress mainly caused by Diaz's encouragement of foreign investment in the country's infrastructure. However, the poor became quite miserable during this time. Political opposition was squelched and rebellions were put down by the ''rurals'', Diaz's personal guard. He was eventually overthrown by the [[Mexican Revolution|Revolution]] which lasted 10 years.
|}

===Central America===
{|class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Country !! Years in power !! Notes
|-
| align=center|[[Rafael Carrera]] || align=center|[[Guatemala]] || align=center|1844–1848 1851–1865 || President of Guatemala. Gained power in a coup; styled himself [[President for Life]].
|-
| align=center|[[Justo Rufino Barrios]] || align=center|[[Guatemala]] || align=center|1873–1885 || President of Guatemala. Gained power in a bloody coup, but introduced reforms.
|-
| align=center|[[Manuel Estrada Cabrera]] || align=center|[[Guatemala]] || align=center|1898–1920 || President of Guatemala. Never elected; subverted constitution; widely described as a dictator (see[http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9033093], [http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761558775/Estrada_Cabrera_Manuel.html]). Constructed numerous large [[Ancient Greece|Hellenic]]-style temples as monuments to his rule.
|-
| align=center|[[Maximiliano Hernández Martínez]] || align=center|[[El Salvador]] || align=center|1931–1934 1935–1944 || Acting President 1931-1934; President of El Salvador 1935-1944. Gained power in a coup; suppressed opposition; oversaw massacre of between ten and forty thousand suspected opponents. Presided over ''[[1932 Salvadoran peasant uprising|La Matanza]]'' in [[1932]], a massacre (genocide) of communists, suspected communists, [[campesinos]] and [[Pipil]] Indians (see [http://countrystudies.us/el-salvador/7.htm]).
|-
| align=center|[[Jorge Ubico]] || align=center|[[Guatemala]] || align=center|1931–1944 || President of Guatemala. Elected, but suppressed opposition and "assumed dictatorial powers".
|-
| align=center|[[Tiburcio Carías Andino]] || align=center|[[Honduras]] || align=center|1933–1949 || President of Honduras. Banned opposition and set up a [[Rubberstamp (politics)|rubber-stamp]] congress; suppressed unions (see[http://countrystudies.us/honduras/19.htm]).
|-
| align=center|[[Anastasio Somoza García]] || align=center|[[Nicaragua]] || align=center|1937–1956 || Somoza used his position as head of the [[National Guard (Nicaragua)|National Guard]] to overthrow President [[Juan Bautista Sacasa]]; centralized constitutional authority under his control; alternately rigged elections for himself or installed relatives in his place; kleptocrat.[http://www.immigrantinfo.org/kin/nicaragua.htm][http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-9212.html].
|-
| align=center|[[Carlos Castillo Armas]] || align=center|[[Guatemala]] || align=center|1954–1957 || Junta Chairman, 1954; President of Guatemala 1954-1957. Gained power in a coup; banned the popular [[Guatemalan Party of Labour|Communist party]]; purged trade unions of leftist influence; declared himself president in 1956. Assassinated.
|-
| align=center|[[Oswaldo López Arellano]] || align=center|[[Honduras]] || align=center|1963–1971 1972–1975 || Head of Military Government 1963-1965; President of Honduras 1965-1971; Head of State 1972-1975. Military officer who allowed elections in 1971 before re-seizing power the next year. According to Clara Nieto in ''Masters of War: Latin America and United States Aggression from the Cuban Revolution through the Clinton years'', p. 114 (ISBN 1-58322-545-5): "During this second term (1972-1975) López governed without a congress and by decree."
|-
| align=center|[[Anastasio Somoza Debayle]] || align=center|[[Nicaragua]] || align=center|1967-1979 || Succeeded his somewhat more liberal brother [[Luis Somoza Debayle|Luis]]; stepped down briefly in 1972, then resumed the presidency after an earthquake; outlawed several opposition parties; declared [[martial law]] in response to guerilla opposition; oversaw brutal repression by the National Guard.
|-
| align=center|[[Omar Torrijos]] || align=center|[[Panama]] || align=center|1968–1981 || Commander of the National Guard. Gained power in a coup; banned opposition, unions and free press.
|-
| align=center|[[Efraín Ríos Montt]] || align=center|[[Guatemala]] || align=center|1982–1983 || Chairman of military junta 1982; President of Guatemala 1982-1983. Dictator during a military coup. Known for [[scorched earth]] counter-insurgency strategies. Since then was Head of Congress for many years and made several failed attempts to be elected democratically. Used his declared conservative evangelical Christian beliefs to portray dissent as an attack against God.
|-
| align=center|[[Manuel Noriega]] || align=center|[[Panama]]|| align=center|1983–1989 || Commander of the National Guard and ''de facto'' military leader, widely described as a dictator (see [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9056130], [http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761561240/Noriega_Moreno_Manuel_Antonio.html], [http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/8155061.htm]).
|}

