<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=LewisW</id>
	<title>Conservapedia - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=LewisW"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/LewisW"/>
	<updated>2026-09-23T18:54:50Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.35.14</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Nazi_Party&amp;diff=621290</id>
		<title>Nazi Party</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Nazi_Party&amp;diff=621290"/>
		<updated>2009-02-09T22:25:13Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;LewisW: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Image:Flag of Nazi Germany.png|thumb|200px|'''The flag of Nazi Germany''' featuring the notorious swastika]]&lt;br /&gt;
The '''Nazi Party''' ('''NSDAP''', formally the ''Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei'' or in English ''National Socialist German Workers' Party''&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt; &amp;quot;Nazi&amp;quot; comes from the first word in the party's name, '''Na'''tionalso'''zi'''alistische.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;) was a [[Socialism|socialist]] movement and party in [[Germany]] from 1919-1945. It was controlled after 1922 by [[Adolf Hitler]]. In 1933 the Nazis came to power in Germany and took control of the government and most sectors of Germany's society and economy. The Nazi regime in Germany 1933-45 called itself the '''[[Third Reich]].''' The Nazis rearmed Germany, conquered the neighbors, killed six million Jews in the [[Holocaust]] and was finally destroyed in [[World War II]] by the [[Allies]], the major powers of which were the United States who led the Allied forces in Europe from 1941, the USSR (more commonly known as the Soviet Union) and Britain.  Like Hitler, the Nazis have become synonymous with evil in the modern world. &lt;br /&gt;
==Foundations==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Adolf Hitler]]  exploited the myth of the “Stab in the Back,” the belief that the [[World War I]] had been lost because “disloyal” elements within Germany – [[Jews]] and [[Marxism|Marxists]] – had undermined the war effort. As [[William Shirer]] put it in ''The Rise and Fall of the [[Third Reich]]'', &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;To him, as to almost all Germans, it was ‘monstrous’ and undeserved. The German army had not been defeated in the field. It had been stabbed in the back by the traitors at home.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Thus emerged for [[Hitler]], as or so many Germans, a fanatical belief in the legend of the ‘stab in the back’ which, more than anything else, was to undermine the Weimar Republic and pave the way for Hitler’s ultimate triumph.”&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Book One, “The Rise of Adolph Hitler.” &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The origin of the Nazi Party itself was a small group called The German Workers' Party, founded by a locksmith named Anton Drexler who, in 1918, had set up a “Committee of Independent Workmen” in reaction to the [[Marxism]]  of the free trade unions.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Book One, “The Rise of Adolph Hitler.” &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; A year later The German Workers Party was formed when this merged with another group, the Political Workers' Circle. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Shoah Resource Center, http://www1.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Microsoft%20Word%20-%205946.pdf &amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Germanculture.com, http://www.germanculture.com.ua/library/weekly/aa012400b.htm&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
It was Adolf Hitler, who joined the party and was put in charge of propaganda in 1920, who transformed this small group into what we now know as the Nazi Party through his great skill in politics and public speaking. That same year the words “National Socialist” were added to the party name and it became “The National Socialist German Workers Party” (NSDAP).  The Storm Troopers (Sturmabteilung, [[Brownshirts|SA]]) in their distinctive brown uniforms, were organized first to kick out hecklers at Nazi meetings, then to break up the meetings of other parties. The hakenkreuz (literally: ''hooked cross''), or the [[swastika]], was adopted in the party’s flag. By the following summer, Hitler himself had taken over as leader (de: Führer) of the party.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*Here we have the core of Nazism: (i) a very strong dose of German anti-semitism (with a paranoid belief in a conspiracy between Jewish financiers who control the capitalist economy and steal from the Germans, Jewish liberal intellectuals who preach humanism and enfeeble the Germans, and Jewish communists who seek to enslave the Germans; (ii) a belief in the German nation and the &amp;quot;aryan&amp;quot; German race as an entity with a special, heroic destiny; (iii) war as the ultimate test of national strength and worth; and (iv) conquest--with extermination or removal of the resident population--to create more &amp;quot;living space&amp;quot; or the German people and larger fields for the German farmers. Add to this (a) the &amp;quot;leadership principle&amp;quot;--a hatred of parliamentary institutions, and a belief that a good political order sees an inspired leader giving people vision and commands (rather than see parliamentarians haggle and compromise on behalf of interest groups)--(b) the use of terror to obtain obedience, and (c) the desire to make sure that all of society's organizations serve the national cause, and you have Nazism. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://econ161.berkeley.edu/TCEH/Slouch_Alternatives12.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Anti-Semitism==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Nazis were highly [[Anti-Semitism|anti-Semitic]] and blamed the Jews for many of the problems in Germany, such as the defeat in [[World War I]]. &lt;br /&gt;
