3 ms·
The word "incorrect" here seems unjustified. "less well-informed" would probably be a more reasonable claim, and possibly verifiable.
by echion 12y ago
The word "incorrect" here seems unjustified.
"less well-informed" would probably be a more reasonable claim, and possibly verifiable.
- byEngineer 12y agoWhat about "historical" reactions to Hitler before ww2 ?
- skj 12y agoI imagine the pro-nazi sentiment was a lot more hysterical than the anti-nazi sentiment. But, of course, I say this with no evidence.
- Retric 12y agoHe had a vary positive image in the US prior to WWII. IMO, this is simply an outgrowth of what it takes to gain power. Sure, plenty of people recall Hitler being man of the year 1939. But, few recall Josef Stalin was also named TIME's Man of the year January 1943
- pessimizer 12y agoIt was an outgrowth of US values and principles, which harmonized with Hitler's in a lot of ways, and he was influenced by many American and British thinkers. I could easily see a WWII that was the US, Britain, and Germany vs. the USSR.
- slavik81 12y agoMan of the Year is not an endorsement. It goes to the most influential, whether they've influenced things for good or for bad. Time basically put European leaders on blast for being completely ineffective in reigning in Germany's aggression. Adolf Hitler: Man of the Year, 1938 http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,00.html http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,...
- Retric 12y agoEndorsement's come in all kinds. Quick name the leader of China? It's not like the leader of the worlds largest economy is irrelevant is it? PS: I had a vague idea that Angela Merkel was and or is Germany's current leader, but other than name and tittle I am drawing a complete blank. For a leader to have a positive image they need to be 'well known' and not demonized.
- byEngineer 12y agoWhat evidence? Learn history! Churchill's "the Second World War" might be a good place to start.
- chippy 12y agohmm, interesting. I think it depends on context. The opinions are there to guide people's decisions. "Incorrect" is a better word to gauge the truthfulness of the opinions. "less well-informed" whilst also accurate is more forgiving and does not really help a voter choose between opinions.
- JimmyM 12y agoI don't know about that even, I know some professional philosophers of ethics who are extremely passionate about veganism, but I wouldn't say they were less well-informed.