imagine being the dorks that got put next to hitler lmao

  • Dirt_Owl [comrade/them, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So what they have on this cover:

    Jesus, a man who may or may not have even existed

    Steve Jobs, a guy who did what exactly? Was a presenter for the iPhone?

    Oprah, was a talkshow host.

    What they don’t have:

    The Red Army and the Allies, who saved the world from the Nazis

    The essential workers who were forced to literally die or cripple themselves to work though covid and keep the world running.

        • Magician [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ve seen this technicality before, but it always feels hollow to me.

          Like yeah, hitler changed the world, but he was an opportunist at the right place at the right time when his style of rhetoric and politics appealed to a country going through the aftermath of a world war and the Great Depression.

          He didn’t change the world because of something clever or intrinsically special about him. He wasn’t special at all. That’s what makes fascism so dangerous.

          To describe him as a supernatural outlier of a person builds a myth that the things he did could only happen under the influence of a single charismatic person.

          Putting him on the list and the cover gives him credit he doesn’t deserve.

          • CannotSleep420@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            24
            ·
            1 year ago

            He didn’t change the world because of something clever or intrinsically special about him. He wasn’t special at all.

            No one is. Like the OP said. Great man theory, the magazine.

              • Collatz_problem [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                Synthesis: 1930s’ Soviet Union had a ton of great men, but the material conditions lead to one of them, who was the most fitting for the situation, becoming the general secretary.

                • space_comrade [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Synthesis: 1930s’ Soviet Union had a ton of great men, but the material conditions lead to one of them, who was the most fitting for the situation, becoming the general secretary.

                  I dunno this still smells like idealist thinking to me, it implies the material conditions have some metaphysical power to guide the right people to the right place. Considering how chaotic internal party politics were at the time Lenin could have easily been replaced by Trotsky or some other dildo like that. There could have also been a better person than Stalin for the job we can’t really know for sure. Also I’d wager the USSR would maybe still be standing today if Lenin had lived longer than he had and planned the transition of power better.

                • theposterformerlyknownasgood [she/her]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  1920s you mean. By the 30s I think the only other old bolshevik leaders still around were Lazar Kaganovich and Kalinin. Maybe Molotov if you count him.

                  Edit: I tell a lie. Bubov was still in government until 36

        • Łumało [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          It is one thing to recognize him and it is another to honor a place for him on the fucking cover. I don’t know, I just very much don’t like it.

  • AFineWayToDie [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    1 year ago

    Mother Teresa did not change anything. She positioned herself in some of the most impoverished areas of the world and told dying people how great their suffering was for their souls.

    • BelieveRevolt [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      She also accepted money from and defended “Baby Doc” Duvalier and corrupt businessmen.

      I think the Catholic Church just needed some kind of W after the allegations came out, and that’s why she was propped up. What I don’t understand is why in my non-Catholic country she was mentioned in school books as a great person.

  • 420stalin69@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    1 year ago

    POCs who changed the word: fought racism and imperialism

    White people who changed the world: got rich and / or were Hitler

    • oregoncom [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      one of the tech guru’s go-to stress relievers during the early days of Apple was to head to the company toilets and soak his bare feet in the toilet water. In fact, the guy had a little bit of a hygiene problem — Isaacson also revealed how Jobs was put on the night shift while he worked at game-maker Atari because he rarely bathed and would walk around the office in his bare feet

      • g_g [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        okay so what are the mechanics of this? is he… sitting on the floor and then putting his feet up and over the rim of the toilet bowl? is he standing in the toilet? did he bring a chair into a stall?

        • oregoncom [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          maybe he’s sitting on the tank? idk but this sounds so disgusting. Maybe his cancer came from chronic Hep C from doing this or something.

    • g_g [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 year ago

      The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as “the greatest or most significant or most influential” rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved.

      • Gosplan14_the_Third [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Beatles were the first band to accumulate a large, consumerist fanbase like we know of modern day examples ranging from Taylor Swift, to the niche bands. Their music is genuinely pretty good (Rubber Soul is their best album imo) and doesn’t really sound too dated.

        Lists of artists considered the best do often feature the Beatles at the very top, but that is both a regional preference geared towards the mostly American internet user-base and commercial film-making capacities and a circlejerk written to earn money, not inform. Other parts of the world might not care about music that’s apparently well liked in Anglo countries, among music nerds or the public. Also, subjective quality does not guarantee the band being seen as better. For example, the band De/Vision is imo a better Depeche Mode copycat than Camouflage imo, but it’s the latter who had commercial success.

        Really, the greatest [x] artist rankings are kinda useless, especially in music - but I’m just rambling.

  • wombat [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    the maoist uprising against the landlords was the largest and most comprehensive proletarian revolution in history, and led to almost totally-equal redistribution of land among the peasantry

  • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I remember the old edition from 90’s, first three were Newton, Jesus and Muhammad. Hitler wasn’t even included, only got the note that he should be pretty high but the change he brought was purely evil so fuck him.