The Nazis passed the [[Nuremberg Laws]] in 1935 which stated that:&lt;br /&gt;
* Young German women could not work for Jews in the domestic services.&lt;br /&gt;
* Jews were no longer citizens of Germany (this meant that they had no protection from the police and so were susceptible to attack)&lt;br /&gt;
* Jewish doctors were not allowed to treat Germans/Aryans&lt;br /&gt;
* Jews could not marry Germans/Aryans&lt;br /&gt;
They made laws against Jews (&amp;quot;Rassengesetze&amp;quot;, ''race laws'') which places successively tighter restrictions on the rights of Jews to own property, use public services, live in some areas, enter public spaces and eventually required Jews  wear a [[Star of David]] on their clothing. &lt;br /&gt;
The Jews were mistreated, persecuted, and killed by the Nazis.  &lt;br /&gt;
The Nazi state also persecuted other political opponents, [[Jehovah's Witnesses]], [[Freemasons]], and foreign nationals. [[homosexuality|Homosexuals]]&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Hans Peter Bleuel, ''Sex and Society in Nazi Germany'', (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1973).&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;came under increasing scrutiny and persecution in the later years of the regime.  &lt;br /&gt;
The Nazis exterminated at least 11 million civilians by rounding them up, transporting them to concentration camps and then murdering them there. About 6 million of these were Jews (see [[Holocaust]]).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Atheism==&lt;br /&gt;
Nazis were largely [[atheist]]/[[pagan]] in motivation. A survey of Nazi prisoners of war in 1941 found that 50% gave 'nature' as their religion when being processed for POW camps, 40% 'Hitler' and the rest 'atheist'&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Newcastle Journal and North Mail, 31 January 1941&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Economic planning==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Nazi.jpg|thumb|left|250px|&amp;quot;With our flags is our victory&amp;quot;]]&lt;br /&gt;
James Burnham, a former [[Trotskyite]] who served with the [[Office of Strategic Services]] (OSS) during the World War II and later contributed to the ''[[National Review]]'', described  the Nazi regime's [[economic planning]].  Burnham pointed out how the original &amp;quot;workers revolution&amp;quot; of [[Marxism]] had in fact become a managerial revolution in all societies were Socialism had been embraced.  Writing in 1940, Burnham noted,&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{Cquote|Outright state ownership and operation, advancing in all fields, are particularly ascendant in the extensive areas of new enterprise opened up during the Nazi rule....virtually all economic enterprise is subject to rigid state control; and it is control which we have seen to be decisive in relation to the instruments of production. Legal forms, even income privileges, are in the end subordinate to ''de facto'' control. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Even where private owners still exist in Germany, the decisions about &amp;quot;their&amp;quot; property are not in their hands. They do not decide what to make or not to make. They do not establish prices or bargain about wages. They are not at liberty to buy the raw materials they might choose nor to seek the most profitable markets. They cannot, as a rule, decide how to invest or not invest their surplus funds. In short, they are no longer owners, no longer effective [[capitalist]]s...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The regulation of production in Germany is no longer left to the market. What is to be produced, and how much, is decided, deliberately, by groups of men, by the state boards and bureaus and commissions. It is they that decide whether a new plant shall be built or an old plant retired, how raw materials shall be allotted and orders distributed, what quotas must be fulfilled by various branches of industry, what goods shall be put aside for export, how prices shall be fixed and credit and exchange extended. There is no requirement that these decisions of the bureaus must be based on any profit aim in the capitalist sense. If it is thought expedient, for whatever reason, to produce, for example, an ersatz rubber or wool or food, this will be done even if the production entails, from a capitalist point of view, a heavy loss. Similarly, in order to accumulate foreign exchange or to stimulate some political effect in a foreign nation, goods will be exported regardless of loss. A factory may be compelled to shut down, even though it could operate at a high profit. Banks and individuals are forced to invest their funds with no reference to the private and voluntary opinions about &amp;quot;risks&amp;quot; from a profit standpoint. It is literally true to say that the Nazi economy, already, is not a &amp;quot;profit economy.&amp;quot; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The workers, on their side, are no longer the &amp;quot;free proletarians&amp;quot; of capitalism. Under Nazism the workers are indeed, free from unemployment. At the same time they cannot, as individuals or through their own independent organizations, bargain for wages or change jobs at will. They are assigned to their tasks, and their labor conditions are fixed, by the decisions of the state bureaus and commissions. Millions of them are allotted to the vast state enterprises. ...With the reduction in the area of private enterprise and the increase of state enterprise, goes also a corresponding reduction in the social position of the private capitalists. So far as control over the instruments of production goes, the capitalists are already near the bottom. As to income privilege: a recent estimate by a New York statistician gives as a mere 5% the share of the German national income going to profits and interest. This is a substantial reduction from the 1933 figures, in spite of a huge increase in the total national income, which, under capitalism, would normally be accompanied by a percentage increase in profits. ...f the German capitalists' 5%, the greater part is appropriated by the state as taxes and &amp;quot;contributions.&amp;quot; ...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
