30 People Who Went Down In History As The ‘Bad Guys’, But Didn’t Actually Deserve That Title
Who writes history? And how often do we question the narratives that are presented to us? I bet the answer is not enough. And it's understandable, life would be exhausting if we constantly doubted everything we know and where that information came from. But we don't really have the luxury of taking the backseat and just accepting things as we're told they are. Not after so many "conspiracy theories" turn out to be true.
One Reddit user wanted to know what people were deemed 'the bad guys' by history, but didn't actually deserve this title. And people were eager to share their picks. There's more to history than the side we're taught in schools, or wherever else we've heard about it, and as it turns out, many people are villainized to fit a certain narrative, or the 'us vs. them' mentality.
Bored Panda collected the most interesting stories of people being vindicated after being portrayed as the 'bad guys' for years. Scroll down and upvote your favorite submissions, and if you think something is missing, make sure to share it in the comments below!
This post may include affiliate links.
Sinead O'Connor
Ripped up a picture of the Pope live on SNL in the 90s in a protest against covered up child abuse in the Catholic Church.
The world lost their s**t. She was demonized and professionally blacklisted for years, booed to hell at concerts, had her intelligence and sanity questioned, and was made into an international punchline. Even SNL disavowed her actions and wouldn't rebroadcast it.
And....turns out she was 1000% right.
Honestly as a Christian I think this move was totally valid. Religion in of itself isn't bad. But what some people do in the name of it is, and we need to talk about that more. It's awful how they treated her for this
I remember seeing footage of her getting booed at some benefit concert and Kris Kristofferson coming onstage to comfort and support her. Stand up guy.
I always disagreed with the knee jerk reaction to her. I thought she was a hero.
Religion is the primary justification for almost every atrocity in human history. I judge you based on outcomes, and religion's outcomes are s**t.
Always been a fan. Her version of Foggy Dew is heartbreaking and no better than a fallen Catholic to call out how toxic that church can be.
You know, even as a kid I knew something was up with the catholic church. I mean, who has all that gold and then has the nerve to ask for donations? They could literally end world hunger.
There is an old movie with Anthony Quinn called Shoes of the Fisherman. Highly recommend.
Load More Replies...
That woman who spilled McDonald’s coffee on her lap.
She didn't even ask for that much, just enough to cover her medical bills. McDonalds refused, so she sued and ended up winning a few hundred thousand. McDonald's knew damn well their coffee was way hotter than legally allowed, but instead of just accepting it they slandered this poor lady. Her genitals melted. Melted, for f***s sake.
Yep. The jury awarded more as punitive damages -- that's the part of the verdict designed to punish the other party so they'll make changes and prevent something similar from happening in the future.
Load More Replies...I feel completely confident in saying that anyone who thinks she didn't deserve a hefty payout either doesn't know the whole story or is an idiot.
I still see people making fun of her online, calling her stupid and greedy. They don't care. Even saying she should have expected that coffee to be hot. They still don't get the fact that it wasn't supposed to be as hot as it was, to cause such horrific burns and she wasn't the only one injured by it. Or that McDonald's lied about it and knew it was dangerously hot and served it anyway.
I feel bad for her as she suffered horrific third degree burns.
Anyone who thinks that she was wrong to sue should Google just what that cup of coffee did to her and how bad her injuries were.
The objectifiers always say "Of course it's hot. It's supposed to be hot. You don't put hot coffee between your legs and attempt to drive." blah blah blah Some people lack empathy and sympathy for others to mask their own fears and vulnerabilities. Because if they tell themselves they're smarter, better than someone else who had the accident they believe it would never happen to them. So, basically their skepticism is their security blankie.
Load More Replies...The way a******s to this day still talk like she was a grifter infuriates me .
She was still in the drive-thru, and literally boiling hot coffee got dumped in her lap when the cashier fumbled it. She asked for $8k to cover hospital stay and skin grafts. They refused, and she was forced to sue cuz she couldn't afford her medical bills otherwise.
A dingo really ate her baby.
Imagine going through that incredible loss and being blamed for it for many many years.
If anyone is interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_Chamberlain-Creighton
This year. a dingo attacked a young girl on Fraser Island (east coast of Australia). Still happens. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-65171305.amp
And the year before last (I think) a boy was bitten and almost dragged from his camper van (if I remember correctly)
Load More Replies...The mini-series based on Lindy's book (Through My Eyes) is also really good. Between the Streep movie and the mini-series you get a definite idea of what went on.
Load More Replies...Dingos are dogs, they're no more or less dangerous than any other medium sized dog. The difference people seem to miss is they're not domesticated so they don't have the ingrained training to NOT bite a human. A lot of the bites on Fraser Island tend to be people not treating them as wild animals. ie: giving them food when they shouldn't, approaching them when they should stay away, not supervising their kids and so on.
Load More Replies...
That woman who was accused of kidnapping children because her kids didn't have her DNA, but in fact her uterus had different DNA than the rest of her body.
This is called Human Chimera I always thought this was fascinating but it was horrible that they thought her children wasn’t hers.
It's horrible that the authorities were too stupid to listen to her and perform thorough tests before rushing to action. Government is full of people like that.
Load More Replies...There's another one that's really sad where a woman went to prison for allegedly killing her baby with antifreeze. Until she was in prison and her other baby (who she did not have access to) also got the same symptoms. Turns out they had a genetic defect that made the children unable to metabolize something, which basically made their bodies poison themselves. In a way that looked remarkably like antifreeze poisoning. And if her second baby hadn't had the same defect, she would've rot in prison. It's Patricia Stallings, look her up.
She had a twin that she absorbed in the womb. Her uterus was of her absorbed twin, which is why it had different DNA.
Not exactly. The fetuses fused, known as twin reabsorption.
Load More Replies...What's really crazy about this is that the DNA proved her ex was the father and (if anyone was smart enough to pay attention) that the kids were related to her relatives.
Wasn't it enough that nurses and an Ob-gyn would've witnessed the births and other people would've seen her pregnant?
Monica Lewinsky
She's doing great now, too. She really went through all that and came out just as strong.
She didn't want any of it. She confided in Linda Tripp and Tripp spilled the beans. Then we spent a year getting to know the POTUS more intimately than any of us ever wanted to. What should have been a private affair was turned into a political hammer and used to pound one of the most popular presidents into the ground.
Load More Replies...Ex She was exploited by an older man, betrayed by an older "friend," used by a rogue prosecutor to fulfill a political agenda, and abused by an immature press. She's the victim.
Right. Today we call it harassment when an older more powerful man who is your boss engages in a sexual relationship with you. Not only was Clinton the most powerful man in the world, he was also a known sexual predator.
...since when was he the most powerful man in the world? The US is not the only superpower out there
Load More Replies...Yup. That her mother told her she should count the President of the United States pursuing her as an honor, knowing that he was married and abusing his power, is equally shameful!!
I was living in Orange County at the time and Monica’s father was a client of the company I worked for. Such a nice man. I felt bad for him. They lived in Beverly Hills. Not necessarily a good place to grow up if your mom is a narcisist.
Load More Replies...The right wing religious nuts should never have been allowed to sensationalize things like that. Two. Consenting. Adults. Mind your own f*****g business and stay out of our bedrooms.