===South America===

{|class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Country !! Years in power !! Notes
|-
| align=center|[[José Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia]] || align=center|[[Paraguay]] || align=center|1813-1814 and 1814-1840 ||gained power in election. Outlawed all opposition. Installed a police state. Cult of personality; citizens forced to raise their hats or a brim when he passed by; styled himself with the position name "El Supremo". 
|-
| align=center|[[Simón Bolívar]] || align=center|[[Gran Colombia]] || align=center|1821–1830 || Though an admirer of classical liberal democracy, the founder and president of Gran Colombia proclaimed himself dictator in 1828 after an unsuccessful constitutional convention. Resigned eighteen months later.
|-
| align=center|[[Juan Manuel de Rosas]] || align=center|[[Argentina]] || align=center|1835–1852 || Governor of Buenos Aires 1829-1832, 1835-1852; Supreme Chief of the Argentine Confederation 1851-1852. Assumed dictatorial powers; exiled opponents.
|-
| align=center|[[Carlos Antonio López]] || align=center|[[Paraguay]] || align=center|1841–1862 || First Consul 1841-1844; President of Paraguay 1844-1862. 
|-
| align=center|[[Manuel Belzu]] || align=center|[[Bolivia]] || align=center|1848–1855 || Provisional President of Bolivia 1848-1850; President of Bolivia 1850-1855. Unelected military ruler; ''[[caudillo]]''. A populist and nationalist who voluntarily relinquished power after 1855 elections, described in (ISBN 0-13-524356-4), p.131, as the "cleanest ever held" in (early) Bolivian history.
|-
| align=center|[[Francisco Solano López]] || align=center|[[Paraguay]] || align=center|1862–1869 || President of Paraguay. Inherited power from his father; had himself awarded immense powers by a congress he had packed with supporters. Killed in the [[War of the Triple Alliance]] (which Lopez had caused by invading Brazil), along with 90 per cent of the Paraguayan adult (age 14+) male population.
|-
| align=center|[[Mariano Melgarejo]] || align=center|[[Bolivia]] || align=center|1864–1871 || Provisional President 1864-1870; President of Bolivia 1870-1871. Gained power in a coup and ruthlessly suppressed opposition. In 1869 he sent the army to suppress an uprising by [[Huaichu]] Indians attempting to regain land privileges they enjoyed under President Belzu (see ISBN 1-55753-324-5).
|-
| align=center|[[Antonio Guzmán Blanco]] || align=center|[[Venezuela]] || align=center|1870–1888 || Acting President of Venezuela 1863, 1865; General-in-chief April-July 1870; Provisional President of Venezuela 1870-1873; President of Venezuela 1873 - 1877; Supreme Director 1879; Provisional President of Venezuela 1879 - 1880; President of Venezuela 1880 -1884, 1886 -1888. Described, perhaps inaccurately, as a "benevolent despot"; other sources mention his "long dictatorship" (see[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:ghIhQZ7WhgUJ:www.normangall.com/artigos/Church_Militant.pdf+Antonio+Guzm%C3%A1n+Blanco+%22dictator%22]).
|-
| align=center|[[Cipriano Castro]] || align=center|[[Venezuela]] || align=center|1899–1909 || Supreme Chief 1899-1901; Provisional President 1901 - 1902, 1904 - 1905; President of Venezuela 1902 - 1904, 1905 - 1909. Took over in a military coup (see [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:kdvql1ZK2-4J:www.sg.inter.edu/revista-ciscla/volume29/singh.pdf+Antonio+Guzm%C3%A1n+Blanco+%22dictator%22]).
|-
| align=center|[[Rafael Reyes]] || align=center|[[Colombia]] || align=center|1904–1909 || President 1904 - 1909, as a military ruler representing the Conservatives. "In the course of his regime, Reyes improved the country’s finances, expanded roads and railroads, and encouraged increased coffee production. Large U.S. investments and purchases of coffee and minerals contributed to Colombia’s economic growth. However, Reyes ruled as a dictator. He dissolved the congress and replaced it with a handpicked legislature, jailed and exiled political opponents, and declared martial law." (''Colombia'', [[Encarta|Microsoft Encarta]] 2003)
|-
| align=center|[[Juan Vicente Gómez]] || align=center|[[Venezuela]] || align=center|1909–1914 1922–1929 1931–1935 || Provisional President 1909-1910; President of Venezuela 1910-1914, 1922-1929, 1931-1935. Gained power in a coup; never elected; kleptocrat; widely described as a dictator (see [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9037322], [http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/movie.html?v_id=156078], [http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761563557/Juan_Vicente_Gomez.html]).
|-
| align=center|[[Óscar Benavides]] || align=center|[[Peru]] || align=center|1914–1915 1933–1939 || Junta Chairman 1914; President of Peru 1914-1915, 1933-1939. Twice gained power by coup.
|-
| align=center|[[Augusto B. Leguía y Salcedo|Augusto Leguía]] || align=center|[[Peru]] || 1919–1930 || President of Peru. Gained power in a coup; ignored constitution; suppressed and exiled opposition.
|-
| align=center|[[Carlos Ibáñez del Campo]] || align=center|[[Chile]] || align=center|1927–1931 || Acting President 1927, President 1927 - 1931. Democratically elected to a six-year term in 1952.
|-
| align=center|[[Getúlio Vargas]] || align=center|[[Brazil]] || align=center|1930–1934 1937–1945 || Head of provisional government 1930-1934 after revolution; indirectly elected as Constitutional President 1934-1937; launched a coup in 1937 and became dictator 1937-1945; democratically-elected President of Brazil 1950-1954.
|-
| align=center|[[Gabriel Terra]] || align=center|[[Uruguay]] || align=center|1931–1938 || President of Uruguay. Suspended congress and dissolved constitution in [[1933]]. 
|-
| align=center|[[Higinio Morínigo]] || align=center|[[Paraguay]] || align=center|1940–1948 || Provisional president 1940-1943; President of Paraguay 1943-1948. Seized absolute power; ruled by [[diktat]] until 1946.
|-
| align=center|[[Manuel Odría]] || align=center|[[Peru]] || align=center|1948–1956 || Chairman of military junta 1948 - 1950; President of Peru 1950 - 1956. Gained power in a coup; restricted civil rights; allowed election in 1956.
|-
| align=center|[[Marcos Pérez Jiménez]] || align=center|[[Venezuela]] || align=center|1948–1958 || Member of military junta 1948 - 1952; Provisional president 1952 -1953; President of Venezuela 1953 - 1958. Never elected; pursued opposition violently; credited with improvements to the country's infrastructure.
|-
| align=center|[[Gustavo Rojas Pinilla]] || align=center|[[Colombia]] || align=center|1953–1957 || President of Colombia. Gained power in a coup.
|-
| align=center|[[Alfredo Stroessner]] || align=center|[[Paraguay]] || align=center|1954–1989 || President of Paraguay. He took over in a military coup (see[http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19890301faessay5951/riordan-roett/paraguay-after-stroessner.html], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:vqkaVDmcvaIJ:www.columbia.edu/cu/polisci/pdf-files/apsa_krutz.pdf+Stroessner+dictator],[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:qfMgvA6bakgJ:users.ox.ac.uk/~newc1465/Proudman%2520-%2520SoftPowerMeetsHard.pdf+Stroessner+dictator]). 
|-
| align=center|[[Humberto de Alencar Castelo Branco|Humberto Castelo Branco]] || align=center|[[Brazil]] || align=center|1964–1967 || President of Brazil. Gained power in a coup; abolished most opposition; subsequently appointed by congress.
|-
| align=center|[[René Barrientos]] || align=center|[[Bolivia]] || align=center|1964–1969 || Chairman of the military junta, 1964-January 1966 (jointly with [[Alfredo Ovando]] 1965-1966); President of Bolivia, August 1966 - 1969. Gained power in military coup; kleptocrat; responsible for [[Catavi massacre]] and execution of [[Che Guevara]] (ISBN 0-85345-991-6), p.136.
|-
| align=center|[[Forbes Burnham]] || align=center|[[Guyana]] || align=center|1966–1985 || Prime Minister 1966 - 1980; President 1980 - 1985. Elected, but became increasingly dictatorial; held dubious elections and encouraged leftist religious cults (such as the [[Peoples Temple]]) to settle in the Guyanese interior (see [http://www.jagan.org/janet_jagan29.htm], [http://www.hardbeatnews.com/editor/RTE/my_documents/my_files/details.asp?newsid=4498&title=Politics]).
|-
| align=center|[[Artur da Costa e Silva]] || align=center|[[Brazil]] || align=center|1967–1969 || President of Brazil 1967-1969. Elected in 1966, but centralised power; closed the Congress; banned opposition; suspended free press. Decreed [[Institutional Act No. 5]], described as "the most unconstitutional, anti-democratic, arbitrary, and repressive decree in Brazil's history." (ISBN 1-58322-545-5), p.167.
|-
| align=center|[[Emílio Garrastazu Médici]] || align=center|[[Brazil]] || align=center|1969–1974 || President of Brazil. Appointed by congress, but instituted a military government; suppressed press and opposition (see[http://www.wrm.org.uy/bulletin/62/index.rtf]).
|-
| align=center|[[Hugo Banzer]] || align=center|[[Bolivia]] || align=center|1971–1978 || President of Bolivia. Gained power in a coup; suppressed opposition; closed universities; 3,000 opponents arrested, 200 killed.
|-
| align=center|[[Juan María Bordaberry]] || align=center|[[Uruguay]] || align=center|1972–1976 || President of Uruguay 1972 - 1976. Elected, but installed a military government, dissolved Congress, suspended civil liberties and banned unions.
|-
| align=center|[[Augusto Pinochet]] || align=center|[[Chile]] || align=center|1973–1990 || Chairman of military junta 1973-1974; Supreme Head of the Nation 1974; President of Chile 1974 - 1990. Gained power in a coup; suppressed and exiled opposition; over 3000 "[[Forced disappearance|disappearances]]" and 28,000 tortured.
|-
| align=center|[[Ernesto Geisel]] || align=center|[[Brazil]] || align=center|1974-1979 || Congress-appointed President of Brazil. The fourth of the military dictators; party and union freedom were still inexistent during his term; had oppositionists like journalist [[Wladimir Herzog]] and factory worker [[Manoel Fiel Filho]] tortured and murdered.
|-
| align=center|[[Jorge Rafael Videla]] || align=center|[[Argentina]] || align=center|1976–1981 || President of Argentina. Gained power in a coup; never elected; between ten and thirty thousand opponents killed.
|-
| align=center|[[João Baptista de Oliveira Figueiredo]] || align=center|[[Brazil]] || align=center|1979-1985 || Congress-appointed President of Brazil. Society won some democratic measures these years, but there was still a major fraud during 1982 State government elections. His government was responsible for the 1983 bomb in the Riocentro.
|-
| align=center|[[Dési Bouterse]] || align=center|[[Suriname]] || align=center|1980–1988 || Chairman of the National Military Council 1980-1988. Gained power in a coup; never elected; widespread misrule. Most infamous atrocity is the ''[[Decembermoorden]]''.
|-
| align=center|[[Luis García Meza Tejada]] || align=center|[[Bolivia]] || align=center|1980–1981 || President of Bolivia. Gained power in the "Cocaine Coup" aided by [[Klaus Barbie]]; highly repressive; over 1,000 killed.
|-
| align=center|[[Gregorio Conrado Álvarez]] || align=center|[[Uruguay]] || align=center|1981–1985 || President of Uruguay. Ignored constitution; extensive human rights abuses (see [http://www.rulers.org/indexa2.html]).
|-
| align=center|[[Leopoldo Galtieri]] || align=center|[[Argentina]] || align=center|1981–1982 || President of Argentina 1981-1982. Gained power in a coup (see[http://www.guardian.co.uk/argentina/story/0,,873601,00.html], [http://english.pravda.ru/world/2003/01/14/41968.html]). Deposed after failed [[Falklands War|invasion of the Falkland Islands]] in 1982.
|-
|align=center| [[Alberto Fujimori]] || align=center|[[Peru]] || align=center|1992-1993 || President of Peru 1990-2000, widely critizised for his political authoritarism. [http://www.fpif.org/briefs/vol5/v5n34peru_body.html][http://www.aprodeh.org.pe/fujimori/delitos-eng.htm] [http://www.cverdad.org.pe/ingles/pagina01.php]. After enjoying a certain degree of popular support, Fujimori was forced from office following controvertial third term re-election[http://archives.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/americas/05/29/peru.elections.04/]. In 2000 political opponent Mario Vargas Llosa called Fujimori a "dictator" [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/741841.stm]. His government was also marked by the influence of the director of the SIN, [[Vladimiro Montesinos]] [http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2005.00165.x?cookieSet=1&journalCode=goop][http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB37/]. Currently in exile in Chile, Fujimori is awaiting extradition by the Peruvian government for presumpt charges ranging from corruption to participation in crimes against humanity [http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/americas/peru-qna-1030.htm].
|}