...how seldom we find a manager among the voluntary or forced exiles from Nazi Germany! There are artists and writers among the exiles, ideologists and politicians, unassailable foes of the new regime, storekeepers and professionals and teachers, and not a few capitalists, both Jews and Christians. But almost never a manager....Germany is to-day a managerial state in an early stage. Structurally, it is less advanced along managerial lines than Russia; ...though structurally less advanced...Its industrial and technological foundation is far stronger; the rising managerial class is much larger, better trained, more able...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
...The first part of the second world war, up to the fall of France in June, 1940, was in reality the continuation of the strategic extension begun in 1935. This phase, the consolidation of the European base, was completed with France's surrender. It is completed irreversibly and can no longer be undone whatever the outcome of the succeeding phases of the war, which are really other wars. This consolidation fundamental to the world politics of managerial society, is not going to be dissolved, not even if the present German regime is utterly defeated. The day of a Europe carved into a score of sovereign states is over; if the states remain, they will be little more than administrative units in a larger collectivity. &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;James Burnham, ''The Managerial Revolution'', Indiana University Press, Bloomingham 1966, pgs. 222-226, 232.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==References==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references/&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==See Also==&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Anti-Semitism]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Adolf Hitler]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==External links==&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://econ161.berkeley.edu/TCEH/Slouch_Alternatives12.html Marxism, Fascism, Nazism] - Brad DeLong, Associate Professor of Economics, University of California at Berkeley&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:World War II]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Germany]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Holocaust]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Political Parties]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Fascist States]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Nazis]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Liberalism]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>LewisW</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Essay:Greatest_Mysteries_of_World_History&amp;diff=621171</id>
		<title>Talk:Essay:Greatest Mysteries of World History</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Essay:Greatest_Mysteries_of_World_History&amp;diff=621171"/>
		<updated>2009-02-09T17:01:30Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;LewisW: /* Humor */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Dark Ages==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I have to ask: does this really qualify as a &amp;quot;mystery?&amp;quot;  Most people who have actually taken the time to study European history, I would suggest, would say that there's a clear and simple answer: &amp;quot;No, the so-called &amp;quot;Dark Ages&amp;quot; weren't really so backwards.&amp;quot;  Significant advances were made during the period generally termed the &amp;quot;Dark Ages&amp;quot; in many fields: music, agriculture, metallurgy, and philosophy spring to mind immediately.  Historians today generally avoid using the term &amp;quot;Dark Ages&amp;quot; for precisely that reason.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Should it really be termed a &amp;quot;mystery&amp;quot; just because some people continue to hold misconceptions about it?  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 14:11, 28 December 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
: Yes, it's not a mystery at all.  Renaissance humanists hated the &amp;quot;dark ages&amp;quot; with a passion. Now we know just how much science and culture were developed during those centuries.  Not so much a mystery as a myth, really (liberals love to claim early Christian Europe was fruitless) [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 14:14, 28 December 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::Perhaps a better question would be &amp;quot;Why are the advances of the early Middle Ages frequently overlooked or dismissed?&amp;quot;  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 14:19, 28 December 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Humor==&lt;br /&gt;