He lied about his relationship with his intern under oath and abused his power over her for sex knowing she would have difficulty denying consent because he was her boss. Need I remind you that sexual harrassment is illegal and sex performed under duress (such as when one party is unconscious, coerced, inebriated, etc.,) and cannot give consent effectively is rape? He was exposed rightly as a predator!
Load More Replies...Nope, I disagree. She told all her friends at home of her intent, then she did what she set out to do. She was an adult. She saved "the dress" for what reason? To set him up.
Thank you! I never understoodvwhy she saved the dress
Load More Replies...She’s an impressive smart lady who was able to survive all kinds of vicious attacks.
The way I remember it Barbara Walters sorta exploited her more, putting out more information that was irrelevant but used to further scrutinize her.
Edward Snowden. The NSA deserved to be called out. Whistleblowers should not be chased out of the country.
I've never thought of him as the bad guy. I'm not a conspiracy theorist but I know the government is not on the up and up.
That's exactly why I always felt the Department of Homeland Security was a bad idea. Something about that word "HOMELAND". It sounds a bit too much like Fatherland maybe.
Load More Replies...I agree. Maybe he needed to blow the whistle but he did it with all the skill and tact of a baboon at a typewriter. He took massive amounts of data and carelessly distributed it. If I recall correctly, he also waited to be a ‘national hero’ until Obama took office even though he was very well aware of it during the Bush admin, just because he wasn’t a fan of Obama. So he sat on all the info until it was politically convenient.
Load More Replies...Sept 13 2001: Patriot Act passes into law, huge document, nearly airtight. Years later, US public shocked to find out that the gov't was using the same thing to spy on its own. Well, gee, whillikiers, Opie, what did you *think* was in the Patriot Act? A document that was suspiciously perfect and ready to go almost literally overnight. Yes, it was sitting in someone's desk just waiting. Who didn't figure that out in 2001? FYI, Snowden is now a Russian citizen, living in Russia, Vlad's little pet, so yeah, he's not a good guy. Some of what he released *did* cause harm, and that's not okay. IMO. And I'm not a conspiracist.
F that scumbag! He caused the death of who knows how many people. His actions helped Trump seize power. A few papers is whistleblowing, but thousands of papers is espionage.
The government violates us, its citizens, with explicit, blatant crimes against us which it is still currentl perpetuating, and the guy who tells the truth and tries to do something about it is the scumbag? Every person who has been party to the illegal spying has betrayed this country and belongs under the jail. Turn off the propaganda.
Load More Replies...As far as I'm concerned, Edward Snowden is a true patriot and should be pardoned and allowed to come home without fearing for his life. He is the reason we found out about the evils of the NSA, among other things.
He's a Russian citizen, and anyone who didn't think the NSA was spying on its own? Slept through the last 80 years.
Load More Replies...You should watch john olivers last week with john oliver video about edward snowden
Although I don’t always agree with John Oliver even though I’m also a liberal, I really like his show. I’m going to go check out this episode if it’s on YouTube!
Load More Replies...So I grew up in a Christian school with a Christian history curriculum printed out of Pensacola Florida. They were dead set on convincing us that JIMMY CARTER is a villain in American history. It was a pretty hollow and nationalistic argument based almost solely on the signing away of the Panama canal. S**t aged like milk in my head because jimmy lives on as the greatest former president to be around during my lifetime
Can't see any of the bush or trump building houses for the homeless with their own hands ..bravo Mr Carter
Truth. Jimmy Carter was on the phone negotiating with the Iranians over hostages up until the last minute of his term when Reagan was sworn in. He secured their release but Reagan got the credit.
"Ronald Reagan's campaign worked to prevent the U.S. hostages from being freed before Election Day" https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/expert-analyzes-new-account-of-gop-deal-that-used-iran-hostage-crisis-for-gain
Load More Replies...The Republicans made the poor man sell his peanut farm because they were worried about conflict of interest. After the last 7 years? F**k them.
Just goes to show how downright vile American christianity is. Their cult has more Mein Kampf than the Bible in it.
Anybody need another anecdote on (religious) power corrupting society?
Jimmy Carter is deeply religious. He just not a wingnut.
Load More Replies...
Richard Jewell. Security guard at the Atlanta Olympic who was blamed for the bombing.
He went on to have a career in law enforcement, and sued a number of news outlets.. He settled all but one case.
Proved Innocent But Not before his DEATH & Not Before They MADE A FILM of his LIFE!!! GOOD OLD HOLLYWOOD DEGENERATES!!
As a 12 year old at the time, I more remember the plane just before the Opening Ceremony. I vaguely recall the bombing, but don't remember Jewell being scapegoat. Otherwise a few memories of the track and field stuff and arrival on the court of the Dream Team
Pharaoh Cleopatra, she was actually a pretty good ruler with her focusing more on her nation than just abusing her position for her own benefit, there’s even some records saying that she wasn’t even all that beautiful, she was however very intelligent with stuff like how she learned around 10 different languages
And let's face it, she recognized how powerful Rome was and tried to keep Egypt independent. It was just rotten luck that all this was happening at the same time as Rome was having an internal power struggle.
And let us all remember in light of, shall we say, upcoming movie adaptations: Cleopatra was Ptolemaic Greek. GREEK.
Load More Replies...I'm not a fan of this need that has come up in the last few years to desperately try to "prove" that Cleopatra was not attractive (or down right unattractive in some cases), as if she cannot possibly have been a good ruler and intelligent woman if she had any sort of beauty. Seducing and manipulating the rulers of Rome to keep her country independent was a very savvy move, and staying ahead of the political infighting for as long as she did is no small feat.
I don't think that's the point. Our modern idea of Cleopatra owes itself mainly to mid-20th century film depictions of her as some sexy femme fatale, trading on her ability to seduce men. Which tells you more about attitudes to gender roles in 1950s America than it does anything about Cleopatra as a historical figure. Essentially she has been depicted in a way no equivalent male ruler would have been. Attempts to emphasise that she was ordinary looking are just attempts to say "look- this was a powerful woman who ruled effectively because she was very good at her job, not because some men indulged her because they ascribed her great beauty".
Load More Replies...Doñt say she wasn't beautiful but intelligent say she wasn't a white wash pharisee
maybe her intelligence is what made people see her as exceptionally attractive.
Janet Jackson deserved exactly none of the backlash she received for that Half Time Show disaster.
Everyone acted like her breast being exposed was an intentional part of the act despite how obviously it f*****g wasn't.
Meanwhile, Justin Timberlake gave the most bare minimum "I'm sorry you got offended" b******t ever, but he gets no punishment because he's a sexy white dude.
I have always thought it was planned. That when the backlash happened then everyone started backpedaling. She took the brunt of the blame but he is responsible too.
I've never managed to care one way or the other. OMG that woman has a breast! So traumatic to discover that! FFS, how can someone freak out that their kid *might* have seen a nip slip, then send that kid to school the next day without a second thought? Our priorities are a lot more screwed up than that whole "scandal" ever was.
Load More Replies...Justin Timberlake is misogynistic trash. Not just for taking none of the responsibility for what happened to Janet. He also discussed highly personal details of his relationship with Britney in interviews and then made a song that made out that he was the victim, according to Jessica Simpson he pretended to be interested in her purely so he could kiss her and win a bet he'd made with Ryan Gosling when they were children, and he was caught cheating on his wife. I feel he only gets away with it because he's good looking. He owes most of his career to Britney. His solo career only took off because of all the publicity he got from riding her coat tails. Without her he'd have disappeared like the other members of N'SYNC.