===Caribbean===

{|class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Country !! Years in power !! Notes
|-
| align=center|[[Jean-Jacques Dessalines]] || align=center|[[Haiti]] || align=center|1804-1806 || Governor-General of Haiti 1804; Emperor of Haiti (as Jacques I) 1804 - 1806. Ruled autocratically.
|-
| align=center|[[Henry Christophe]] || align=center|[[Haiti]] (northern)|| align=center|1806-1820 || Provisional Chief of the Haitian Government 1806-1807; President of Haiti 1807-1811; King of Haiti (as Henry I) 1811-1820. Ruled autocratically.
|-
| align=center|[[Pedro Santana]] || align=center|[[Dominican Republic]] || align=center|1844-1848, 1853 -1856, 1858 - 1861 || Never elected; suppressed opposition; widely considered a dictator.
|-
| align=center|[[Buenaventura Báez]] || align=center|[[Dominican Republic]] || align=center|1849-1878 (intermittent) || President of the Dominican Republic five times. Gained power following coups; never elected.
|-
| align=center|[[Ulises Heureaux]] || align=center|[[Dominican Republic]] || align=center|1882-1899 (intermittent) || President of the Dominican Republic three times. Never elected; widely described as a dictator (see[http://www.marcusgarvey.com/wmview.php?ArtID=507], [http://countrystudies.us/dominican-republic/8.htm], [http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-7709.2004.00452.x]).
|-
| align=center|[[Gerardo Machado]] || align=center|[[Cuba]] || align=center|1925-1933 || President of Cuba. A follower of [[Benito Mussolini]], he is widely described as a dictator (see [http://www.historicaltextarchive.com/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=672], [http://www.highbeam.com/ref/doc0.asp?docid=1E1:MachadoG]).
|-
| align=center|[[Rafael Trujillo]] || align=center|[[Dominican Republic]] || align=center|1930-1961 || President of the Dominican Republic 1930 - 1938, 1942 - 1952; ''de facto'' ruler 1930-1961. Gained power in a coup; cult of personality (renamed the capital [[Ciudad Trujillo]]); promoted racism against Haitians and ordered the massacre of 20,000 blacks.
|-
| align=center|[[Paul Magloire]] || align=center|[[Haiti]] || align=center|1950-1956 || President of Haiti. Gained power in a coup; never elected.
|-
| align=center|[[Fulgencio Batista]] || align=center|[[Cuba]] || align=center|1952-1959 || President of Cuba 1940-1944; 1952-1959. Gained power the second time in a coup; suppressed opposition violently. Use of torture and [[collective punishment]]. [[Mafia]] ties.
|-
| align=center|[[François Duvalier]] || align=center|[[Haiti]] || align=center|1957-1971 || President of Haiti. Elected in [[1957]], but banned opposition; declared himself [[President for Life]] in 1964; highly repressive.
|-
| align=center|[[Fidel Castro]] || align=center|[[Cuba]] || align=center| '''1959-present''' || Prime Minister of Cuba 1959-1976; President of the Council of State and the Council of Ministers from 1976. Gained power after [[Cuban Revolution|revolution]]. Castro was elected President [[Elections in Cuba|after 1976]], but within a one-party [[Communist state]].
|-
| align=center|[[Jean-Claude Duvalier]] || align=center|[[Haiti]] || align=center|1971-1986 || President of Haiti. Inherited presidency aged 19 from his father; never elected.
|-
| align=center|[[Eric Gairy]] || align=center|[[Grenada]] || align=center|1974-1979 || Prime Minister of Grenada 1967-1979. Widely described as a dictator (see[http://www.factbites.com/topics/Eric-Gairy], [http://www.paradise-inn-carriacou.com/grenada_revolution.php], [http://counterpunch.org/gibson06052004.html]). 
|-
| align=center|[[Raoul Cédras]] || align=center|[[Haiti]] || align=center|1991-1994 || ''De facto'' ruler for a relatively short period of time. Gained power in a coup (see [http://www.haitisupport.gn.apc.org/infamous.htm]).
|}

==Asia==
===Central Asia===

{|class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Country !! Years in power !! Notes
|-
| align=center|[[Askar Akayev]] || align=center|[[Kyrgyzstan]] || align=center|1990–2005 || Appointed but became increasingly authoritarian; widely described as a dictator (see [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4542783.stm], [http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/bushbeat/archive/000935.php], [http://www.eurasianet.org/resource/kazakhstan/hypermail/200507/0023.shtml]).
|-
| align=center|[[Islom Karimov]] || align=center|[[Uzbekistan]] || align=center|'''1991–present''' || Described as authoritarian who is increasingly centralizing power (see [http://www.ingentaconnect.com/search/expand?pub=infobike://bell/soviet/2003/00000019/00000004/art00002&unc=], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:uuOVzdj_xBoJ:www1.dogus.edu.tr/dogustru/journal/sayi_6/M00073.PDF+%22Islam+Karimov%22+%22dictator%22]). Elections essentially uncontested and unmonitored. Opposition repressed. 
|-
| align=center|[[Saparmurat Niyazov]] || align=center|[[Turkmenistan]] || align=center|'''1991–present''' || Declared [[President for Life]] in 1999; [[cult of personality]]; his book ''[[Ruhnama]]'' is to be treated with reverence (see [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:blnbM3mP0eAJ:www.eurasianet.org/turkmenistan.project/files2/050603Turkmenreport.pdf+%22Niyazov%22+%22dictatorship%22], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:Ie2QfLuR_ysJ:www.ndu.edu/ctnsp/tamerlane/Tamerlane-Chapter2.pdf+%22Niyazov%22+%22dictatorship%22]).
|-
| align=center|[[Muhammed Omar]] || align=center|[[Afghanistan]] || align=center|1996–2001 || Considered a Theocratic Dictator who excercized strict sharia laws; allowed the persecution of Hazaras; gave Al Qaeda refuge in Afghanistan. (see[http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0881088.html][http://www.afghan-web.com/bios/today/momar.html]).
|-
| align=center|[[Ilham Aliyev]] || align=center|[[Azerbaijan]] || align=center|'''2003–present''' || Dubious election; opposition suppressed (see[http://www.underreported.com/print.php?sid=1241]).
|}

===South Asia===
{|class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Country !! Years in power !! Notes
|-
| align=center|[[Ayub Khan]] || align=center|[[Pakistan]] || align=center|1958–1969 || Gained power in a coup. Subsequent elections considered dubious (see[http://www.storyofpakistan.com/articletext.asp?artid=A069], [http://www.indianexpress.com/messages.php?content_id=71414]).
|-
| align=center|[[Yahya Khan]] || align=center|[[Pakistan]] || align=center|1969–1971 || Military ruler, gaining power from coup (see [http://presidentyahya.com],[http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/pakistantimeline.html], [http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/kpsgill/terrorism/04Jan10Pio.htm]).
|-
| align=center|[[Maumoon Abdul Gayoom]] || align=center|[[Maldives]] || align=center|'''1978–present''' || [[Autocracy|Autocrat]]; widely considered to be a dictator; no opposition or free press allowed.
|-
| align=center|[[Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq]] || align=center|[[Pakistan]] || align=center|1978–1988 || Took over following coup. Claimed government to be legitimate because it was Islamic (see [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:dcmhb0vRS4wJ:smartech.gatech.edu:8282/dspace/bitstream/1853/6901/1/kulkarni_nikhil_v_200505_ms.pdf+%22Muhammad+Zia%22+%22dictator%22]).
|-
| align=center|[[Rahimuddin Khan]] || align=center|[[Balochistan (Pakistan)]] || align=center|1978–1984 || Appointed supreme Martial Law Governor of Balochistan by central Pakistani military government following coup. (see [http://www.answers.com/rahimuddin%20khan]).
|-
|align=center|[[Hossain Mohammad Ershad]] || align=center|[[Bangladesh]] || align=center|1982–1990 ||Gained power in a coup; declared martial law; never elected.
|-
| align=center|[[Pervez Musharraf]] || align=center|[[Pakistan]] || align=center|'''1999–present''' || Deposed [[Nawaz Sharif]] in a military coup, calling it a necessity during a [[state of emergency]]. Governed directly as commander in chief until [[Parliament of Pakistan|Parliament]] reconvened in November 2002. Assumed the title of [[President of Pakistan|President]] upon [[Rafiq Tarar]]'s resignation and stood in a [[referendum]] in 2002.[http://www.time.com/time/asia/covers/1101020722/story.html] Opposition parties state that the rule of law in his custody has deteriorated further.
|-
|}