Perhaps this entry could be clarified: is there a particular form of humor that the author had in mind? There are examples of jokes, riddles, puns, comic figurines/images, anthropoligical notes of humorous conversations, etc. from both pre-Christian times and from post-Christian 'first contacts' with cultures that had had no previous exposure to Christianity.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] 09:37, 8 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:Brossa: Can you provide some? --[[User:AbnerY|AbnerY]] 21:51, 8 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:I'd like to see Brossa's alleged examples also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:49, 8 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::How about Greek and Roman comedy? that way predated Christianity. Andy, what kind of claim are you making here? on what basis would you allege that humor does not predate Christianity? it seems pretty far-fetched. I'd like to see some evidence. --[[User:DaveClark|DaveClark]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::: You misunderstand what a Greek &amp;quot;comedy&amp;quot; was.  It was not a humorous performance as meant by the term today (after the onset of Christianity).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 08:32, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::: Yes. It was. The intention was to make people laugh. Otherwise, what on earth do you mean by &amp;quot;humor&amp;quot;? Also.. news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7536918.stm [[User:KimSell|KimSell]] 09:02, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::: Aschlafly is right in saying that the term &amp;quot;comedy&amp;quot; did not mean exactly what it does today, but KimSell is right that the works of playwrights such as Aristophanes certainly included humorous elements such as wordplay, farce and grotesque exaggeration (often surprisingly coarse by our standards). I'd also cite the episode where the children mocked Elisha in 2 Kings 2:23-24 as an example, albeit fairly base, of pre-Christian humor.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 09:10, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::: As a side-note, in the past there have been bitter disputes where people have taken the polar opposite position to Mr Schlafly, ie that all humor is un-Christian. This is touched on in Umberto Eco's ''The Name of the Rose'', which I recommend.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 09:21, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::::: The pre-Christian examples don't withstand scrutiny.  Mockery or crude comments are not quality humor, and may not be humor at all.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:23, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
:::::::Sorry Mr. Schlafly. While you may not consider crude comments humorous, it is still defined as humor. you are yet to back up the claim you're making with any specific evidense. even if greek comedy didn't qualify as humor (and it does) there would still be no evidence that the advent of christianity brought the advent of humor.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::This will be easier if you define precisely what ''you'' mean by 'humor' or 'comedy' so that we can determine if in fact it did or did not exist before Christianity. As the essay stands now, it implies that there was no ''humor'' before Christianity, not that, say, stand-up comedy as practiced in the United States today did not exist in the ancient world. The Greek comedy tradition was well-established by the sixth century BC and contains aspects of sexual farce, parody of 'serious' literary styles, and mockery of specific political and public figures. Comic performers wore characteristic costumes that included fat suits, huge genitalia, and grotesque masks that are still in use in modern comic performances. Greek vases depict these comic characters engaged in antics; I recall in particular a vase depicting two grotesque dwarves helping a third dwarf up a ladder or ramp - Three Stooges level humor.&lt;br /&gt;
::::Isaac in the Bible got his name from the laughter of Abraham and Sarah; does this not indicate a sense of humor? Elijah mocks the prophets of Baal, including the suggestion that Baal cannot hear his priests because he is on the toilet.&lt;br /&gt;
::::Egyptian papyri show exaggerated caricatures of dishevelled older men engaged in sexual relations with young women, including humorous captions (in heiroglyphics!) detailing the women's commentary on the situation. Other examples of Egyptian pictorial humor include depictions of animals engaged in human activities - like cats herding geese and goats and lions playing board games - juxtaposed with humans engaged in animal activity. A foreign queen is depicted as being so fat that she stands next to an ass with the caption 'the ass needed to carry the queen'. &lt;br /&gt;
::::Sumerian scatological humor is recorded (in cuneiform) on a tablet dated to 1900 BC.&lt;br /&gt;
::::Many Native American groups had oral traditions that include the 'Trickster' figure, who gets involved in humorous scrapes and mocks authority figures. Many of these stories also include punning wordplay and practical jokes; another dimension of humor.&lt;br /&gt;
::::Nineteenth century Australian ethnographers, coming into first contact with an isolated Aboriginal group, noted that the Aboriginals told stories among themselves and laughed during an otherwise stressful time - in this case, a terrible thunderstorm.&lt;br /&gt;
::::I'm sure that others could contribute examples from Sanskrit or Asian cultures.&lt;br /&gt;