Whether it was staged or not people totally overreacted. Janet Jackson was seen as a social pariah and experienced a lot of negative publicity that really destroyed her career for a period. However, Justin got off scott-free.
Load More Replies...I mean... it's only a boob, get over it. In Spain in 1987 a VERY famous singer showed her tits on national television (unintentionally) . It was the only TV channel, EVERYBODY saw it. Nothing happened. Well, she just got VERY famous.
Welcome to the USA, where showing people eviserated by guns is perfectly fine, but OMG a boob.
Load More Replies...Completely agree that the reaction to it was ridiculous, but what exactly should Justin have been "punished" for? Even Jackson's representatives at the time said that the move where he ripped off the cup part of her dress was planned and staged. The "malfunction" they said was that the cup section was meant to pull away to reveal a red lace bra, but that bit of fabric had come away with the main piece. Neither of them should have been "punished", other than for it being a lame publicity stunt.
I agree with you, however, Justin should've stood up for her when it happened.
Load More Replies...The whole thing was a shameless publicity stunt. And, the US needs to be less prudish about everything. It's hypocritical.
I felt like more of the blame should be on the broadcasters. They have the ability to delay live broadcasts and dump out or change cameras so that people at home don't see or hear what "isn't allowed". I'm not saying I'm for censorship, because I hate trying to watch a movie on TV and the dubbed words are horrendous (like Jack Nicholson's courtroom scene in A Few Good Men). I'm just saying that they became lazy in enforcing outdated rules whether on purpose or not.
The fact that seeing a breast is the least bit controversial just makes me roll my eyes and sigh. Our priorities are so f****d. I'm willing to bet that most of those people that were oh so offended by a nip slip are fine with gratuitous violence on TV, but see a little bit of a body part that everyone has and look out!
I don't think he's the least bit sexy. Unpopular opinion, I know. Oh well.
Captain Hazelwood of the Exxon Valdez.
He is often pictured on the helm of the Exxon swaying drunkenly going full throttle into the reef talking like a "pirate."
What actually happened.
Valdez's critical navigation equipment was out of commission, faxs sent to Exxon and Exxon told them to sail instead.
Coast guard budget cuts removed vessel tracking in the area.
Green and tired crew was on duty, request was made to relief crew. It was denied.
XO who was on Conn at the time was inexperienced on the passage and neither requested pilotage.
While Hazelwood did drink that day he was not in command of the conn at the time and was in his quarters resting.
Hazelwood made a comment that "He needed a drink." Because of how upset he was over the situation.
Exxon's PR paid off the media to blame Hazelwood.
However Hazelwood was charged with only one charge which was for pollution. He proved he was not a drunkard and retained his captain's license. Even getting offers to sail again which he turned down.
The real villains are mass media, False News, and comedians but Exxon's PRs spending power to keep the blame off them.
Hazelwood passed away last year after the annv of the spill.
Random fact the Valdez sailed until 2008 under different name Oriental Nicety
A family member was on the jury at Captain Hazelwood's trial and they said Hazelwood was completely thrown under the bus by Exxon.
Well now, I don’t think Exxon would ever do anything wrong!
Load More Replies...The fault of EVERY oil spill lies with the Oil Companies and those that keep them in power by blocking every attempt to move away from fossil fuel.
I don't know anyone who blames the captain of the ship; it was Exxon's fault, with some blame being shared by basically everyone. Never would've happened if we weren't so rabidly addicted to oil.
I grew up in Ak. The papers were all over him. His name was constantly being mentioned by late night hosts who get their jokes from the papers. I didn't know all this info.
Load More Replies...He is often pictured on the helm of the Exxon swaying drunkenly going full throttle into the reef talking like a "pirate." OK I want to see a movie where Johnny Depp captains an oil tanker!
Well even The Head of EXXON died from a HEARTATTACK & Couldn't TAKE his Millions with Him!! Hope he is Burning in Hell!!
Well yea obviously. Even if it was his fault as the captain these things don't happen unless someone higher up has screwed up. After all, one person f*****g up is in and of itself a screwup, because it should never come to one person not screwing up. Because eventually someone will
Hefty percentage of people expect short form posts and responses. That's why TL;DR became a thing.
Load More Replies...
Amanda Knox. She was accused of [taking out] her college study abroad roommate after extremely sloppy investigation, WILD claims, cruel tabloid journals calling her all kinds of s**t shaming names and asserting that she [unalived] the roommate because she (roommate) wouldn’t agree to a threesome, the true [criminal’s] DNA being all over the damn place, etc. etc.
She was cleared of all charges later on but she and her equally innocent beau spent YEARS in prison in Italy for it.
bro. what is up with this censoring. I can't even understand this anymore, [taking out] sounds like a date fr and I started reading it like why would they be mad about a date??
We can’t say “killed” or “dead” or “murdered” on BP. All the innocent babes’ minds shall explode in a frenzy of unaliving.
Load More Replies...Meredith Kercher was her name. It’s annoying that she gets forgotten in all of this and it’s Amanda Knox who gets all the attention. Meredith Kercher still remains dead and her murder still remains unsolved.
This was a ridiculous case, the police accusing her came up with the most bizarre reasoning to convict them and when it was discovered to be some vagrant they changed their proposition to her being in cahoots with him just so they could save face.
Even crazier was after she got released on a technicality and got to go home to the US. Italy still wanted her back to try her again.
Load More Replies...What the hell is with this "unalived," nonsense?? It literally means the same as, "killed." Why on earth is this being censored. Absolutely ridiculous to trade out one word for another that means exactly the same thing. That and ,"taken out." Come on! This is obfuscatory.
"Unalived" isn't even a word. It's just some cr@p the BP censors made up.
Load More Replies...Killed. Dead. Just checking…so those words work here, why not up there in the story?
Maybe because it's a copy and paste article originally on Reddit? It's just a guess.
Load More Replies...It's killed. She KILLED someone. The person isn't any less dead by you saying "unalived". Grow up.
Bored Panda will censor the words killed and murdered. It's a way around the censors. Insta and TikTok does it, also.
Load More Replies...”Taken out,” and “unalived” my a*s. The word is kill. K-I-L-L. Now go ahead and censor me. I’m sick of this c**p. What is this, nursery school?
BP automatically stuck the asterisks in there. I’m done.
Load More Replies...
Niccolo Machiavelli.
Machiavelli didn't invent the idea of lying or ruthlessness. He made an observation about what worked and tried to get a new gig.
Now his name is synonymous with "heartless manipulator".
He observed, that was all he did. People had been lying and deceiving for way longer than him. That's like saying Newton invented gravity because he was the first to document and really think about it.
From Wikipedia: "Machiavelli's concern with Christianity as a sect was that it makes men weak and inactive, delivering politics into the hands of cruel and wicked men without a fight." Sounds kinda accurate to me.
