4 ms·
If there's one thing you don't do, it's offer any criticism of Mother Theresa, no matter what information there is in the world about her outside of the perpetu
by pstack 15y ago
If there's one thing you don't do, it's offer any criticism of Mother Theresa, no matter what information there is in the world about her outside of the perpetuated religious and media portrayal of her to the masses.
If there's a second thing you don't do, it's offer any criticism of Ghandi.
People cling so irrationally to the persona that have been drilled into their head throughout their entire life that offering any insight or raising any contradictory perspectives on certain characters draws the same response you'd get if you went up to a devout religious person and started asking about their crazy mythology. That is, you encounter a brick-wall that only spouts that you are wrong, because (instead of The Bible Says So) "she was a saint" or "he was a pacifist". And that's as far as you'll get. People who have no investment or interest in either person will be highly offended that you would dare make any assertions.
Hyped figures perpetuated by media and society are destined to be remembered this way for eternity and any contradictions -- no matter how scholarly -- will always be categorized as hateful.
Oh, if there's a third thing you don't do, it's offer any criticism of Nelson Mandela.
Oh, and if there's a fourth thing you don't do, it's offer any criticism of Che Guevara.
- araneae 15y ago5th: Dalai Lama Well, unless it's to the Chinese. Then you can't compliment him.
- warrenwilkinson 15y agoThe other day I was pondering if non-violent resistance really would help the Tibetans. If Gandhi's revolution really wasn't non-violent (and the transition was already well underway), that doesn't leave many cases where non-violence worked.
- OstiaAntica 15y agoChe Guevara was Stalinist murderer who ran a gulag. Those are facts, not a criticism. http://www.slate.com/id/2107100/ http://www.slate.com/id/2107100/ http://reason.tv/video/show/killer-chic http://reason.tv/video/show/killer-chic
- jbooth 15y agoI almost commented a second ago, too, on how Che is actually controversial, because hippie kids wear him on a t-shirt they got at the mall as a generic symbol of resistance, and then some conservative asshole always has to come in with an extremely selective outrage towards human rights, and use overheated terms like "stalinist" and "gulag". Was Che ever in Russia? How did he run a gulag? Meanwhile, neither the hippie nor the conservative could likely tell you offhand what country the guy was born in. I had to wiki it myself.
- Joakal 15y agoI was surprised Che was outside of South America. Here's the list of places he been to: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/File:CheGuevaraCountries.jpg https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/File:CheGueva... (Including being in Congo during the war)
- pygy_ 15y agoA mirror rule applies to the monsters of history. Try to argue that Adolf H., Joseph S. or Mao Z. had some positive traits or did beneficial things. Or even mention that, say, they liked raspberry jam on their bread for breakfast. They were human beings, but they're better left comfortably demonized.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- hugh3 15y agoPeople value having inspirational figures more than they value knowing random facts which just happen to be true. "People", here, might have a point.
- pstack 15y agoPeople should value truth and authenticity. It's far more valuable than attributing inaccuracies to persons or events simply to manipulate the emotions and aspirations of mankind. If I discovered that the Moon landing was falsified, I wouldn't simply continue with a lie, because it makes me feel better to believe we really achieved such a feat. I also don't think that the truth is something one should belittle as "random facts". I'm sure this is an argument that people like Nixon would solidly support and probably did. (Note, I'm not a Moon landing conspiracist -- it was just an example.)