===Eastern Asia ("Far East")===
{|class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Country !! Years in   power !! Notes
|-
|align=center|[[Tokugawa Ieyasu]] || align=center|[[Japan]] || align=center|1600-1616|| Shogun of [[Japan]] and founder of the long reigning [[Tokugawa shogunate]]. Gained power by unifying the warring clans during [[Japan]]'s long period of civil unrest. He also created an "alternate attendance" system to pacify the [[daimyo]] warlords, as well as closing and isolating trade and the economy, in order to retain his power. His rule was also marked by persecution of european missionaries and japanese christians.
|-
|align=center|[[Yuan Shikai]] || align=center|[[Republic of China]] || align=center|1912–1916 || [[President of the Republic of China]] 1912 - 1915, self-proclaimed [[Emperor of China]], 1916. Ignored legislative consent as defined by the [[Constitution of the Republic of China|Constitution]]; dissolved the [[National Assembly of the Republic of China|National Assembly]]; assassinated [[Song Jiaoren]]; disbanded the [[Kuomintang]].
|-
| align=center|[[Roman von Ungern-Sternberg]] || align=center|[[Mongolia]] || align=center|1921 || 
Born, Baron Roman Nicolaus von Ungern-Sternberg (Роман Фёдорович Унгерн фон Штернберг), in Graf, Austria of Prussian nobility, von Ungern-Sternberg fought, against his own Prussians, in the Imperial Russian Army during World War I and fought the [[Bolsheviks]], in [[Siberia]], after 1917. A rabid [[monarchist]], von Ungern-Sternberg soon thereafter became an independent [[warlord]] with the intention of establishing an independent Russo-Sino-Mongolian monarchy in [[Urga]] under the nominal rule of [[Bogd Khaan]] (the [[Living Buddha]]). Although considered the paragon of bravery, von Ungern-Sternberg was reckless, brutal and mentally unstable.

After a savage battle against occupying [[Chinese republic]]an forces, on March 13, 1921, [[Mongolia]] was proclaimed an independent [[monarchy]], and Ungern von Sternberg became Mongolian [[dictator]]. His brief rule of Mongolia was characterised by looting, raping and a reign of terror by his army. Eventually, the [[Bolsheviks]] invaded Mongolia and after a series of battles, von Ungern-Sternberg was defeated in a August 1921, captured by his own soldiers, and handed over to the [[Red Army]] on August 21, 1921.

|-
| align=center|[[Chiang Kai-Shek]] || align=center|[[Republic of China]] || align=center|1927–1975 || Known as the "Generalissimo". Gained power by military force. Leader of anti-communist one-party state under the [[Kuomintang]]. Rule on [[mainland China]] repeatedly undermined by powerful regional factions, civil wars, and the war against Japan. Ruled with an iron-fist following his retreat to [[Taiwan]] in 1949.
|-
| align=center|[[Horloogiyn Choybalsan]] || align=center|[[Mongolia]] || align=center|1936–1952 || Unelected; opponents purged; cult of personality.
|-
| align=center|[[Kim Il-sung]] || align=center|[[North Korea]] || align=center|1948–1994 || Appointed prime minister in 1948; purged rivals in the [[Workers' Party of Korea]] to consolidate power in 1956 (see [http://muse.jhu.edu/cgi-bin/access.cgi?uri=/journals/korean_studies/v026/26.1lankov.pdf]); introduced "[[Juche]]" ideology demanding absolute loyalty to him and the party; created most pervavise cult of personality in recent history. Declared "Eternal President" on his death.
|-
|align=center|[[Mao Zedong]] || align=center|[[People's Republic of China]] || align=center|1949–1976 || Chairman of the PRC (1949 – 1959), Chairman of the [[Communist Party of China]] (1945 – 1976), Chairman of the [[Central Military Commission]] (1936 – 1976). Immense cult of personality; purged members of government; silenced opposition. Circumvented Communist Party hierarchy after the 1966 [[Cultural Revolution]]; imprisoned head of state [[Liu Shaoqi]]. Millions of Chinese citizens killed or murdered as a result of his policies and repression.
|-
| align=center|[[Ngo Dinh Diem|Ngô Ðình Diệm]] || align=center|[[South Vietnam]] || align=center|1955–1963 || Unelected; autocratic; oppressed Buddhists (see[http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9055646?tocId=9055646&ref=news0905arc]).
|-
| align=center|[[Park Chung Hee]] || align=center|[[South Korea]] || align=center|1961–1979 || Took power in 1961 coup. Although initially welcomed by much of the population, he suspended the constitution in 1971 and introduced a new constitution that greatly increased his power.
|-
| align=center|[[Ne Win]] || align=center|[[Burma]] || align=center|1962–1988 || Seized power in a coup; instituted extreme repression (see [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:rSAOt9c_lU0J:www.iseas.edu.sg/62003.pdf+%22Ne+Win%22+%22dictator%22], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:yqkmuBoqlnYJ:www.asiapacificms.com/papers/pdf/burma_india_china.pdf+%22Ne+Win%22+%22dictator%22]).
|-
| align=center|[[Thanom Kittikachorn]] || align=center|[[Thailand]] || align=center|1963–1973 || Military dictator, known as one of Thailand's so-called "Three Tyrants". Oppressed student-led uprisings in October 1973 and 1976.
|-
| align=center|[[Ferdinand Marcos]] || align=center|[[Philippines]] || align=center|1965–1986 ||Elected president in 1965 and 1969; declared [[martial law]] in 1972 based on nonexistent assassination plot; closed all independent press; kleptocrat; retained presidency through elections that he firmly controlled.[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:sKBwU4oGQcgJ:www.kairoscanada.org/e/resources/GEJR%2520Summer%25202003%2520low%2520res.pdf+%22Ferdinand+Marcos+dictatorship%22], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:uZa-WxEum0sJ:www.stanford.edu/~flsamson/318_AMLM.pdf+%22Ferdinand+Marcos%22+%22dictatorship%22]).
|-
| align=center|[[Suharto]] || align=center|[[Indonesia]] || align=center|1967–1998 || His ''[[New Order (Indonesia)|New Order]]'' imprisoned Communists and alleged Communists; repressed Chinese inhabitants; made existing parties subordinate. Also a cleptocrat (with personal and family's assets at least worth US$ 15 billion, based on [[Time]] Magazine investigation in 1998). Described as a dictator in many sources (see[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:Bbh_caM50o4J:www.aut.ac.nz/depts/commstud/journ/docs/reviewscronau.pdf+%22Suharto+dictatorship%22], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:128rEIvvRD4J:www.civiced.org/research/pdfs/RisingTide.pdf+%22Suharto+dictatorship%22], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:_233mw5azNkJ:cmbc.ucsd.edu/content/1/docs/laurance2004.pdf+%22Suharto+dictatorship%22]).
|-
| align=center|[[Lon Nol]] || align=center|[[Cambodia]] || align=center|1972–1975 || Gained power by coup; not elected.
|-
| align=center|[[Pol Pot]] || align=center|[[Democratic Kampuchea]] (Cambodia)|| align=center|1975–1979 || Unelected; led a [[Khmer Rouge]] dictatorship; responsible for deaths of at least 1 million Cambodian citizens during his rule.
|-
| align=center|[[Chun Doo Hwan]] || align=center|[[South Korea]] || align=center|1980–1988 || Gained power in a coup; declared martial law; oversaw [[Gwangju Massacre]].
|-
| align=center|[[Khamtai Siphandon]] || align=center|[[Laos]] || align=center|1992–2006 || Unelected; one-party state (see[http://www.arthuredelstein.org/worlddictators]).
|-
| align=center|[[Than Shwe]] || align=center|[[Myanmar]] (Burma)|| align=center|'''1992–present''' || Unelected; persecution of minorities (especially [[Karenni]] and [[Rohingya]] groups [http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2005/51506.htm]) leading 250,000 to flee, either becoming [[IDP]]s or moving across the border to Thailand; consolidated power into himself from the [[SPDC]] - he moved to a new capital in Kyat Pyay in 2006 , &renamed it as Nay Pyi Daw ,i.e the Royal Palace City"; gained power via a military [[coup]] and announced that he would not hand over the power to [[Aung San Suu Kyi]]'s Elected Party (the [[NLD]]); no free press (see [http://www.bbc.co.uk/burmese/forum/story/2004/10/041020_khin_nyunt_ousted.shtml]).
|-
| align=center|[[Kim Jong-il]] || align=center|[[North Korea]] || align=center|'''1994–present''' || Became General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea and Chairman of the National Defense Commission (the highest state offices) on his father's death. Continues his father's "[[Juche]]" ideology.
|-
| align=center|[[Sonthi Boonyaratglin]] || align=center|[[Thailand]] || align=center|'''2006–present''' || Army chief seized power while Prime Minister [[Thaksin Shinawatra]] was out of the country. A state of martial law was declared, parliament was dissolved and the constitution abrogated. Instituted press censorship and restrictions on protests. The first Muslim in charge of the mostly Buddhist army.
|-
|}