Load More Replies...he also said that it was easier to be feared than to be loved, people altered it from easier to better, when the whole point of his work was you could take the easy route and risk rebellion or take the hard route and secure your rule
Actually, he was being satirical. He said that while a nobleman can rule effectively by love or fear, it would be easier *for the particular nobleman he was writing The Prince to* to be feared than loved.
Load More Replies...Actually he was a commited anti royalist. Every work of his except the prince is about calling out the nonsense of the royals. The prince is satire he literally wrote it while being punished for his anti royalism However it would be perfectly logical to blame him if it wasn't satire because take the satire out and the price is essentially the handbook of being a tyrant, as in it endorses its methods it presents em as good. Its not a neutral accounting of history.
The name synonymous for "heartless manipulator" should be "Trump".
Its an instruction guide on how to be a prince with the central theme that the ends justify the means. He may not have invented the idea but he made a how to guide . His name deserves to be associated with ruthlessness and immorality.
It was satire. That people use it as an instructional guide just proved his point.
Load More Replies...Ahhhh Machiavelli. A year of AP European History has ingrained this name into my dang head.
Hades
He barely cheated on his wife and was loyal.
He only kidnapped Persephone because Zeus told him to.
He's a good father.
He doesn't cause death, only what happens after.
Also he named his Dog Spot, adorable.
People always act like he's evil and malicious. But in all reality he's a sweet guy.
I wouldn't say he's a sweet guy, but he's a very misunderstood one. Zeus was an absolute menace, if it had a hole he had a goal.
I absolutely agree with you. Better ask which characters have not been straddled by Zeus, because this list is finished faster. Hades is a 'dark' god because, after all, no ray of the sun (Helios) ever falls on his realm. But he is always righteous and he is someone who never gets loud, where others would already blow a fuse. But which dog did he call "Spot"? The biter, which greets the arriving shadows at the bank of the Styx wagging his tail, is still called Kerberos, isn't it? According to Hesiod, Kerberos is a son of Echidna and Typhon, but that would lead too far now...
Load More Replies...I think it’s in comparison to other gods who aren’t as villainised, eg. Zeus.
Load More Replies...Hades was honestly one of the best gods in Greek myths. He didn’t procreate with any thing and everything that breathed, he didn’t kill people unnecessarily, he didn’t curse many people. He’s still not a perfect role model or anything, but compared to the other gods, he is semi-decent.
And Lore Olympus is a pretty awesome take on the Hades/Persephone story!
I ADORE Lore Olympus, I fully spent 24hours one week binging it because man It's so good
Load More Replies...Hades and Hestia are my favourite gods/goddesses. Zeus is just a jerk and a cheater.
When my sister was in high school, her English class had a unit on Greek mythology. The quiz at the end was a fill-in-the-blank, like "Hades was ______" and you'd answer god of the Underworld. So for "Zeus was," she answered "a man-whore." Partial credit. XD
Load More Replies...Hades is actually a very neutral god, sure he's done somethings that are moderately annoying but Zeus is the one who cheated on Hera all those times because he's always horny and also unloyal
Marie Antoinette never said “let them eat cake” when she heard that her people couldn’t afford bread.
She was executed out of frustration for how bad things became during the French Revolution and was wrongly misattributed for the ideology of someone in power being out of touch with being poor.
Well, to be fair, she and the rest of the French nobility actually were absurdly out of touch. That said, the French seem to be willing to riot at the drop of a hat, so there's that, too.
Pity the brits won’t do the same thing. Babies dying from mouldy houses whilst an old man gets more spent on his in one day than the average person earns in a lifetime and yet people cheer.
Load More Replies...She was a bit out of touch from what I recall, though, what with her little milkmaid village in the backyard and her elaborate ship hairstyles.... while the third estate couldn't get bread. but it's true, she never said this
Oh nah. She was well out of touch with reality, her people and the very poor. She lived a decadent, ostentatious life and their wealth was too extreme compared to the French populace. She may have not said those actual words but they were created, in a way, to symbolise what she and the nobility were living like at that time. It's the whole concept of ' I don't give a toss about these starving French people, I'm okay and having the best life'. She was not an innocent woman.
I can see why she was out of touch. At the time, women and daughters only value was in how many sons they could birth and how they could help consolidate power through marriages. Rich daughters were raised to be hosts. They were taught rudimentary basics about the world, reading and math but they were never exposed to the real world.
Load More Replies...That’s not true, and whether she said this sentence or not (she probably didn’t) has no relevance. She wasn’t executed out of frustration, nor because she was out of touch with the people. The French Revolution wasn’t about removing the king or establishing democracy, it was mainly about the abolition of privilege. And because the claim to power from the royal family came from divine law, they had to go. It was a consequence, not an objective.
As a French lang. hist. & cult. major, u had me till that last part. Not very "wrongly misattributed" at all for that, especially since that is not how "misattribute" is used. Be careful what you internalize and quote from sites like these y'all.
She didn't even say the line. It was made up by French tabloids at the time.
"Let them eat cake" was first said about a hundred or so years before.
Load More Replies...They were indeed out of touch, living it up as th epeople starved. Just because she didn't say that one thing doesn't mean that she wasn;t a self-centered privileged a*****e who cared more about the next fashion season than about making sure that children weren't dying of starvation. She and the king were caught because instead of using light and simple carriages, they insisted on using the huge ornate royal carriages, and stopping to greet admirers and loyal crowds on the way.
wrongly misattributed for the ideology of someone in power being out of touch with being poor How so? She was out of touch with being poor. When the famine that lead to the French revolution was going on the nobles were taking the little food that remained for them I don't see how that's a misattributation
I read that her quote was said after she and her husband learned of the storming of the Bastille.
Julius Caesar.
His murderers expected the people to rejoice upon being freed from the “tyrant.”
Instead the people wept and rioted, they loved Caesar because (unlike most of the senators) he truly cared for the people and sometimes would spend all night writing up laws, he is the reason the grain bill worked to feed to neediest. He grew up with the common man and it’s often forgotten how much he did for them, there is a reason the people loved him more than the senate.
Was he perfect? No. Did he try and gain power? Yes. But Is an dictatorship worse than an oligarchy? It’s clear that Rome was in much better hands with Caesar than the Senate.
Oh thank you! Ppl like to forget that and I came here to say it. His writings are beautiful prose and excellent examples of spin and propaganda
Load More Replies...Caesar was one of the most ruthless people in human history. Saying he cared for his people reminds me of the Autobahn argument in Germany and Austria. Someone talks about Hitler and out of nowhere a wannabe Nazi appears and screams about how not everything was bad under Nazi rule and "Hitler built the Autobahn".
Caesar was not as bad as everyone thinks, Marc Antony's speech in Shakespeare's play shows this.
I feel like I shouldnt have to say this but here goes... Shakespeare wrote plays which are fictional works of art and not in fact historically accurate. Did Ceasar do a few good things amongst all the bad? Sure just like every dictator does, Hitler loved animals and was a vegetarian, Saddam wrote romance novels, that doesnt outweigh the bad things they did.
Load More Replies...Debatable. One can argue many things about Gaius Julius Caesar Dictator, but nobody ever called him a saint.
Didn't Caesar sleep with his sister while feeding people to deprived lions for pleasure and entertainment? Release barnabus killed sacrificed Jesus? Caesar really truly was the jews king.
