Where are all the..........

[Lincoln Republican]

..........Lincolns, Churchills, FDRs, Ghandhis, Horatio Nelsons,  

now that we need them?

Please discuss.

[John Dule]

We had one. His name was Ron Paul. He was rejected by those he was destined to save, and we must now live in the doomed world we have created for ourselves.

[Fuzzy Bear]

We will reject such people these days because the internet will disclose how, once upon a time, they made the moves on a girl at a party and got slapped, used an ethnic slur in anger that was recorded, had an extramarital affair, and conveyed in a public speech the idea that they were superior beings to the persons they sought to govern and lead.

I'm not defending these behaviors, but when it comes to leaders, America no longer knows what is important. 

[brucejoel99]

We will reject such people these days because the internet will disclose how, once upon a time, they made the moves on a girl at a party and got slapped, used an ethnic slur in anger that was recorded, had an extramarital affair, and conveyed in a public speech the idea that they were superior beings to the persons they sought to govern and lead.

I'm not defending these behaviors, but when it comes to leaders, America no longer knows what is important. 

Press X to doubt.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

He does have a point in the instant access to knowledge and access has a way of making distant heroes feel closer, and thus more human and more flawed.

[SingingAnalyst]

We will reject such people these days because the internet will disclose how, once upon a time, they made the moves on a girl at a party and got slapped, used an ethnic slur in anger that was recorded, had an extramarital affair, and conveyed in a public speech the idea that they were superior beings to the persons they sought to govern and lead.

I'm not defending these behaviors, but when it comes to leaders, America no longer knows what is important. 

[Senator Incitatus]

They are too busy posting on atlas dot com.

[Vittorio]

As capitalist society continues its process of degeneracy, it produces the conditions under which bourgeois Great Men become more and more impossible, because it renders possible the ability for everyone to become world historical in that way.

Empirically, communism is only possible as the act of the dominant peoples “all at once” and simultaneously, which presupposes the universal development of productive forces and the world intercourse bound up with communism. Moreover, the mass of propertyless workers – the utterly precarious position of labour – power on a mass scale cut off from capital or from even a limited satisfaction and, therefore, no longer merely temporarily deprived of work itself as a secure source of life – presupposes the world market through competition. The proletariat can thus only exist world-historically, just as communism, its activity, can only have a “world-historical” existence. World-historical existence of individuals means existence of individuals which is directly linked up with world history.

Each member of the proletariat is increasingly "directly linked up with world history", a process facilitated by technology. This inevitable process paves the way for our rule.

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

they made the moves on a girl at a party and got slapped, used an ethnic slur in anger that was recorded, had an extramarital affair, and conveyed in a public speech the idea that they were superior beings to the persons they sought to govern and lead.

These are all good reasons the people in the OP don't deserve all the praise they gets nowadays

[HillGoose]

As capitalist society continues its process of degeneracy, it produces the conditions under which bourgeois Great Men become more and more impossible, because it renders possible the ability for everyone to become world historical in that way.

Empirically, communism is only possible as the act of the dominant peoples “all at once” and simultaneously, which presupposes the universal development of productive forces and the world intercourse bound up with communism. Moreover, the mass of propertyless workers – the utterly precarious position of labour – power on a mass scale cut off from capital or from even a limited satisfaction and, therefore, no longer merely temporarily deprived of work itself as a secure source of life – presupposes the world market through competition. The proletariat can thus only exist world-historically, just as communism, its activity, can only have a “world-historical” existence. World-historical existence of individuals means existence of individuals which is directly linked up with world history.

Each member of the proletariat is increasingly "directly linked up with world history", a process facilitated by technology. This inevitable process paves the way for our rule.

R u high brah? I don't think anybody feels linked up to world history lmao I mean history is so much longer than we have been alive.

[darklordoftech]

..........Lincolns, Churchills, FDRs, Ghandhis, Horatio Nelsons,  

now that we need them?

Please discuss.

I think Al Gore is one.

[Vittorio]

As capitalist society continues its process of degeneracy, it produces the conditions under which bourgeois Great Men become more and more impossible, because it renders possible the ability for everyone to become world historical in that way.

Empirically, communism is only possible as the act of the dominant peoples “all at once” and simultaneously, which presupposes the universal development of productive forces and the world intercourse bound up with communism. Moreover, the mass of propertyless workers – the utterly precarious position of labour – power on a mass scale cut off from capital or from even a limited satisfaction and, therefore, no longer merely temporarily deprived of work itself as a secure source of life – presupposes the world market through competition. The proletariat can thus only exist world-historically, just as communism, its activity, can only have a “world-historical” existence. World-historical existence of individuals means existence of individuals which is directly linked up with world history.

Each member of the proletariat is increasingly "directly linked up with world history", a process facilitated by technology. This inevitable process paves the way for our rule.

R u high brah? I don't think anybody feels linked up to world history lmao I mean history is so much longer than we have been alive.

Can you name a single peasant from the Middle Ages, with the possible exception of Wat Tyler (himself memorable solely in relation with his function as the head of a jacquerie)?

We proletarians are so much more a part of things than our peasant predecessors. Any one of us has the living standards of a king of old, and have the potential, at least, to be as well-remembered as one. We are all at least as "linked up with world history" as Tyler himself, and even if our individual names go relatively un-recorded, the intimate details of our daily lives will be as available to any historian of this age as those of any king.

When one reads the histories of the Middle Ages, the peasantry seems to disappear in favor of individual aristocrats. When one reads the histories of capitalism, it will be the history almost exclusively of the working-classes.

We, collectively, constitute a ruling class - and more, a class to abolish all class. Capitalism has created this condition; we have it to thank for it, and, so long as it continues to exist, we ought to encourage it to continue in this direction.