Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingston  And I suspect that the historians from 4000 years in the future will not study Bush, but certainly they will study Napoleon and Alexander. To compare them with Bush makes me lol. He is not an example of great results, but of nepotism and stagnation. |
Oh no, I didn't mean to compare Bush with Napoleon and Alexander. That is indeed funny
. It was merely that you seemed to say quite too directly that to get to the political top and have
impact, or to generally have control ove a very large number of people, required high-lvl/pol, and I know you agree that that is not the case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingston Most darkworkers of the past were probably not politicians, but we don't read about them in the historybooks, so thats where my examples came from. |
What we do not know might be more important than what is easily visible.
I would think one has to watch very carefully which indicators they look for to find great people to model or be inspired by. Ever since I learned about the syndrome, I have thought it logical to see any self-destructive acts as important negative signs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingston In Napoleon's case, surely the same audacity that made him great defeated him in the end. He is a classic tragic hero with a fatal flaw. The perfect darkworker off course lives happily ever after, but Napoleon and Alexander were still polarized, and still manifested great results. That was my single point! |
That is a good point then.
One thing you said is interesting, that Alexander died at 30 something. It is probable that someone at that age, even if they had polarized, would not yet have reached a level of consciousness where they had gotten rid of all the more weighty self-destructive tendencies.
I would not like to see you crash.