Agreed about Italy. And is anyone on earth perfect? No chance. Every one will make mistakes while having their ways
Caesar also had epilepsy, which has been theorized as one cause of why the Senators killed him. Once they showed up at his home, and he did not stand to greet them. It's possible that he lost control following a seizure, and did not want it to be known. The Senators saw it as a terrible snub, which may have helped lead to his assassination.
Anyone that is familiar with the movie 300 is aware of how it sanitises the Spartans and how it demonises the First Persian Empire.
The reality is that the First Persian Empire or the Achaemenid Empire was pretty forward thinking for the era; this is the empire that freed the Jews from the Babylonians and gave the world the Cyrus Cylinder which some regard as the first bill of rights.
As for Sparta? It was a militaristic society based on Social Darwinism (centuries before the birth of Charles Darwin) and it had a greater percentage of slaves than Persia ever did.
Edit: I am not suggesting that the First Persian Empire was perfect, I am just pointing out the historically inaccurate and racist portrayal of Persia in the movie 300.
Well I think that with the giant beheading monster in the film they weren't aiming for historical accuracy.
True, but I think the racism still stands...
Load More Replies...It was based on the account by Herodotus, who is known as both the "father of history" and the "father of lies." Basically, he wrote about real events, but his purpose was more to entertain than to preserve facts.
Sparta was a timocracy, which is fundamentally a sort of military communal society. Children were taken away from parents and raised in barracks. Although male children were prized as soldiers, women were considered important, because their wombs fed the war machine.
Erm I think you are missing the point here? The Persians could have been as sweet as my Aunt Mable and as pious as the Pope. That means diddly squat about the fact that they 'invaded' another country. I don't think Greek historians would agree on principle about the OP's post. "Yeah well, they may have sent thousands of ships and murdered masses of people defending their land but they were nicer than you think they were" oh, hmmmm.
The Greeks kind of invaded Persia first. The Athenians sent armies in to the Greek colonies that were part of the Persian Empire to participate in rebellion against the Persians. Garrisons were destroyed and burnt, cities were sacked. The emperor could not allow this assault to go unpunished. Ancient empires were constantly defending their borders and often ended up expanding as they conquered another attacking power. The Greeks ultimately had to defend their homes, but if the Athenians had minded their own business the world would be a tremendously different place.
Load More Replies...Just look at this: Egypt-part...Empire.jpg
It's from https://www.britannica.com/event/Greco-Persian-Wars
What do you think? This enormous Persian Empire NEED
ed to invade timy Greece to make things right or it was greedy expansion?
Malcolm X. History basically taught me he was the gunslinging MLK Jnr. counterpart, but really, they agreed on a ton of s**t and worked together a lot. In fact, Malcolm did a whole lot more outside of just civil rights, and arguably did more than MLK. MLK is remembered more because he was more outspoken (and the speech has kinda been overstated)
The sad fact is that MLK is held in such high regard because those in power felt less threatened by him. Simply put, he's more palatable for white folks.
If I remember correctly, they influenced each other, with Malcolm mellowing out and MLK acknowledging the impact of kicking some asss.... anyone elaborate on this dynamic?
Load More Replies...His trip to Mecca showed him folks of different colours getting along. It made him rethink Elijah Muhammed's anti-white sentiment. Malcolm gets assassinated and Farrakhan becomes the new "mouth piece".
Rush Limbaugh had a lot of respect for Malcolm X, said that he was assassinated for eschewing militancy. I wonder if Farrakhan played a part in his assassination.
Load More Replies...Malcolm X also gave up his racism and acknowledged that white folks could be as brothers to him. It’s a shame that many of his contemporaries didn’t and it’s not widely known that Malcolm X acknowledged the white man is his brother in the end.
It has been theorised that this is why he was assasinated. Because he started to look towards co operation.
Load More Replies...Malcolm X was more militant, therefore less popular - An incredibly great, intelligent man.
Who tf besides racist Silent Generation yahoos think Malcom X was ever a bad guy?
Not all of those born in the Silent Generation were objectively racist.
Load More Replies...His a communist, there's a picture of him and Rosa Parks sitting together at a communist event.
Obviously neither Malcolm X or Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. had much of a LASTING influence on civility as a whole. Look at where our country is today. It’s more racist than it’s ever been due to the victim mentality encouraged and empowered by liberal democrats, starting with Obama.
A lot of the women of history who have been treated as sluts/liars/manipulative/[criminals] etc. Example being Erzabet Bathory - a woman with money and power and her uncle wanted it so she gets locked in a room and goes down in history for bathing in the blood of virgins. Not saying she was a good person necessarily, just that the idea that she[unalived] hundreds of local young women so she could bathe in their blood is bollocks. And there are many more women who gets treated the same.
Really, many of those who lost and whose story gets written by those that won
There's an excellent book series by Vicki León called "Uppity Women."
She and her husband were serial killers. They did murder local women. The bathing in blood thing was made up years later.
Oh boy. It's spelled Erzsébet. Thank you, and agreed. Although she did have a thing for torture which she got from her husband. However, she wasn't the mass murdered they made her out to be. And it wasn't her uncle who wanted the land. It was an arrogant male chauvinist guy, a politician of sorts, who didn't accept her being in charge of such an estate, as a window. She'd also turned him down a few times, I believe.
Don't tell them, they don't know what it means ;)
Load More Replies...The word "unalived" is absurd. It is "killed". It makes me grind my teeth every time someone says that. Even spellcheck wont accept it.
MonsterTalk podcast did a while episode on her, and how after her husband died, she was slandered and basically murdered. I listened to the podcast too long ago to remember the details, but what happened to her was awful, and now everyone remembers her as "The Blood Countess" because it's a good story. But story is all it is.
Stop Unaliving people. I keep reading it like Unabomber. Not good. Una-living. Bad.
Vlad the Impaler. He was fighting the invading Turks, and resorted to scare tactics. It worked.
It was the 1400s. people got away with savagery left and right back then. I don't think Vlad was doing anything worse than, say the Ottomans, who have a long, proud tradition of torture.
It was his time as a prisoner of the Ottoman sultan where he learned of the Turkish torture known as impalement. He was just using their own tactics against them, and on a *much* broader scale. He eventually became obsessed with it, yes. But he had been a prisoner of the Turks since he was 11 years old. Abused physically and s*exually, and all because he own father had relinquished him and his brother Radu to the sultan as hostages, to ensure Vlad's father would support Ottoman policies. His younger brother, Radu, was known as "Radu the Handsome" and was a known "s*domite". Both boys were warped by their time as Turkish prisoners
Load More Replies...Vlad was a sociopath that while in prison impaled rats, spiders, and whatever else came into his cell and watched them suffer and die. And he sharpened the branches on trees and impaled people on them, their own body weight caused branches to slowly, but surely impale them deeper - it was a very slow and agonizing death, which he reportedly watched with great amusement.
Vlad was ruthless when it came to protecting his country. He earned and deserved respect and loyalty.
There are horrid stories about the Turks even in the last century, e.g. the whole Armeni thing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_genocide , so it's not even like the 20th century had decent people in general, in military scenarios.
He irked Western European money-makers. Ta-da! but in his own nation, he remains a hero.
What? He was fighting with the otromans, what western Europeans?
Load More Replies...
