Yup I think that is shocking. I don't think that Di's death did anything in Britain except start a new craze of public mourning. Granted it's never nice when someone dies/is murdered but 10 years ago you wouldn't get things happening like you do now.

For example the deaths of Jessica & Holly recently was an awful tragedy, two small defencless children who have seemingly had their lives ended to satisfy some weirdo's craving. However why does this justify having a minutes silence before national sporting events?? Why are there books of condolence??

Don't get me wrong I feel very sorry for the parents of Holly & Jessica however in Britain over the next week or two there will probably be another child killed(it's a very very sad fact of life). Will we have a minutes silence for them? Will we have books of condolence for them? No because the media needs a certain look to get the nation to enter it's national mourning mode.

End of rant, back to topic...

The most significant events that I can think off are, September 11th(It's changed the way most people think about flying and national security in this country even if it happened in USA), World War 2(If we'd lost we'd all be speaking German now), the invention of televison and computers(both things which have affected our lives in so many ways)

Milky I agree completely with your rant on the whole Jessica & Holly saga. The media have whipped everyone into a frenzy so they can sell more newspapers...

World Wars
Burning of the Bra's
The cracking of the Enigma code
Computers
The Internet

Yes there are los of things that have happened in the last 100 years but one person dieing sad though it is, are not earth changing in the scheme of things.

The things that change countrys and how people live are the big things.

Totally agree with what everyone else has said - there is no way that Diana's death was of any historical significance. And as for Holly and Jessica, the mass hysteria reminded me of nothing more than the reaction to Diana's death. Can't people just leave the families alone to deal with picking up the pieces of their shattered lives?

Rant over - back to significant events...

In no particular order, just what came into my head:

WWI (prolonged trench warfare, shell shock, conscription - a totally different kind of war)

The abdication of Edward VIII - can be seen as starting the shift in public perception of the monarchy that took place in the last century.

The introduction of the Welfare State.

The extension of the vote to cover all citizens over the age of 18 - 100 years ago a lot of men were barred from voting, let alone women!

The Beatles.

The Blitz (WWII in general, but I think that the Blitz was what had most impact on people's lives, the war itself was not that different from WWI).

Public protest - started with CND and the Greenham Common peace camp, now road protesters, eco-warriors...

The introduction of restrictions on licensing hours during WWI.

Increased communications with the rest of the world - Britain has become a much more cosmopolitan society, in terms of culture, diet, business - and we're slowly working towards being a true multicultural society.

Vastly increased standards of education for the general public.

Hmmmm - I see I take a Marxist view of history - that what is significant is the factors contributing to social change rather than individual events, however much they may stand out

I'd agree with Milky that September 11th was, for me, the most significant event, even though it's not 'offically' British History. For any event to be truly significant, it has to effect life many years later. The Battle of 1066, in my opinion, is the most significant war, since it made our culture and country what it is today.

Bleh, that makes me really angry. Are there really people stupid enough to think that Diana's death was an important event? Yes, it was very sad but people die all the time (my dad died a few days earlier so I REALLY didn't care about her) and it hasn't remotely changed the way we live. As for what I think are the most significant events, well...

First World War
Women getting the vote
ROCK MUSIC! YEAH!
The pill
Internet

Probably some others I can't think of.

One small point. You all go on about Diana's death being un-important because it's very minor in the 'grand scale of things'. BUT less than a week ago you all were "oh no Hollie and Jessica" "boo hoo, it's the most significant thing ever".

Vix was one of the few exception, but the rest of you were pretty unanimous on this topic. I'm just mentioning it because when I said it wasn't significant, I got shouted down.

---

by KeiranFrost
Vix was one of the few exception, but the rest of you were pretty unanimous on this topic. I'm just mentioning it because when I said it wasn't significant, I got shouted down.

---

Actually, I agreed with your post on Holly and Jessica (for the first and probably last time). I just haven't had a lot of time for serious posts lately.

---

by KeiranFrost
For any event to be truly significant, it has to effect life many years later.

---

This is exactly why I didn't mention September 11. Who knows what the effect of that will be in 10 years' time? It still seems to me to be too recent to be called 'history', although it's very true that the significance of an event can't be confined to one nation any more.

Personally I think the Russians backing down over Cuba is a pretty big event, because how many minutes away was the world from nuclear war over that??

For info, the lists are:

British
1. That woman's death, 31/8/97 (22%)
2. Start of second world war, 3/9/39 (21%)
3. Women win the right to vote, 6/2/18 (15%)
4. Good Friday agreement signed, 10/4/98 (9%)
5. End of first world war, 11/11/18 (8%)
6. England won the World Cup, 30/7/66 (7%)
7. Coronation of Queen Lizzy 2, 2/6/53 (4%)
8. British troops land on Falkland Islands, 2/4/82 (4%)
9. John Lennon assassinated, 8.12.80 (2%)
10. Abdication of Edward VIII, 11/12/36 (1%)

World
1. World Trade Center (sic) attack, 11/9/2001 (41%)
2. Atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, ending WW2, 6/8/45 (19%) (notice huge difference)
3. Berlin Wall falls, ending Communism, 22/12/89 (11%)
4. Man lands on the moon, 20/7/69 (9%)
5. Nelson Mandela freed, 13/2/90 (9%)
6. End of WW1, 11/11/18 (2%)
7. Kennedy assassination, 22/11/63 (2%)
8. Pan Am flight 103 downed over Lockerbie, 21/12/88 (2%)
9. Vietnam war ceasefire signed, 27/1/73 (1%)
10. Tiananmen Square massacre, 4/6/89 (0%) (not sure how that computes, but never mind)

I won't surprise anyone by agreeing with the comments regarding 'That Women's Death'.