::::So scatological humor, sexual humor, puns, riddles, slapstick, political satire, parody of 'serious' art forms, practical jokes, and others are all documented in pre-Christian or non-Christian cultures.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] 09:40, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::: To one with an open mind, your vulgar &amp;quot;examples&amp;quot; tend to reinforce the basic observation: (real) humor was lacking before Christianity.  Crudeness or vulgarity or mockery is not true humor, and Greek &amp;quot;comedies&amp;quot; were not attempts at humor in today's sense.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::: If you had evidence of writings about humor itself, or books of humor, or truly comedic performances, or anything remotely similar to quality humor today, then that could help your argument.  But the above examples, if they are the best you have, simply underscore the insight in this essay.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:54, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::::::: It would have been simpler for you to have simply started with the statement that no 'true humor' existed before Christianity, so that we would have known what sort of Scotsman we were dealing with in the first place. At any rate, the Japanese had [http://www.conservapedia.com/Noh_theater#What_is_Ky.C5.8Dgen.3F mature forms of theater] designed to &amp;quot;draw rich laughter from the audience&amp;quot; before Christianity was introduced to Japan.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] 11:02, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::::::Have you ever watched an ancient Greek comedy? Because I have, and in parts, they are downright hilarious. As people keep saying, you have not explained what you mean by &amp;quot;humor&amp;quot; and so, this conversation would seem to be pointless. However, Aristotle speaks of the history of Greek comedy, including the fact that it was funny! [[User:KimSell|KimSell]] 10:39, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::::: May I ask what is the earliest example of true humor that you know of? While I respect the viewpoint that the above examples are not real humor, I don't know of any new form that emerged very soon after the establishment of Christianity.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 10:30, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::::::If you are so adament about so called &amp;quot;genuine humor&amp;quot; mr. Schlafly, then please define it for us.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>LewisW</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Essay:Greatest_Mysteries_of_World_History&amp;diff=621170</id>
		<title>Talk:Essay:Greatest Mysteries of World History</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Essay:Greatest_Mysteries_of_World_History&amp;diff=621170"/>
		<updated>2009-02-09T17:00:58Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;LewisW: /* Humor */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Dark Ages==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I have to ask: does this really qualify as a &amp;quot;mystery?&amp;quot;  Most people who have actually taken the time to study European history, I would suggest, would say that there's a clear and simple answer: &amp;quot;No, the so-called &amp;quot;Dark Ages&amp;quot; weren't really so backwards.&amp;quot;  Significant advances were made during the period generally termed the &amp;quot;Dark Ages&amp;quot; in many fields: music, agriculture, metallurgy, and philosophy spring to mind immediately.  Historians today generally avoid using the term &amp;quot;Dark Ages&amp;quot; for precisely that reason.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Should it really be termed a &amp;quot;mystery&amp;quot; just because some people continue to hold misconceptions about it?  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 14:11, 28 December 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
: Yes, it's not a mystery at all.  Renaissance humanists hated the &amp;quot;dark ages&amp;quot; with a passion. Now we know just how much science and culture were developed during those centuries.  Not so much a mystery as a myth, really (liberals love to claim early Christian Europe was fruitless) [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 14:14, 28 December 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::Perhaps a better question would be &amp;quot;Why are the advances of the early Middle Ages frequently overlooked or dismissed?&amp;quot;  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 14:19, 28 December 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Humor==&lt;br /&gt;
Perhaps this entry could be clarified: is there a particular form of humor that the author had in mind? There are examples of jokes, riddles, puns, comic figurines/images, anthropoligical notes of humorous conversations, etc. from both pre-Christian times and from post-Christian 'first contacts' with cultures that had had no previous exposure to Christianity.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] 09:37, 8 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:Brossa: Can you provide some? --[[User:AbnerY|AbnerY]] 21:51, 8 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:I'd like to see Brossa's alleged examples also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:49, 8 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::How about Greek and Roman comedy? that way predated Christianity. Andy, what kind of claim are you making here? on what basis would you allege that humor does not predate Christianity? it seems pretty far-fetched. I'd like to see some evidence. --[[User:DaveClark|DaveClark]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::: You misunderstand what a Greek &amp;quot;comedy&amp;quot; was.  It was not a humorous performance as meant by the term today (after the onset of Christianity).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 08:32, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::: Yes. It was. The intention was to make people laugh. Otherwise, what on earth do you mean by &amp;quot;humor&amp;quot;? Also.. news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7536918.stm [[User:KimSell|KimSell]] 09:02, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::: Aschlafly is right in saying that the term &amp;quot;comedy&amp;quot; did not mean exactly what it does today, but KimSell is right that the works of playwrights such as Aristophanes certainly included humorous elements such as wordplay, farce and grotesque exaggeration (often surprisingly coarse by our standards). I'd also cite the episode where the children mocked Elisha in 2 Kings 2:23-24 as an example, albeit fairly base, of pre-Christian humor.