What will we call the 2000-2009 decade?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Richard87
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the naming of the decade from 2000 to 2009, often referred to as "the Naughties" or "the Oughts." Participants express frustration over the lack of a universally accepted name and debate the significance of the decade, citing major events such as 9/11 and the global financial crisis. The conversation highlights the confusion surrounding the concept of a "year zero" and how it affects perceptions of decades. Ultimately, the consensus leans towards informal names like "Twenty-Os" or "Dumb0s," reflecting a mix of humor and nostalgia.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of decade naming conventions
  • Familiarity with significant historical events from 2000 to 2009
  • Knowledge of cultural references and media influences
  • Basic grasp of chronological counting principles
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the historical significance of the 2000s decade
  • Explore the impact of major events like 9/11 on cultural perceptions
  • Investigate how decades are named and the implications of these names
  • Examine the role of media in shaping public memory of decades
USEFUL FOR

Historians, cultural analysts, and anyone interested in the societal impacts of the early 21st century will benefit from this discussion.

  • #31
old people are itt
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
lisab said:
But the last decade...wow. It's been a slog. Maybe that was our test...?
If that was our test, we should consider ourselves lucky. It wasn't anywhere close to as rough as the '60s or '70s.
 
  • #33
lisab said:
I agree, it's been rocky.

I remember talking with a woman who was about my age, just a few weeks before the Y2K "disaster"...she was one of those who was nearly hysterical about it.

I told her I wasn't so worried, every generation gets tested. There was the Great Depression, WWII, the turbulent events of the 60s...but those of us who came of age in the 70s and 80s, we haven't had our test yet. I was confident we'd do just fine.

Well, we all know Y2K was a bust!

But the last decade...wow. It's been a slog. Maybe that was our test...?

Yeah, okay, but who was doing the testing? Because, you know why? I want to have a serious one-on-one discussion with that person. Seriously.
 
  • #34
Astronuc said:
I think that's a reflection on 9/11, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, flare up between Israelis & Palesitinians...
As wars go, they don't stack up real well to the wars of the 20th century.
...the hurricanes (Katrina, Rita, Ike) in US, Typhoon Ingrid (2005) in Australia, other Typhoons between 2001 and 2009 ravaging S.E. Asia and W. Pacific nations, 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake & tsunamis (230,000 killed), earthquakes (Gujarat, 2001; Kashmir/N. Pakistan 2005; Sumatran & Saomoa, 2009), 2006 European floods, 2007 Australian floods, 2009 fires in Victoria, Australia (173 fatalities, 414 injured, 1.1 million acres burned, many structures destroyed) and numerous other bushfires in Australia 2001-2009...
Natural disasters? Really? Only one of those is worth mentioning (the tsunami). None of the rest would probably even register on a top 100 list.
the global financial crisis, . . . ..
Almost as bad as the 1970s!

I guess you could say that the 2000s were one of the worst decades since WWII... But since there were only 6, being second or third worst isn't saying all that much. Yeah, it kinda sucked a little, but "decade from hell"? Sensationalism at its worst.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
848
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
483
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
4K