In the film Titanic the character Murdoch [unalived] someone, took bribes and generally came across as a right s**t. He was a real life person who was actually a hero and saved many lives. His living relatives were so disgusted that the VP of Fox travelled to Dalbeattie to personally apologise and presented a £5000 donation to Dalbeattie High School to boost the school's William Murdoch Memorial Prize.
5000?? Seems low given how much that movie cost to make and what it made after.
It was shut up money, for "the 'distress'" (not my phrasing). Fox actually never apologised like media claimed, the portrayal wasn't retracted nor did they say it was wrong, and Cameron said that his portrayal wasn't meant to be negative.
Load More Replies...Murdoch was a very experienced officer, rated as a master in his own right. He was a RNR officer, and when in the RMS Arabic he had avoided a collision with a vessel that might have resulted in a disaster every bit as tragic as the Titanic. His manoeuvre to avoid the iceberg was textbook and probably only seconds from succeeding. His handling of the subsequent evacuation was exemplary- he correctly interpreted the captain's order "Women and children FIRST" compared to Lightoller who incorrectly interpreted it as "women and children ONLY". Lightoller's misinterpretation meant many male passengers were denied access to the half-empty lifeboats and were subsequently drowned. The boats under Murdoch's charge were filled closer to capacity compared to Lightollers and launched much more quickly too.
What the hell is up with this idiotic censorship, BoredPanda. Do you think we are damned idiots who can’t handle the word die!?
Oddly enough when I watched the movie I thought he came across as one of the most noble characters in it. Yes he takes a bribe, but it's reluctantly and later on he throws it back in the villain's face and tells him to go screw himself, and when he shoots someone it's mostly just an impulsive accident which instantly horrifies him. I was really saddened by his death.
Or, and hear me out here, shall we all do the Monty Python parrot sketch?
Honestly, I'd say King John of England. Many of the troubles during his reign were directly caused by his brother Richard I preferring to gallivant around Europe and the Middle East.
10,000 upvotes. John ended up paying for Richard's sins/crimes/stupidities/etc. He was very interested in law, in fact, and was known to be very lenient when hearing appeals from commoners, IIRC. He also provided for his out-of-wedlock offspring in an era when most didn't bother to admit they had 'em. And his family dynamic was so f*cked up it's amazing he survived to adulthood, really.
The high taxes in the Robin Hood story were to pay the extremely high ransom when Richard was captured.
I was in Croatia just recently and there's an island where they claim Richard wrecked a ship. We were just like, "Yeah, sounds like something that dumbass would do".
The "Robin Hood" taxes were caused by Richard getting his dumb a*s captured and held for ransom in Austria. Again, thank goodness for it, otherwise we wouldn't have Magna Charta and a lot would be different as a consequence.
The only good ruler out of the two of them was, their mother Eleanor of Aquitaine.
She was an amazing woman. If only circumstances had been different and she had been allowed to take the throne after her husband died.
Load More Replies...And Richard III has been rehabilitated. Even his enemies admitted he (a very slight man with adult-onset scoliosis) was courageous in battle.
Even in Richard III, Shakespeare's hit-piece for the Tudors, he's portrayed as a fearsome warrior.
Load More Replies...Richard was the real POS, abandoning his country so he could go off to the Middle East and order the merciless slaughter of captured men, women and children. There were so many victims it took THREE DAYS to murder them all. Then of course he got himself captured on the way home and the ransom payment bankrupted the kingdom.
Can't overlook the way he lost the crown jewels in the Wash though. That wasn't clever. The fact that he was forced to sign the Magna Carta suggests that his rule wasn't great.
Magna Carta was a result of Richard Lionheart's not being around, which is why the barons were always resisting John ------- they liked England's kings far, far away. Also, he didn't plan to lose the jewels, FFS. IIRC, they got hit by a freak tide. No way to know that was gonna hit.
Load More Replies...
In brave heart, William Wallace gets betrayed by Robert the Bruce which never happened, he was loyal to the end
Braveheart is 99% fiction. William Wallace was not a commoner, he was an adult when his father died, he never even met Isabella of France much less got her pregnant, his wife (if she existed as that's also in doubt) was called Marion not Murran, he didn't have an Uncle Argyle, kilts weren't worn for about another 300 years after the events of the film. I could go on and on. 😆
I did my final paper on Braveheart for my History of the British Isles class in college. XD Made all the points that you did, plus I pointed out that everyone’s teeth in the movie were far too perfect and pearly-white for the time period XD My teacher appreciated the humor.
Load More Replies...Decent movie bad history and we won't get started on Mel Gibson's ""Scottish "" accent 🤦
A great film, but no more accurate than, say, Wile E Coyote vs the Roadrunner, save in Edward I of England being a ba*tard.
Most kings were back then. You didn’t become one by being nice.
Load More Replies...Basically a star vehicle for Mr Gibson. There were some true bits: here is a place called Scotland and William Wallace fought for freedom from the English and he died. And there was a place called York and a man called Robert the Bruce.
There is a statue in Scotland supposedly of William Wallace, but they had no idea what he really looked like, so they used Mel Gibson as their model. They could at least have used a Scotsman.
Not a guy but rather an organisation.
The IRA are practically the sole reason that Ireland is an independent country today, yet their legacy has forever been tainted by an offshoot organisation (the Provisional IRA) to the point that most people outside of Ireland simply view their entire history as terrorists and criminals.
I mean, *technically*, that's exactly what they were. It's just that they won (mostly). The Sons of Liberty were terrorists in colonial America, but when the Continental Army won, they became founding fathers.
A terrorist is not necessarily a freedom fighter. You don't have to bomb innocent people to be a freedom fighter
Load More Replies...And plenty of people in Ireland who were tortured or had loved ones murdered by the IRA hate them and their "we'll just kill everyone who stands in our way and bomb public places and school children till we get what we want." There are plenty of Catholics and Irish people who want a reunified Ireland who were targeted by the IRA for some perceived lack of purity. The IRA also raped local women as a war tactic, and covered up incidents of child rape. They are absolutely terrorists.
This comment is hidden. Click here to view.
Load More Replies...FWIW, the IRA/PIRA gave us the first car bomb, and they trained up other terrorist groups, so.... Yay for independent Ireland, not so much for IRA to me....
PLO, FARC, Hamas... All trained by Gerry Adams' group of tw*ts.
Load More Replies...1916 IRA, which is the reference meant, has been tied to the modern day one because of the name. The UVF suffers the same fate. The UVF who marched into war at The Battle of the Somme is forever linked to the modern group. Neither historical group should be.
Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering why the picture shown didn't seem to correlate with the more modern version of the IRA.
Load More Replies...They murdered a hell of a lot of innocent people, though. Presumably the civilians and especially the foreign tourists (who had nothing to do with British-Irish relations) who got blown up because the IRA were going around bombing pubs and tourist attractions in London don't think they are the good guys! The IRA murdered over 1700 people, and committed more than a thousand bombings.
Off by a few decades. You're referring to The Troubles. Circa 1960-1990. The OP is talking about the Irish Civil War which happened in the 1920s. There's a major difference. You speak from authority, but you either don't know or are deliberately ignoring this basic fact.
Load More Replies...The British empire could also be called terrorist and criminal just ask any of it's ex colonial territories
That wasn't terrorism - it was outright invasion.