===Western Asia ("Middle East")===

{|class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Country !! Years in power !! Notes
|-
| align=center|[[Abdullah bin Abdulaziz]] || align=center|[[Saudi Arabia]] || align=center|'''Present'''||unelected.
|-
| align=center|[[Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah]] || align=center|[[Kuwait]] || align=center| '''Present'''||unelected.
|-
| align=center|[[Hamad bin Khalifa]] || align=center|[[Qatar]] || align=center| '''Present'''||unelected.
|-
| align=center|[[Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahayan]] || align=center|[[United Arab Emirate]] || align=center| '''Present'''||unelected.
|-
| align=center|[[Mohammad Reza Pahlavi]] || align=center|[[Iran]] || align=center|1941/1953–1979 || Installed over his father [[Reza Shah|Rezah Shah Pahlavi]] by [[Allies (World War II)|Allied]] occupation forces. Fled Iran in 1953 amid a power struggle with Prime Minister [[Mohammad Mossadegh]] and was restored with help from the United States and Great Britain. Abolished all rival political parties and used a secret police,[[Savak]], to torture and imprison thousands of political dissidents; yet, modernized Iran.
|-
| align=center|[[Abdul Karim Qassem]] || align=center|[[Iraq]] || align=center|1958–1963 || Gained power by coup; viewed by some as benevolent (see [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/03/18/wisad18.xml]).
|-
| align=center|[[Abdul Salam Arif]] || align=center|[[Iraq]] || align=center|1963–1966 || Gained power in a coup; military ruler.
|-
| align=center|[[Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr]] || align=center|[[Iraq]] || align=center|1968–1979 || Gained power in a coup; never elected.
|-
| align=center|[[Hafez al-Assad]] || align=center|[[Syria]] || align=center|1970–2000 ||Gained power in a coup; totalitarian;{{cn}} cult of personality; oversaw [[Hama massacre]] yielding twenty to forty thousand dead (see [http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=M1ARTM0012197]).
|-
| align=center|[[Ruhollah Khomeini]] || align=center|[[Iran]] || align=center|1979–1989 || Considered a theocratic dictator by [[Western world|Western]] powers.[http://www.bartleby.com/59/10/khomeiniayat.html] As [[Supreme Leader of Iran|Supreme Leader]], held ultimate and uncontested authority over all government matters under the principle of [[Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists|Guardianship]]. Created the extra-constitutional [[Special Clerical Court]] system in [[1987]], accountable only to the Supreme Leader and used principally for suppression of political dissent.
|-
| align=center|[[Saddam Hussein]] || align=center|[[Iraq]] || align=center|1979–2003 || Pressured Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr to resign in 1979 and formally became president. Repressive; developed extensive personality cult; deposed by [[United States]] and coalition forces in an invasion.
|-
| align=center|[[Ali Khamenei|Ayatollah Ali Khamenei]]||align=center| [[Iran]] ||align=center| '''1989-present''' || Continues Khomeini's [[Islamist]] path & uses religion as a tool, cracks down on all authentic dissent, tortures, and has given orders that permit killings like that of [[Akbar Mohammadi]] and [[Zahra Kazemi]]. Only permitts [[government-organized demonstrations]]. Allows a multi-party government but disallows the candidacy of true moderates.[http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=9940][http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1527919/][http://www.nationalreview.com/ledeen/ledeen200505310823.asp][http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/1154652871.shtml][http://isd.georgetown.edu/demo_0102.pdf][http://www.boycottliberalism.com/liberalcelebrity.htm]ISBN 0-16-074590-X
|-
| align=center|[[Bashar al-Assad]] || align=center|[[Syria]] || align=center|'''2000–present''' || No opposition permitted in election following death of his father; widely described as a dictator (see[http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110007449], [http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP92405], [http://www.freeman.org/m_online/feb04/pasko.htm]).
|}

