On the shoulders of would be giants
January 27, 2009 6:03 PM Subscribe
If Lincoln, Elizabeth I, Alexander or any other historical leader were put under the same media / internet microscope as Barack Obama, would they still be as legendary as they are today? Would they have even survived the first round of vetting? Were these men truly great, upstanding leaders or were they boosted to fame by chance, myth or treachery? Would Caesar be a mediocre leader by today's standards?
This post was deleted for the following reason: this is really better suited to Big Big Question, it's chatfiltery. What is the problem you're trying to solve? -- jessamyn
Would Caesar be a mediocre leader by today's standards?
Whether he was a great leader then is pretty subjective, bearing in mind his solution to the difficulties of exercising power in a constitutional fashion in the Roman Republic was to take his army, invade Rome proper, and seize power after a bitter civil war. Whether or not he'd survive the first round of vetting is kind of irrelevant - the modern equivalent would have been Norman Schwarzkopf returning form the first Gulf War with his army and marching on Washington DC.
posted by rodgerd at 6:27 PM on January 27, 2009
Whether he was a great leader then is pretty subjective, bearing in mind his solution to the difficulties of exercising power in a constitutional fashion in the Roman Republic was to take his army, invade Rome proper, and seize power after a bitter civil war. Whether or not he'd survive the first round of vetting is kind of irrelevant - the modern equivalent would have been Norman Schwarzkopf returning form the first Gulf War with his army and marching on Washington DC.
posted by rodgerd at 6:27 PM on January 27, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
Well, in the case of Queen Elizabeth I, she inherited her power. It's largely irrelevant whether she was a great leader--her lineage guaranteed her a place in history.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 6:20 PM on January 27, 2009