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 09:10, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::: As a side-note, in the past there have been bitter disputes where people have taken the polar opposite position to Mr Schlafly, ie that all humor is un-Christian. This is touched on in Umberto Eco's ''The Name of the Rose'', which I recommend.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 09:21, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::::: The pre-Christian examples don't withstand scrutiny.  Mockery or crude comments are not quality humor, and may not be humor at all.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:23, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
:::::::Sorry Mr. Schlafly. While you may not consider crude comments humorous, it is still defined as humor. you are yet to back up the claim you're making with any specific evidense. even if greek comedy didn't qualify as humor (and it does) there would still be no evidence that the advent of christianity brought the advent of humor.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::This will be easier if you define precisely what ''you'' mean by 'humor' or 'comedy' so that we can determine if in fact it did or did not exist before Christianity. As the essay stands now, it implies that there was no ''humor'' before Christianity, not that, say, stand-up comedy as practiced in the United States today did not exist in the ancient world. The Greek comedy tradition was well-established by the sixth century BC and contains aspects of sexual farce, parody of 'serious' literary styles, and mockery of specific political and public figures. Comic performers wore characteristic costumes that included fat suits, huge genitalia, and grotesque masks that are still in use in modern comic performances. Greek vases depict these comic characters engaged in antics; I recall in particular a vase depicting two grotesque dwarves helping a third dwarf up a ladder or ramp - Three Stooges level humor.&lt;br /&gt;
::::Isaac in the Bible got his name from the laughter of Abraham and Sarah; does this not indicate a sense of humor? Elijah mocks the prophets of Baal, including the suggestion that Baal cannot hear his priests because he is on the toilet.&lt;br /&gt;
::::Egyptian papyri show exaggerated caricatures of dishevelled older men engaged in sexual relations with young women, including humorous captions (in heiroglyphics!) detailing the women's commentary on the situation. Other examples of Egyptian pictorial humor include depictions of animals engaged in human activities - like cats herding geese and goats and lions playing board games - juxtaposed with humans engaged in animal activity. A foreign queen is depicted as being so fat that she stands next to an ass with the caption 'the ass needed to carry the queen'. &lt;br /&gt;
::::Sumerian scatological humor is recorded (in cuneiform) on a tablet dated to 1900 BC.&lt;br /&gt;
::::Many Native American groups had oral traditions that include the 'Trickster' figure, who gets involved in humorous scrapes and mocks authority figures. Many of these stories also include punning wordplay and practical jokes; another dimension of humor.&lt;br /&gt;
::::Nineteenth century Australian ethnographers, coming into first contact with an isolated Aboriginal group, noted that the Aboriginals told stories among themselves and laughed during an otherwise stressful time - in this case, a terrible thunderstorm.&lt;br /&gt;
::::I'm sure that others could contribute examples from Sanskrit or Asian cultures.&lt;br /&gt;
::::So scatological humor, sexual humor, puns, riddles, slapstick, political satire, parody of 'serious' art forms, practical jokes, and others are all documented in pre-Christian or non-Christian cultures.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] 09:40, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::: To one with an open mind, your vulgar &amp;quot;examples&amp;quot; tend to reinforce the basic observation: (real) humor was lacking before Christianity.  Crudeness or vulgarity or mockery is not true humor, and Greek &amp;quot;comedies&amp;quot; were not attempts at humor in today's sense.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::: If you had evidence of writings about humor itself, or books of humor, or truly comedic performances, or anything remotely similar to quality humor today, then that could help your argument.  But the above examples, if they are the best you have, simply underscore the insight in this essay.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:54, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::::::: It would have been simpler for you to have simply started with the statement that no 'true humor' existed before Christianity, so that we would have known what sort of Scotsman we were dealing with in the first place. At any rate, the Japanese had [http://www.conservapedia.com/Noh_theater#What_is_Ky.C5.8Dgen.3F mature forms of theater] designed to &amp;quot;draw rich laughter from the audience&amp;quot; before Christianity was introduced to Japan.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] 11:02, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::::::Have you ever watched an ancient Greek comedy? Because I have, and in parts, they are downright hilarious. As people keep saying, you have not explained what you mean by &amp;quot;humor&amp;quot; and so, this conversation would seem to be pointless. However, Aristotle speaks of the history of Greek comedy, including the fact that it was funny! [[User:KimSell|KimSell]] 10:39, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::::: May I ask what is the earliest example of true humor that you know of? While I respect the viewpoint that the above examples are not real humor, I don't know of any new form that emerged very soon after the establishment of Christianity.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 10:30, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::::::If you are so adament about so called &amp;quot;genuine humor&amp;quot;, then please define it for us.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>LewisW</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Essay:Greatest_Mysteries_of_World_History&amp;diff=621121</id>