==Europe==

{|class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Country !! Years in power !! Notes
|-
| align=center| [[Oliver Cromwell]] || align=center| [[Commonwealth of England]] || align=center| 1653-1658 || A [[Puritan]] general in the [[English Civil War]] who quickly rose through the ranks to become ''de facto'' head of the Parliamentary forces. After the Royalist defeat and the execution of [[Charles I]] the newly constituted [[Rump Parliament]] was overthrown by Cromwell who refused the Crown, choosing instead the title of Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland. After his death the monarchy was reinstated. [http://www.olivercromwell.org/].
|-
| align=center| [[Maximilien Robespierre]] || align=center| [[France]] || align=center| 1793–1794 || Head of the Committee of Public Safety during the French Revolution. To purge french society of "Counter Revolutionaries", he instituted the heavily repressive Reign of Terror, a period which killed thousands of french citizens, many of those killed were simply killed under mere suspicion, with little or no proof. Desposed when the National Convention declared him an outlaw.
|-
| align=center| [[Napoleon Bonaparte]] || align=center| [[France]]|| align=center| 1799–1814 || First Consul, 1799-1804. Emperor of the French 1804-1814. Declared himself "First Consul for Life" in 1802 and then Emperor in 1804.
|-
| align=center| [[Józef Chłopicki|Józef Grzegorz Chłopicki]] || align=center| [[Poland]] || align=center| 1830–1831 || Held official title of dictator for one year only.
|-
| align=center| [[Napoleon III of France|Charles Louis Napoléon Bonaparte]] || align=center| [[France]] || align=center| (1848–1851) 1851–1870|| President of France from 1848 to 1852. In 1851 he launched a coup against the legislature, making himself absolute ruler. From 1852 to 1870 he styled himself Emperor of the French under the name Napoléon III from 1852 to 1870. Later during his reign constitutional liberties were gradually restored. In 1870 he was captured during the abortive [[Franco-Prussian War]] and deposed in his absence by the [[Third Republic]] of France.
|-
| align=center| [[Romuald Traugutt]] || align=center| [[Poland]] || align=center| 1863–1864 || Held official title of dictator for one year. Succeeded [[Marian Langiewicz]] who had declared himself dictator previously, but only lasted less than a year in 1863. 
|-
| align=center| [[Vladimir Lenin]] || align=center| [[Soviet Union]] || align=center| 1917-1924 || Head of Bolshevik Revolution took power in 1917. Secured victory in the Russian civil war. Headed effort to transform the Russian economy to a socialist model.[http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/lenin_vladimir.shtml] 
|-
| align=center|[[Mustafa Kemal Atatürk]] || align=center|[[Turkey]] || align=center|1918-1938 || Led the Turkish national movement. Transformed Turkey into a secular republic through broad authoritarian reforms.
|-
| align=center| [[Benito Mussolini]] || align=center| [[Italy]] || align=center| 1922–1943, and in part of the country 1943-1945 || Prime Minister of Italy 1922-1943; head of the so-called [[Italian Social Republic]] until 1945. "He introduced strict censorship and altered the methods of election so that in 1925–1926 he was able to assume dictatorial powers and dissolve all other political parties" (see [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:0PFM13qC39YJ:www.ablongman.com/history_rh_bridge/assets/0321025865_ch15.pdf+%22Italian+dictator+Benito+Mussolini%22],[http://doi.contentdirections.com/mr/greenwood.jsp?doi=10.1336/0275979377]).
|-
| align=center| [[Miguel Primo de Rivera]] || align=center| [[Spain]] || align=center| 1923–1930 || Prime Minister of Spain. Gained power in a coup; suspended the constitution; established martial law; imposed strict censorship; banned all political parties. Widely described as a dictator (see[http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9061388], [http://www.bartleby.com/65/pr/PrimRivM.html], [http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761565186/Miguel_Primo_de_Rivera.html]). 
|-
| align=center| [[Aleksandar Tsankov]] || align=center| [[Bulgaria]] || align=center| 1923-1926 || Established Right wing nationalist, anti communist coup against [[Stamboliyski]]’s democratic elected [[Agrarians]]. Forced out of power by Tsar [[Boris III]]. [http://www.bartleby.com/65/ts/TsankovA.html]. 
|-
| align=center| [[Joseph Stalin]] || align=center| [[Soviet Union]] || align=center| 1924–1953 || General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, 1922 - 1953; Premier of the Soviet Union 1941 - 1953. Never elected; cult of personality; heavily repressive; responsible for deaths of millions of Soviet citizens (see [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9108469], [http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761559200/Stalin_Joseph.html],[http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitextlo/prof_josephstalin.html]).
|-
| align=center| [[Ahmet Bej Zogu]] || align=center| [[Albania]] || align=center| 1925–1939 || Originally elected Prime Minister of Albania 1922-1924 and 1925; President of Albania 1925-1928; crowned himself King of the Albanians (as Zog I) 1928-1939. Described as a dictator (see[http://www.albanian.com/information/history/independ.html], [http://www.diplom.org/manus/talossa/?lingo=&page=Statute&act=25RZ13], [http://www.electionworld.org/history/albania.htm]). Forced to flee with his wife, Queen Geraldine, the imminent takeover of the country by Italy under [[Benito Mussolini]].
|-
| align=center| [[José Mendes Cabeçadas]] || align=center| [[Portugal]] || align=center| 1926 || Leader of [[Ditadura Nacional]] during the first part of June immediately after the [[28th May 1926 coup d'état]]
|-
| align=center| [[Gomes da Costa]] || align=center| [[Portugal]] || align=center| 1926 || Succeeded Cabeçadas as head of the [[Ditadura Nacional]] for less than a month
|-
| align=center| [[António Óscar Carmona]] || align=center| [[Portugal]] || align=center| 1926-1928 || Head of [[Ditadura Nacional]]
|-
| align=center| [[Józef Piłsudski]]|| align=center| [[Poland]] || align=center| 1926–1935 || Polish Head of State 1918-1922, but regained power in 1926 via coup. Prime Minister of Poland 1926-1928 and 1930; Commander in Chief of the Army 1926-1935. Initiated authoritarian [[Sanacja]] government; often described as a "benevolent dictator".
|-
| align=center| [[Antanas Smetona]] || align=center| [[Lithuania]] || align=center| 1926–1940 || President of Lithuania. Seized power in a 1925 military coup (see [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:wEZn53dBGtoJ:www.gla.ac.uk/departments/dcees/Duvold.pdf+Antanas+Smetona+%22dictatorship%22]); authoritarian rule. His description as a dictator is common (see[http://www.encyclopedia.com/searchpool.asp?target=@DOCKEYWORDS%20balthistbio&unkey=balthistbio&clientIp=216%2E63%2E197%2E211&userAgent=Mozilla%2F4%2E0+%28compatible%3B+MSIE+6%2E0%3B+Windows+NT+5%2E1%3B+SV1%3B+%2ENET+CLR+1%2E1%2E4322%29]), but not universal.
|-
| align=center| [[António de Oliveira Salazar]] || align=center| [[Portugal]] || align=center| 1928–1968 || Prime Minister of Portugal. Established an anti-democratic, anti-parliamentarian, ultra-[[Clericalism|clericalist]], [[Corporativism|corporativist]], extremely conservative, repressive and authoritarian dictatorship, connoted with the Italian fascism, highly supported by the [[Roman Catholic Church]]. Longest right-wing dictatorship ever (four complete decades).
|-
| align=center| [[Alexander I of Yugoslavia|Alexander I]] || align=center| [[Yugoslavia]] || align=center| 1929-1934 || King of Yugoslavia from 1921. On [[January 6]] [[1929]] he abolished the constitution, prorogued parliament and established the so-called "January 6 Dictatorship." A new constitution in 1931 left all significant political power in the hands of the King.
|-
| align=center| [[Engelbert Dollfuss]] || align=center| [[Austria]] || align=center| 1933–1934 || Chancellor of Austria 1932-1934. Suspended parliament indefinitely in March 1933, governing thereafter by decree. Rule sometimes compared to Mussolini or Franco (see [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:PUVNNLui6y4J:www3.la.psu.edu/hrsweb/majmin/Theses/Houlihan/Thesis.pdf+%22dictator%22+%22Dollfuss%22]).
|-
| align=center| [[Konstantin Päts]] || align=center| [[Estonia]] || align=center| 1933–1940 || State Elder 1933 - 1937; State Protector 1937 - 1938; President of Estonia 1938-1940. Established authoritarian rule following a coup. Allowed (and won) election in 1938.
|-
| align=center| [[Adolf Hitler]] || align=center| [[Germany]] || align=center| 1933–1945 || Chancellor of Germany 1933-1945; ''Führer'' (Leader) 1934-1945. The 1933 [[Enabling Act]] suspended most of the constitution and allowed Hitler to [[rule by decree]]. Heavily repressive; ordered imprisonment of millions of political opponents and members of ethnic minorities in concentration camps, where they were abused and killed.
|-
| align=center| [[Kimon Georgiev]] || align=center| [[Bulgaria]] || align=center| 1934 || Took power in coup. Overthrown by Tsar Boris III. 
|-
| align=center| Tsar [[Boris III]] || align=center| [[Bulgaria]] || align=center| 1934-1943 || Overthrew Kimon Geogiev. Took power him self ruled through puppet Prime Ministers Georgi Kyoseivanov. His Regime banned all opposition parties. Took Bulgaria into alliance with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. 
|-
| align=center| [[Kurt Schuschnigg]] || align=center| [[Austria]] || align=center| 1934–1938 || Chancellor of Austria. Maintained his predecessor Dollfuss' oppressive rule.
|-
| align=center| [[Karlis Ulmanis|Kārlis Ulmanis]] || align=center| [[Latvia]] || align=center| 1934–1940 || Prime Minister of Latvia 1934-1940; President of Latvia 1936 - 1940. Gained power in a coup and dissolved parliament; generally viewed as a "benevolent dictator" (see [http://www.ltn.lv/~krz/latvia/lat_history.html], [http://www.sciencedaily.com/encyclopedia/karlis_ulmanis], [http://www.bartleby.com/65/la/Latvia.html]).
|-
| align=center| [[Ioannis Metaxas]] || align=center| [[Greece]] || align=center| 1936–1941 || Prime Minister of Greece. Never elected; banned political parties; arrested opponents; criminalized unions; censored media. Widely described as a dictator (see[http://www.bartleby.com/65/pa/PapandrG.html], [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9052304], [http://www.ahistoryofgreece.com/biography/metaxas.htm]). 
|-
| align=center| [[Francisco Franco]] || align=center| [[Spain]] || align=center| 1936–1975 || Prime Minister of Spain 1938-1975 and Head of State 1939 - 1975 (in the Nationalist Zone, both only to 1939). Purged opposition; often referred to as a dictator or ''caudillo'' (see[http://www.policyreview.org/jun03/diamond.html], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:B1Mmefo38twJ:www.personal.psu.edu/mlb300/spainsocprob.pdf+%22dictator+Francisco+Franco%22],[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:NsfbKjiVUowJ:www.acad.carleton.edu/curricular/POSC/faculty/montero/Spain%2520Paper%25201.pdf+%22dictator+Francisco+Franco%22], [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=active&q=cache:9ZzXaMENcm8J:www.artcult.org/cst/spain_prepack_participants.pdf+%22Francisco+Franco%22+%22dictatorship%22]). Strongly supported by the [[Roman Catholic Church]] worldwide.
|-
| align=center| [[Carol II of Romania|Carol II]] || align=center| [[Romania]] || align=center| 1938-1940 || King of Romania from [[1930]]. In January 1938 he abolished parliamentary government and pushed through a new constitution putting all executive power into his own hands.
|-
| align=center| [[Jozef Tiso]] || align=center| [[Slovakia]] || align=center| 1939–1945 || President of [[Slovak Republic (1939-1945)|WWII Slovak Republic]]. Led a partly Roman Catholic clerical, partly pro-Nazi, one-party state. Described by some as a dictator (see [http://www.adl.org/PresRele/HolNa_52/3578_52.asp], [http://dominican-republic.asinah.net/en/wikipedia/j/jo/jozef_tiso.html], [http://www.ce-review.org/00/19/vaknin19.html]).
|-
| align=center| [[Ion Antonescu]] || align=center| [[Romania]] || align=center| 1940–1944 || Prime Minister of Romania. Two days after his appointment, forced King Carol II (see above) to abdicate in favor of his son, Mihai. Named himself ''Conducător'' (Leader), assumed dictatorial powers and relegated monarchy to decorative role.
|-
| align=center| [[Philippe Pétain]] || align=center| [[Vichy France]] || align=center| 1940–1944 || Prime Minister of France 1940 - 1942; Head of State 1940 - 1944. The ''Assemblée Nationale'' of Vichy France suspended the [[Third Republic]] and granted Pétain dictatorial power, although ultimately he was answerable to the German Nazi hierarchy.
|-
| align=center| [[Ante Pavelic|Ante Pavelić]] || align=center| [[Croatia]] || align=center| 1941–1945 ||''Poglavnik'' ("Leader") of Croatia. Not elected; ordered massacres of Serbs, Jews, Gypsies and dissidents; hundreds of thousands slaughtered; led the genocial, devoutly Roman Catholic Ustase (see [http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/tyrants.htm], [http://www.cuttingedge.org/articles/RC130.html], [http://emperors-clothes.com/vatican/cpix.htm]). Supported by most, if not all, of the Roman Catholic church in Croatia.
|-
| align=center| [[Vidkun Quisling]] || align=center| [[Norway]]|| align=center| 1942–1945 || Minister President of Norway between 1942-1945, and founder of the fascist "National Unity" party . Traitor to his country. Executed by firing squad. Described as being the Hitler of Norway.
|-
| align=center| [[Ferenc Szálasi]] (Szálasi Ferenc) || align=center| [[Hungary]] || align=center| 1944–1945 || Leader of the [[fascist]] [[Arrow Cross]] party, Szálasi was installed as a fascist ruler by the [[Nazis]] following their overthrow of [[regent]] [[Miklós Horthy]].
|-
| align=center| [[Josip Broz Tito]] || align=center| [[Yugoslavia]] || align=center| 1944–1980 || Secretary-General of the Yugoslav Communist Party 1937 - 1963; Prime Minister of Yugoslavia 1945–1953; Premier of Yugoslavia 1953 - 1963; President of Yugoslavia 1953 - 1980; President of the ''Presidium of the League of Communists'' from 1963 until 1980. Declared himself [[President for Life]] in 1963. Viewed favorably in Yugoslavia despite authoritarian rule.
|-
| align=center| [[Enver Hoxha]] || align=center| [[Albania]] || align=center| 1944-1985|| General Secretary of the Albanian Party of Labour. Leader of single-party Communist state; extensive personality cult; Declared his nation to be the world's only officially atheist state and banned all practice of religion in 1967.
|-
| align=center| [[Mátyás Rákosi]] || align=center| [[Hungary]] || align=center| 1949-1953|| General Secretary of the [[Hungarian Workers Party]] and Prime Minister of the [[Hungarian People's Republic]]. Leader of single-party Communist state; nicknamed "Stalin's best Hungarian disciple"; Invented the phrase "[[salami tactics]]" to describe piecemeal assumption of power.
|-
| align=center| [[Nikita Khrushchev]] || align=center| [[Soviet Union]] || align=center| 1953-1964 || First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union between 1953-1964. Allowed limited liberalisation in the arts and media later on. 
|-
| align=center| [[Todor Zhivkov]] || align=center| [[Bulgaria]] || align=center| 1956-1989 || Head of pro soviet communist regimen in Bulgaria. Became party secretary in 1956 and prime minister in 1962. Forced out of power in 1989 by communist party to comply with demands of protesters.
|-
| align=center| [[Antonín Novotný]] || align=center| [[Czechoslovakia]] || align=center| 1957-1968 || Antonín Novotný, the First Secretary of the Communist Party and President of the Republic, was leader of Czechoslovakia during the Stalinisation of the country, resulting in the replacement of the Czechoslovakian democracy by a one-party communist state. His dictatorship centralized power and used force to protect his regime which lasted fifteen years.
|-
| align=center| [[Walter Ulbricht]] || align=center| [[German Democratic Republic]] || align=center| 1950/1960-1971 || General Secretary of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany 1950-1971 and Head of State 1960-1973.
|-
| align=center| [[Leonid Brezhnev]] || align=center| [[Soviet Union]] || align=center| 1964–1982 || First/General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union between 1964-1982. Formed a [[cult of Personality]] later on.
|-
| align=center| [[Nicolae Ceauşescu]] || align=center| [[Romania]] || align=center| 1965–1989 || General Secretary of the Romanian Communist Party, 1965-1989; President of Romania, 1974-1989. Leader of single-party Communist state; extensive personality cult developed during the 1970s.
|-
| align=center| [[George Papadopoulos]] || align=center| [[Greece]] || align=center| 1967–1973 || Prime Minister of Greece 1967 - 1973; Regent 1972 - 1973; President of Greece 1973. Gained power in a coup; lead military regime. Widely described as a dictator (see [http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0778782.html], [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/379334.stm], [http://www.hellas.net]).
|-
| align=center| [[Marcelo Caetano]] || align=center| [[Portugal]] || align=center| 1968–1974 || Prime Minister of Portugal 1968 - 1974; Upon the death of [[António de Oliveira Salazar]] he continued the dictatorial regime. Some liberties were improved but the situation of the country and the [[Portuguese Colonial War|colonial wars]] lead to the [[Carnation Revolution]].
|-
| align=center| [[Gustáv Husák]] || align=center| [[Czechoslovakia]] || align=center| 1969-1987 || Came into power through soviets, Crushed the Prague spring. Headed brutal secret police stepped down from power in 1987 two years before communism fell. 
|-
| align=center| [[Erich Honecker]] || align=center| [[German Democratic Republic]] || align=center| 1971-1989 || General Secretary of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany 1971-1989 and Head of State 1976-1989.
|-
| align=center| [[Phaedon Gizikis]] || align=center| [[Greece]] || align=center| 1973-1974 || President of Greece 1973-1974. Gained power in coup. Lead millitary regime installed by previous head of state.
|-
| align=center| [[Wojciech Jaruzelski]] || align=center| [[Poland]] || align=center| 1981-1990 || Imposed martial law in Poland in 1981 in response to [[Solidarity]] party led strikes. Made himself head of the "Commission for National Salvation." Stated his actions were taken in order to prevent a Soviet invasion of Poland. Was President of Poland until his resignation in 1990.
|-
| align=center| [[Yuri Andropov]] || align=center| [[Soviet Union]] || align=center| 1982-1984 || General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union between 1982-1984. Early signs of [[Perestroika]] and [[Glasnost]].
|-
| align=center| [[Konstantin Chernenko]] || align=center| [[Soviet Union]] || align=center| 1984-1985 || General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union between 1984-1985. Ailing stop-gap leader. 
|-
| align=center| [[Mikhail Gorbachev]] || align=center| [[Soviet Union]] || align=center| 1985-1991 || General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 1985 until 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed and the CPSU was banned. Oversaw democratisation in the Soviet Union, but was never directly elected as leader.
|-
| align=center| [[Slobodan Milošević]] || align=center| [[Serbia]] [[Yugoslavia]] || align=center| 1989-1997 1997-2000 || In 1984 he became the head of the local Communist party in Belgrade and adopted a populist style, the party's leader. He successfully took over as head of the Serbian Communist party in 1987. He challenged the federal government, championed Serbian control of the autonomous provinces of Kosovo and Vojvodina, and advocated stridently socialist economic policy. By 1988, he had replaced party leaders in Kosovo and Vojvodina, and in 1989 he became president of Serbia. However, in September 1990, a new democratic constitution was passed allowing direct, multi-party presidential and parliamentary elections. Milosevic was elected president of Serbia for the first time in December 1990, although allegations persist of electoral fraud during the Milosevic years.
|-
| align=center| [[Igor Smirnov]] || align=center| [[Transnistria]] || align=center| '''1991-present''' || President of the unrecognized country of Transnistria. Religion and free speech not fully allowed. Arbitrary arrests and torture used to silence opposition and political activists. Romanian speakers discriminated.
|-
| align=center| [[Alexander Lukashenko]] || align=center| [[Belarus]] || align=center| '''1994-present''' || President of Belarus. Said to have an "authoritarian ruling style". Lack of democratic standards. Human rights violations. Referred to as "Europe's last dictatorship."
|}