So, for my ego, here's my list:

World War II
The forming of the Israeli state
The formation of the Welfare State
Women getting the vote
The introduction of the age of consent for male adults

---

by White Hart
Who knows what the effect of that will be in 10 years' time? It still seems to me to be too recent to be called 'history', although it's very true that the significance of an event can't be confined to one nation any more

---

I agree the event is too recent to make judgement, but (ignoring Diana's death) it is the only big event to happen in my life time (I was too young to remember others). It shocked me, as did Diana's. I agree with everyone, her death wasn't 'significant', but it was unexpected, especially in the way she died.

September 11th will stay with me, always. I don't know, or can even judge if it's 'significant' for history, but it is to me, due to its scale of attrocity and backlash in my life time. I remember my friends crying, I remember Katie's concern for her family, not able to get through to America, to find out if they were okay. I remember the feel as I walked in the JCR and that there was little if any noise. It holds more signifance to me than any other event. It will, even if there aren't reprocutions that will mark history forever.

---

by White Hart
Actually, I agreed with your post on Holly and Jessica

---

I apologies, and retract the statement in relation to you, sorry

---

by KieranFrost
One small point. You all go on about Diana's death being un-important because it's very minor in the 'grand scale of things'. BUT less than a week ago you all were "oh no Hollie and Jessica" "boo hoo, it's the most significant thing ever".

---

I haven't read the Holly and Jessica post. Too depressing for people that I don't know and didn't even hear of them til they found the bodies. It's very, very sad, but like I said before, people die all the time, we can't mourn everyone. Not sure if that made any sense, too many commas....not enough actual sense....

i don't think Di's death should have been number one.

I don't think that Princess Diana's death should have been number one but i can see why it is. The majority of people that phone in and vote on these things aren't the sort that would put a lot of care and thought into what they are voting for and you also need to ask whether they have considered things as personally significant or national significant.

To me personnally, her death was significant - I can remember exactly what I was doing when I heard and given that I was doing A-level Media Studies at the time it happpened I have spent alot of time analysing media coverage before and after. Women getting the vote is significant to me but i have no connection at all with the second world war - though i can see its significance for the country as a whole.

So i don't think that it is a case of 'celebrity above substance' more that the History Channel should have thought more carefully before flippantly analysing their data.

Time to play Devil's Advocate:

While most of us are agreed that the impact of that woman's death was emotional, but of little substance or real consequence, may I suggest we are all missing the point?

While the examples most of us list are huge turning points in history, causing seismic shifts in our culture, maybe the importance of her death is not in what changes it brings about, but in the cultural changes the nations reaction signifies. All that mourning. All that grieving. Over someone who lived a life of extravagance at our expense. If nothing else, does not her death REFLECT the cultural shift, the importance of celebrity over substance, of the complete dominance of media sensation and hype upon our actions?

Maybe the History channel did miss the point. I mean, they are right, this is celebrity over substance. But maybe that is the point?

Just a thought...

*The majority of people that phone in and vote on these things aren't the sort that would put a lot of care and thought into what they are voting for*

But this was a survey, not a phone-in.

---

by Vix

10. Tiananmen Square massacre, 4/6/89 (0%) (not sure how that computes, but never mind)

---

The figures have been rounded to the nearest percent.

---

by Jayjay
Maybe the History channel did miss the point. I mean, they are right, this is celebrity over substance. But maybe that is the point?

---

Well, you don't commision a survey to actually determine the most significant events of the last hundred years.
So why did they comission the survey? In order to collect data on the prevailing culture, or just so that they knew what to make programmes about?

---

by Jayjay
While the examples most of us list are huge turning points in history, causing seismic shifts in our culture, maybe the importance of her death is not in what changes it brings about, but in the cultural changes the nations reaction signifies. All that mourning. All that grieving. Over someone who lived a life of extravagance at our expense. If nothing else, does not her death REFLECT the cultural shift, the importance of celebrity over substance, of the complete dominance of media sensation and hype upon our actions?

---

Or one could argue that even turning points are the culmination of events determined by the tensions within a culture or between the cultures of the time and therefore only a reflection of cultural changes themselves.

Which would be silly, but anyway.

---

by Jango
But this was a survey, not a phone-in.

---

And most people see people with a clipboard and avoid them.

Things hold a different significance for different people anyway so we cant really say it shouldnt be number one because it could have been deeply significant for a lot of people. IMO there are more significant things but thats my opinion.

As for me... no idea because things that are more significant to me are probably not to everyone else, off the top of my head,

WW2 (significant to me because both grandads fought and both grandmas worked in munitions factorys so it sort of seems more real)

The falklands

September 11th

Women getting the vote

Things that are strongly significant to me are more recent and more local things that have affected me such as,

Hillsborough

IRA bomb in Warrington

James Bulger

Toxteth riots

..stuff like that.