World-wide, who do you think is the most damaging, most evil, or just plain most pathetically dislikable individual? Please exclude anyone from the 1970’s on: they haven’t had enough time to compete fairly.
My vote? Kaiser Wilhelm by a country mile. Out of everyone in history, he was the most damaging. His obstinance, if hardly solely the cause for WWI, certainly contributed more than other factors (and I’m sympathetic to Germany as a whole in that war!). His actions and the actions of his supporters led to the failure of the Weimar Republic (itself despicable for other reasons), the rise of Nazism, and the eruption of Russian power on the world stage. In short, Kaiser Wilhelm’s pride probably led to hundreds of millions of deaths and countless millions living in totalitarian or authortarian rulers.
They might have lived in another form of authortarianism, but probably not as bad as it was.
Indirectly, the Nazis flooded the Middle East and some othe 3rd-world nations with authortarian models, which led to much of the hatred and pain all over the world wherever Muslims dwell today.
I may be painting a bullseye on my forehead, but I’d have to go with Paul of Tarsos. Virtually every bad, boring, guiltridden, narrowminded, stupid, pointless and destructive aspect of Christianity comes from him. While his body count may be lower than Kaiser Wilhelm’s he has ruined more lives than any other human being, and he keeps on ruining them today, almost two thousand years after his death. I’d wager he’ll go on ruining lives for centuries to come.
I nominate whoever was the first person in history to say: “This truth that I lay before you is the word of God, and there is no other truth. Those who do not accept it must die.”
How was Kaiser Wilhelm responsible for the eruption of Soviet power? Was it due to the fact that problems from WW1 pushed Russia over the edge, leading to a communist revolt?
I’d nominate Mao Tse Teng (or whatever your preferred spelling is). In addition to those killed in his own nation he provided one of the legs on which the Domino Theory rested.
Yes. Also, if it hadn’t been for fascism, Stalin probably would have confined his paranoia to Russia itself.
of course, Gavrilo Princip goes into the same bucket as Kaiser Wilhelm; such is life.
Huh? It’s not Marx’s fault that the Communism ideal and the power gained from revolutions got hijacked by authoritarian psychopaths. If we’re going to blame individuals for acts erroneously attributed to their teachings, then I guess Jesus and Mohammed are going to appear high up in the list.
There is some question whether Paul wrote all the letters attributed to him.
I find it hard to believe the same person that wrote the beautiful Love chapter in Corinthians could be the one who wrote some of the doctrine of punishment in the later letters. I believe there were two “Pauls” one good and one who decided to build churches in any manner.
If you want to know the heart of Jesus and Christianity read only the Love chapter, and try to follow the message.
I admit, I was not very impressed with the teachings of Mohammed. yes, I have a Koran, and I am also Christian, so I may be biased. Some good, some decidedly not so.
No, he’s got a point. Das Kapital is full of hatred and the wildest lies directed at “the bourgousie,” often to a laughable degree. Certainly, the later Communists used Marx’s venom as a model for their own. Marx’s assertions of historical prophecy arguable prove he had a god complex, which probably rubbed off on some of the mighty Communist leaders.
It’s also hard to say the revolution was hijacked by the people who made it possible. You can argue that for Russia, but nowhere else.
That’s a complex question. European powers did conquer much of the world (and I would argue that South America today is a legacy of Spain’s policies). On the other hand, they were virtually never as harsh or as brutal as any of the totalitarian governments, and when they were it was for a shorter and more focused time (i.e., a massacre and not a system of oppression). They were conquerers and rulers, but not outright tyrants.