==Oceania==
{|class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Country !! Years in power !! Notes
|-
| align=center| [[Sitiveni Rabuka]] || align=center|[[Fiji]] || align=center|1987–1992 || Twice gained power through coup, allowed elections in 1992, which he won.
|}

==See also==
* [[Constitutional crisis]]
* [[Cult of personality]]
* [[List of political leaders who held active military ranks in office]]
* [[List of political leaders who suspended the constitution]]
* [[List of successful coups d'état]]
* [[President for Life]]
* [[Single-party state]]

==External links==
*[http://www.thedictatorship.com The Dictatorship]
*[http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Dictators_and_Non-Democratic_Governments Dictators and Non-Democratic Governments]
*[http://www.lkwdpl.org/schools/horacemann/dictators/ Modern dictators and Human Rights Violations]
*[http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Oppressive_Regimes Oppressive Regimes]
*[http://www.parade.com/articles/editions/2006/edition_01-22-2006/Dictators The World’s 10 Worst Dictators]

Derivative (calculus)

2007-08-06T00:18:14Z

AungSein:

A '''derivative''' is a measure in [[Calculus]] of how functions change based on how their input values change; otherwise known as 'the rate of change' (second derivatives thus give the rate of change of change, etc). For example, [[speed]] is a first derivative, obtained from distance and time, whereas [[acceleration]] is a second derivative, obtained from the first derivative, speed, and time.

Given a graph of a [[real]] curve, the derivative at a specific point will equal the [[slope]] of the line [[tangent]] to that point.

To calculate the derivative of a function, one must use techniques from the differential branch of calculus. This branch of calculus is related to the integral branch by the first fundamental theorem of calculus: ''differentiation'' (the process of finding a derivative) ''is the reverse process of [[integral|integration]]'' (the process of finding an integral).