		<title>Talk:Essay:Greatest Mysteries of World History</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Essay:Greatest_Mysteries_of_World_History&amp;diff=621121"/>
		<updated>2009-02-09T14:32:33Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;LewisW: /* Humor */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;==Dark Ages==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I have to ask: does this really qualify as a &amp;quot;mystery?&amp;quot;  Most people who have actually taken the time to study European history, I would suggest, would say that there's a clear and simple answer: &amp;quot;No, the so-called &amp;quot;Dark Ages&amp;quot; weren't really so backwards.&amp;quot;  Significant advances were made during the period generally termed the &amp;quot;Dark Ages&amp;quot; in many fields: music, agriculture, metallurgy, and philosophy spring to mind immediately.  Historians today generally avoid using the term &amp;quot;Dark Ages&amp;quot; for precisely that reason.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Should it really be termed a &amp;quot;mystery&amp;quot; just because some people continue to hold misconceptions about it?  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 14:11, 28 December 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
: Yes, it's not a mystery at all.  Renaissance humanists hated the &amp;quot;dark ages&amp;quot; with a passion. Now we know just how much science and culture were developed during those centuries.  Not so much a mystery as a myth, really (liberals love to claim early Christian Europe was fruitless) [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 14:14, 28 December 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::Perhaps a better question would be &amp;quot;Why are the advances of the early Middle Ages frequently overlooked or dismissed?&amp;quot;  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 14:19, 28 December 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Humor==&lt;br /&gt;
Perhaps this entry could be clarified: is there a particular form of humor that the author had in mind? There are examples of jokes, riddles, puns, comic figurines/images, anthropoligical notes of humorous conversations, etc. from both pre-Christian times and from post-Christian 'first contacts' with cultures that had had no previous exposure to Christianity.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] 09:37, 8 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:Brossa: Can you provide some? --[[User:AbnerY|AbnerY]] 21:51, 8 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:I'd like to see Brossa's alleged examples also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:49, 8 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::How about Greek and Roman comedy? that way predated Christianity. Andy, what kind of claim are you making here? on what basis would you allege that humor does not predate Christianity? it seems pretty far-fetched. I'd like to see some evidence. --[[User:DaveClark|DaveClark]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::: You misunderstand what a Greek &amp;quot;comedy&amp;quot; was.  It was not a humorous performance as meant by the term today (after the onset of Christianity).--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 08:32, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::: Yes. It was. The intention was to make people laugh. Otherwise, what on earth do you mean by &amp;quot;humor&amp;quot;? Also.. news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7536918.stm [[User:KimSell|KimSell]] 09:02, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::: Aschlafly is right in saying that the term &amp;quot;comedy&amp;quot; did not mean exactly what it does today, but KimSell is right that the works of playwrights such as Aristophanes certainly included humorous elements such as wordplay, farce and grotesque exaggeration (often surprisingly coarse by our standards). I'd also cite the episode where the children mocked Elisha in 2 Kings 2:23-24 as an example, albeit fairly base, of pre-Christian humor.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 09:10, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::::: As a side-note, in the past there have been bitter disputes where people have taken the polar opposite position to Mr Schlafly, ie that all humor is un-Christian. This is touched on in Umberto Eco's ''The Name of the Rose'', which I recommend.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 09:21, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::::: The pre-Christian examples don't withstand scrutiny.  Mockery or crude comments are not quality humor, and may not be humor at all.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:23, 9 February 2009 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
:::::::Sorry Mr. Schlafly. While you may not consider crude comments humorous, it is still defined as humor. you are yet to back up the claim you're making with any specific evidense. even if greek comedy didn't qualify as humor (and it does) there would still be no evidence that the advent of christianity brought the advent of humor.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>LewisW</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>