3 ms·
My guess is that because Bush, from my memory of everything I learned about him, was mostly behind the scenes. Edison for example, kept himself in the news as t
by tcmart14 2y ago
My guess is that because Bush, from my memory of everything I learned about him, was mostly behind the scenes. Edison for example, kept himself in the news as the face of everything, even doing photo-ops to present himself as an eccentric genius. Bush was preferred to be glue behind the scenes for the most part. Probably like how we may all know Eisenhower as the face of D-Day, who yes, played a big role, but none of us probably know the name of the guy on his staff who handled every excruciating detail of the logistics of it all (which is probably one of the most impressive parts of D-Day).
Addition: Also sort of like how everyone knows Edison as the man behind the light bulb, but not very many people can name the people on Edison's team that helped with the light bulb.
- jimmySixDOF 2y agoAnother unsung hero who helped usher in the modern age is J.C.R Licklider and I am sure there are hundreds of others like them, even today, who remain nameless and are driven more by intellectual curiosity than who gets the credit. Theirs are the shoulders of Giants.
- ricksunny 2y agoI like this and agree: >Bush was preferred to be glue behind the scenes for the most part. re. associating with something like Edison does the light bulb, I ageee there's probably a lot to that. In ny presentation above I demonstrate what historians unanimously agree on that Vannevar was the single most pivotal individual to set the conditions for justifying initiating the Manhattan Project. Oppenheimer gets the popular credit, but Vannevar was kicking off the feasibility studies for fissile chain reactions long before Oppenheimer enters the picture. But people don't want to be associated with such a destructive invention like they do the light bulb, right? So any would-be propagators of their impact narrative have to wrestle with that moral quandary as well..