In mathematics, derivatives are helpful in determining the [[maximum|maxima]] and [[minimum|minima]] of a function. For example, taking the derivative of a quadratic function will yield a linear function. The points at which this function equals zero are called ''critical'' points. Maxima and minima can occur at critical points, and can be verified to be a maximum or minimum by the ''second derivative test''. The second derivative is used to determine the [[concavity]], or curved shape of the graph. Where the concavity is positive, the graph curves upwards, and could contain a relative minimum. Where the concavity is negative, the graph curves downwards, and could contain a relative maximum. Where the concavity equals zero is said to be a point of ''inflection,'' meaning that it is a point where the concavity could be changing.

[[Category:Mathematics]]

User:AungSein

2007-08-06T00:14:03Z

AungSein:

Hello. I am a Year 11 student in England UK (although I come from [[Burma]] but not from [[Myanmar]]!). I hope to be able to help this project.

David Hilbert

2007-08-06T00:12:17Z

AungSein: I expanded and moved the section on Godel's Inc.The.

[[Image:T534346.jpg|right|thumb]]
'''David Hilbert''' (1862-1943) was a German mathematician who attempted to formalize mathematics in a methodical manner. He is most famous for listing the 23 greatest unsolved problems of mathematics in 1900, problems that included the Riemann hypothesis, the continuum hypothesis, Goldbach's conjecture, the well ordering of the reals, the transcendence of powers of algebraic numbers and the extension of Dirichlet's principle, in addition to his analogy for Cantorian infinite sets, known as 'Hilbert's Hotel'. The very possibility of answering these questions was thrown into doubt by the [[Kurt Godel]]'s publishing in 1931 of his [[Godel's Incompleteness Theorems|Incompleteness Theorems]]. This difficult in proving the basics of mathematics was known as the 'Grundlagenkrise der Mathematik' ('basic crisis of mathematics').

Later, after Hilbert did work in algebraic number theory and geometry, and created the "Hilbert space," he helped create the general [[theory of relativity]] by first publishing a derivation of the field equations. In 1934 and 1939 he published two works attempting to develop a "proof theory," which is a direct check for the consistency of mathematics.
[[category: Mathematicians|Hilbert, David]]

Conservapedia:Critical Thinking in Math

2007-08-06T00:06:08Z

AungSein:

"Critical Thinking in Math" is an experimental course with four independent purposes in mind:

*sharpen the analytical skills of students and improve their math [[College Board]] scores

*awaken an interest in [[mathematics]] by students who did not realize they had extraordinary aptitude for math, the future [[Bernhard Riemann]]s

*encourage adults to keep their mind sharp through mathematics, and fend off mental decline

*help parents who would like to teach math to their [[homeschooled]] children

The experiment is to use only fundamental or elementary techniques to accomplish the above results. No tools beyond about 9th grade math is required, and motivated students younger than 9th grade will not have difficulty with the concepts.

This course seeks the contributions of both teachers and students to make it is effective as possible. It will be begin in September. Possible topics include:

*a comparative look at different techniques of proof

*major problems that remain unsolved using elementary techniques

*a look at the history of the development of math

*an analysis of what skills [[College Board]] exams test, and how to improve those skills

Please feel free to add other topics and suggestions, and add your name below as a teacher or student interested in this field:
--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:08, 5 August 2007 (EDT)

== Draft Curriculum ==

*different methods of proof: constructive, induction, contradiction, existence
*Goldbach's Conjecture and Fermat's Last Theorem
*Types of math problems presented in math board exams and math contests
*Interesting problems in number theory and Euclidean geometry
*greatest mathematicians in history, and why
*Axiom of Choice, why it has been controversial, and its use in Wiles' proof of Fermat's Last Theorem
*Set theory in general

*Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorems are interesting; they are applicable not only in maths and logic, but also move into philosophy.
*Hilbert's program (although of course the above renders null its aims!)

Students on the course
*I would like to join this. Is it alright if I live in the UK? Your profile suggests that you live in the US, but I am always eager for maths. [[User:AungSein|AungSein]] 18:13, 5 August 2007 (EDT)

:: That's fantastic. Of course you're welcome in the UK. You have great colleges there, and produced some fantastic physicists. Please help build a curriculum (see above). Lord willing, maybe we can make some inroads into some unsolved problems.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:29, 5 August 2007 (EDT)
[[category:mathematics]]
::: Well I come from Burma, but the colleges and university there are good. Your point about unsolved problems is good, too - have you heard of the folding@home project? It is a different concept, I know, but perhaps relevant - maybe what one brilliant mathematician might struggle at, us many lesser minds might gain insight into! I would also recommend for point 3 the UKMT papers [http://www.wpr3.co.uk/UKMT/jmc.html][http://www.wpr3.co.uk/UKMT/imc.html][http://www.wpr3.co.uk/UKMT/smc.html] - I do not know about how it is in the USA, but they are typical here. [[User:AungSein|AungSein]] 20:06, 5 August 2007 (EDT)

Algorithm

2007-08-05T22:16:09Z

AungSein:

An '''algorithm''' is a procedure for carrying out a task which, given an initial state, will terminate in a clearly defined end-state. It can be thought of as a recipe, or a step-by-step method, so that in following the steps of the algorithm you are guaranteed to find the solution or the answer. The name is derived from a corruption of [[Muhammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī|Al-Khwārizmī]], the Persian astronomer and mathematician, wrote a treatise in Arabic in 825 AD, entitled: ''On Calculation with Hindu Numerals''. This was translated into Latin in 12th century as ''Algoritmi de numero Indorum'' The title translates as "Al-Khwārizmī on the numbers of the Indians", with ''Algoritmi'' being the translator's rendition of the original author's name in Arabic. Later writers misunderstood the title, and treated ''Algoritmi'' as a Latin plural of the neologism ''Algoritmus'' or ''Algorithmus'', and took its meaning as 'calculation method'. In the Middle Ages there were many variants on this, such as alkorisms, algorisms, algorhythms etc.

There are two main current usages:
# In elementary education, where an 'algorithm' is used for calculation, such as the decomposition algorithm, or the equal addition method of subtraction. Many of these algorithms are, in fact derivations from methods in Al-Khwārizmī's original treatise.
# In computing, where an algorithm is the methodology which underlies a computer program. This tells the computer what specific steps to perform (in what specific order) in order to carry out a specified task, such as calculating employees’ paychecks or printing students’ report cards.

All algorithms must adhere to two rules -

*They must work for any given input or network.
*They must have a single start point, and a single finish point.

==Examples of Algorithms==

===Dijkstra's algorithm===

Dijkstra's algorithm finds the shortest path through a [[network]], from one point to another.

#Start by labelling the first [[node]] (1,0,0). The first number, the ordinal value, denotes the order in which the arcs were labelled, the second, the label value (the distance travelled thus far), while the third, the working value, denotes the possible distance to that point.
#Then, update the working values for nodes separated to the current node(s) by one [[arc]], by adding the weight of the arc to that node to the label value of the node at the other end. This value may decrease during the progression of the algorithm, as new, shorter, routes are found.
#Choose the node with the lowest working value, and promote its working value to the label value, and write in its new ordinal value. For example, if this was the second node labelled, its complete annotation would now read (2, x, x), where 'x' would be the distance between it and the first node.
#Now return to the second step. If there are no more nodes to be added, the algorithm has finished.

===Planarity algorithm===

The planarity algorithm is used to determine whether a given shape is 2-dimensional or not. It has found particular use in road and circuit board design to avoid cross-overs.

#Identify a [[Hamiltonian Cycle]] in the network.
#Redraw the network with the Hamiltonian cycle on the outside.
#Identify any crossings between lines.
#Choose an arc with crossings to stay inside the cycle. Move any arcs with crossings to the outside.
#Repeat from step 3 until there are no more crossings. If this step is completed, it shows that the shape is planar (2-d). If it cannot be completed, the shape is 3-dimensional and not planar.

===Critical path analysis===

Critical path analysis is used to determine the fastest/most efficient way of completing a series of tasks, which often depend upon each other.
===Kruskal's algorithm===

Kruskal's algorithm is used to find the minimum spanning tree in an network that you can see all of.
===Prim's algorithm===

Prim's algorithm is used to find the minimum spanning tree when only some of a network is visible.
==See also==
*[[Computability]]
*[[Genetic algorithms]]
*[[Evolutionary algorithm]]
[[category:mathematics]]

Conservapedia:Critical Thinking in Math

2007-08-05T22:13:08Z

AungSein:

Algorithm

2007-08-05T22:10:46Z

AungSein: /* See also */just adding the other types

User:AungSein

2007-08-05T22:08:34Z

AungSein: New page: Hello. I am a Year 11 student in England UK (although I come from Burma). I hope to be able to help this project.

Hello. I am a Year 11 student in England UK (although I come from Burma). I hope to be able to help this project.