Load More Replies...Have to MASSIVELY disagree with that...on the fact that they've killed hundreds of innocent people.
Randomly shooting people in the street for your own shits and giggles will do that to you
All of the Black Panthers.
Any American should see it as reasonable to start a militia in order to protect your family, friends, and community from a corrupt and [criminal] state. [Taking out] cops was justice.
Ironically, the Black Panthers are the reason California has such strict gun control laws. They began openly carrying their weapons -- the same kind of "show of force" that police departments put on to intimidate the public into good behavior -- and the state legislators freaked the f**k out and started passing restrictions on gun ownership.
And now we have white supremacist's doing the same thing. EDIT: oh wait white supremacists always did that and never stopped.
Load More Replies...Responsible for first Free Breakfast Programs in the country. Their philosophy was about protecting the members of their community — from violent racist police.
I remember the Panthers serving free breakfast to the local children.
Load More Replies...Black men with the fundamental right to carry firearms. Black men who identified bad police officers, terrible politicians, and biased laws. Black men who pushed for free and better meals/education in their community. All considered outlaws who needed to be put in their place by any means available.
Rarely justice, sure - unless those same people are killing you.
Load More Replies...I always roll my eyes and laugh when people say that the Black Panthers are the “black KKK.” Not even close.
The Black Panthers were awesome but the White media made them seem like radicals when in actuality they were just fighting for a cause in an unconventional way
Kinda like BLM?? “Let’s loot and riot and destroy cities to get our way in the name of justice!!!” ✊🏿
Load More Replies...American politicians - everyone has the right to carry a gun. Black people - ok we'll carry guns. Americna politicians - we didn't mean you!
This highly confusing, I thought it was wrong to start a militia and own guns to protect yourself? It is it ok for some groups, and just not others?
Depends on the color of your skin. If you are not white then you are a militant / terrorist. If you are white, Proud Boys and Ammon Bundy , then you are patriots and defenders of freedom.
Load More Replies...So they killed cops and your just chill with it? They murdered living, breathing beings and its 'justice?' Who is to decide that the cops deserved death or not?
Americans do see it as reasonable to start a militia in order to protect their family, friends, and community - they're called the KKK and the supporters of a certain politician-wanna-be-dictator.
**Herbert Hoover.** He was a lifelong humanitarian and had a reputation as an excellent administrator, which led him to win the Presidency of the U.S in 1928.
- But less than eight months after he took office, the world was rocked by one of the worst economic depressions in history.
- It was also during Hoover’s Presidency that mass media like radio and newsreels started spreading wildly, and Hoover was a breathtakingly awful speaker with poor public relations skills.
So Hoover got trounced in the next election by FDR’s abundant optimism and wide toothy grin, and was forever tarred in history as being the uncaring standoffish bureaucrat who ignored all the hardships of the Great Depression from his White House perch.
It didn't help that Mafia culture was so strong and that he was prolonging prohibition, if I remember correctly.
He proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that being a competent administrator doesn't translate into being a good president. What he really was was a shameless self-promoter; many of his "accomplishments" even before he became president were completely the work of others.
Most of the policies that caused the Great Depression were actually enacted by Calvin Coolidge, his predecessor. He's the one who said "The business of America is business."
Hoover was Secretary of Commerce from 1921 to 1928. He helped write and implement those policies
Load More Replies...Let's add prime Minister Bennett to the list for the same reasons 🇨🇦
Hoover did a lot of work for hunger relief in Belgium after WWI as well as Russia during their Civil War. He also served as Secretary of Commerce from 1921 to 1928, basically laying the ground work for the Depression to take place. It is not out of line to blame him for starting that disaster. And then his doing nothing to help afterwards. Except calling out the Army to wipe out the Bonus Marchers in the summer of 1932.
I'm sorry but this is white washing - Hoover was stuck with the legacy of Harding - Coolidge presidencies Harding was corrupt as could be and Coolidge was a do nothing- but it was Hoover's party . And Hoovers belief that capitalism would fix itself led to his demise . He was a great administrator but he was a terrible president .
As Secretary of Commerce from 1921 to 1928 Hoover did a lot to help bring about the Depression. It was not something that just happened to him, he helped bring it about.
Load More Replies...he was a racist and determined to keep black Americans under control.
Richard III. Demonised by the Tudors, in part due to his curved spine (now confirmed) and their political agendas. He might have been a good King or a bad King/person but it is difficult to determine as the records that followed his death are so incredibly bias.
There is a suggestion that he put them in the tower for their own safety. He is thought now to be a loyal husband and good administrator (he was in charge of the North during the previous reign). Shakespeare's version is aimed at pleasing the Tudors, whose claim to the crown was very tenuous.
Load More Replies...Oh c'mon. It's like a 99.9% chance that he killed those boys. They were in the direct line of succession and oh, what a funny coincidence, they then disappear, never to be seen again and he then becomes King??. They didn't even resurface years later after Henry Tudor took the crown, so they were most certainly killed. Just because there is a lack of solid evidence to categorically say he didn't do it, doesn't mean it's definitely not true. It's just one of those mysteries, that's not really, truthfully a mystery at all is it? It's not stacked in his favour, is what I'm saying.
A lot of the recent pro-RIII stuff is being pushed by the RIII society, which is a group of middle aged women who basically are in love with him. They're essentially SnapeWives. There's a hilarious documentary about this one deranged woman who essentially funded and pushed the entire dig that discovered his body (because she had a psychic vision where it was) and her motivation was to prove he wasn't disabled. The archeologists were visibly uncomfortable with her since she was just obsessed with him on a personal level. Like, she just really wanted to f**k RIII. Then they found his remains and instantly saw that he was disabled, and her face just fell.
I'd say "No." There's a very strong case against that, actually. You should look into the details, it's a fascinating bit of history, if tragic.
There is an entire song from Horrible Histories UK about how Richard III was a good guy
The fact that they have found his remains has shed new light on him. They show how he died in battle and the other wounds he may have sustained while he was king.
Medieval European kings were basically gangsters. I don't think there's much point speculating on which ones were 'good' or 'bad'. The only thing a modern historian can judge is which ones were successful. And Richard was a loser- end of.
Caligula.
A lot of the stories of him being mad were just posthumous propaganda by his political opponents. Considering the horrific abuse by Tiberius he suffered as a child, Caligula was remarkable well balanced.
Environmental factors at the time are known for causing madness. Making his horse a general is funny.
And to be fair if I was a royal today, I’d have had my cats knighted and given positions too
Load More Replies...Oh my good lord this thread is full of inaccuracies and holes. Dude got a brain sickness ( possibly some form of meningitis) and went bonkers after that. Prior to this sickness Caligula was a completely different person and a good , just leader. He was mentally ill caused by a brain injury. He was definitely a complete despot and tyrant for most of his reign. Totally off the charts bonkers. And Tiberius was a complete perverted nut job too. He taught Caligula a lot of bad things and on his island in Capri, Caligula witnessed a lot of sordid stuff growing up. I wish people would really read up on history and get their facts straight!
Drinks from lead cups, has closely-related parents, gee, what could go right? But he probably was a bit nuts.
At the time, lead was used to preserve wine. He ingested the stuff all the time. No wonder he was nuts!
Load More Replies...Caligula was a sadistic nut job— I have no idea why this person is trying to paint him as a sympathetic figure. Just read the The Twelve Caesars. He was mentally ill, inbred, suffered from a brain injury, and some historians even believe that lead poisoning contributed to his madness.
Another great book is "I, Claudius" - it's written as a (fictitious) autobiography by Claudius, who became emporer after Caligula. It covers the reigns of Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, and then his own reign.
Load More Replies...Ever hear of his two pleasure barges he had constructed? Let alone declaring himself a god? He started out very level headed and was a good emperor. I think he lost his mind after an assassination attempt.
it seems that he could have been insane due to lead or antimony poisoning... but as to whether he was insane or otherwise sane, I don't think there is any doubt!
Yeah, no. Even his Roman contemporaries say this guy was a f*****g lunatic.
Napoleon, there wasn't really a ''bad'' or a ''good'' side in the Napoleonic wars
And after he died, someone cut off his *ahem* and it’s been passed down and bought throughout the years. John K. Lattimer bought it in 1977 and it is still in the family possession now as a private property.
Load More Replies...Napoleon believed in meritocracy, that a person could be promoted to any job/office/rank if they were good enough. Many of the ruling powers of Europe hated this idea as they believed only the "high born" should be able to do so.
That didn't keep him from turning the republic into an empire and puting his family members on various European thrones.
Load More Replies...Sooooo…. Drowning half of Europe in blood not such a big deal? Got it.
I think the point is that the opposing side was pretty much equally bad. Which is true, really. Lot of blood from both sides there.
Load More Replies...Depends on your view. A republic warring against now defunct family kingdoms, trying to bring republic gov to the masses.
What republican government, he declares himself emperor and and did the same with areas he conquered, as well as haity
Load More Replies...This was the man (justifiably) famous for separating church and state. Wouldn't it be great to see more of that these days? Let the state be governed by logic?
Carol Baskin. They found her husband alive . People still think she fed her husband to tigers.
The sheriff's department has stated, as of january 2023, that there is absolutely zero proof that her husband is alive. She stated he was, but what else would she say? Oh, "my husband is dead, I killed him."?
Wait what about her taking control of all his money and not letting his children have any. Didn’t she take full control just as soon as she could. She looked for him like OJ looked for the “real killer”.
Her husband is still MIA. I personally think he just grabbed his cash and bailed to a new identity to get out of the marriage.
Hahaha! I am so using “bovine feces” !!! You made my day!
Load More Replies...Again, if you have to get your fact off something off Netflix, you're an idiot.
I cannot prove any of the following. I am posting this in the hope of finding another person who can corroborate. Between 1990 and 1992 I worked at what was then named Town and Country Hospital at 6100 Webb Road, Tampa FL. I am certain I worked with Carol there, but her last name was not Baskin. She was employed as a registered nurse. Most of my life I kept a diary. I have daily entries to confirm what I’m claiming here. Carol said she was married at the time, but she came on to me more than once. This was not my male imagination as my girlfriend at the time also noticed this. Also, any casual conversation with Carol diverted to her talking about endangered Florida panthers or other big cats. Daily entries then also included “Carol always asks someone to start an IV.”, “Carol can’t seem to read a cardiac rhythm strip.” I simply thought she was a lousy or lazy RN. Now I think she was not a nurse at all. Can anyone backup my words?
My standards usually limits my reading to 1-3 out every 10 articles on BP (I'm not into Cringe or AITA); and, of those articles I do view, I never make it past the first 10 or so Posts therein... However, with this article I found myself reading all the Posts, AND a good majority of (often correcting / informed) Reader Comments! Thank You All - Such Fun!! 🙂
Agreed, it’s getting tough to find positive or happy BP thread nowadays, so much anger. Agreed, good post 🙂
Load More Replies...Yes and no on that one. She did have her mom killed. But, that certainly wouldn't have happened if the mom didn't brainwash and abuse her the way she did (not to mention the cons she got away with because of the munchousein by proxy (sp?).
Load More Replies...I would add Kathleen Folbigg. She was convicted of killing four of her children over a decade, but now medical evidence is getting conviction overturned. Two of the children have been shown to have a gene that would cause ear;y death and the others are likely to have the same gene.
Richard iii should be on here for sure- he was a man who favoured the common man over his on retainers, he cared about justice, education, the printing press and the church. He didn’t execute George, he didn’t usurper the throne, he wasn’t a tyrant or a monster. And there’s no evidence to say he killed the princes and there’s more to say they survived. He was a good man and a social reformist in the late 15th century, he’s just seen as a monster because Henry vii had to legitimise his flimsy claim to the throne
Ulysses S Grant. He wasn't a bloody butcher and corrupt president. As a general his campaigns DID produce more casualties than the american public was used to seeing but, HE FOUGHT. Especially in the overland campaign, both he and lincoln understood that the army of northern Virginia needed to be pushed to its breaking point. As a president he supported eaqual rights and passed the KKK act which let the federal goverment prosecute the KKK and other terrorist organizations. Yet who do we remember as the greatest general of the War of the Rebellion? Lee.
The more you read of these the stupider they get with someone justifying vlad the impaler and godamn napoleon
I’m not sure questioning blind, rampant demonizing is actually the same thing as “justifying”, though. It’s ok to have a nuanced understanding of things.
Load More Replies...My standards usually limits my reading to 1-3 out every 10 articles on BP (I'm not into Cringe or AITA); and, of those articles I do view, I never make it past the first 10 or so Posts therein... However, with this article I found myself reading all the Posts, AND a good majority of (often correcting / informed) Reader Comments! Thank You All - Such Fun!! 🙂
Agreed, it’s getting tough to find positive or happy BP thread nowadays, so much anger. Agreed, good post 🙂
Load More Replies...Yes and no on that one. She did have her mom killed. But, that certainly wouldn't have happened if the mom didn't brainwash and abuse her the way she did (not to mention the cons she got away with because of the munchousein by proxy (sp?).
Load More Replies...I would add Kathleen Folbigg. She was convicted of killing four of her children over a decade, but now medical evidence is getting conviction overturned. Two of the children have been shown to have a gene that would cause ear;y death and the others are likely to have the same gene.
Richard iii should be on here for sure- he was a man who favoured the common man over his on retainers, he cared about justice, education, the printing press and the church. He didn’t execute George, he didn’t usurper the throne, he wasn’t a tyrant or a monster. And there’s no evidence to say he killed the princes and there’s more to say they survived. He was a good man and a social reformist in the late 15th century, he’s just seen as a monster because Henry vii had to legitimise his flimsy claim to the throne
Ulysses S Grant. He wasn't a bloody butcher and corrupt president. As a general his campaigns DID produce more casualties than the american public was used to seeing but, HE FOUGHT. Especially in the overland campaign, both he and lincoln understood that the army of northern Virginia needed to be pushed to its breaking point. As a president he supported eaqual rights and passed the KKK act which let the federal goverment prosecute the KKK and other terrorist organizations. Yet who do we remember as the greatest general of the War of the Rebellion? Lee.
The more you read of these the stupider they get with someone justifying vlad the impaler and godamn napoleon
I’m not sure questioning blind, rampant demonizing is actually the same thing as “justifying”, though. It’s ok to have a nuanced understanding of things.
Load More Replies...
