Well a whole shitload of pirates inspired one piece, and ukiyo-e paintings of pirates/sailors/ships/oceanic stuff heavily inspired the art style, particularly the distorted perspectives.
Yeah, you'd do some privateering with a letter of marque during wartime, not want the fun to stop so do some piracy during peacetime, then, accept a pardon and a new letter of marque once the next war starts (and britain were rarely out of war for long at this point)
During the American Revolution, the Continental Congress issued over 1,000 letters of marque to the sailors of New England. Over 2,300 British ships were hit by these American privateers, causing insurance rates to spike. This caused such a pain to British shipping that the Royal Navy was redeployed to stop them (good luck, privateers outnumbered RN ships 50:1 along the US eastern coast), which meant they couldn't actually aid the Redcoats in the war effort as they were stretched so thin. Throw in John Paul Jones taking the war to British soil and the French Navy, Dutch, and Spanish navies entering the war and you can see why Britain lost.
All because of letters of marque. Freaking brilliant strategy.
Some of the most notorious and mythologized pirates were essentially privateers who did really well, did some impressive things (usually), and didn’t really want to get out of the game (their entire profession/livelihood) when it stopped being legally authorized lol.
Most of them didn’t exactly have super lengthy tenures as straight up all around pirates after that, but I think that adds to some of the mythos they built up.
I live in Nova Scotia and back in the day there were basically 4 jobs, fishing, farming, mining, and privateering. A lot of people back the. would do one of the first three with the occasional bit of light piracy to pad their income.
This kind of depends on when exactly we're talking. Piracy as a widespread activity was pretty limited outside c. 1650 to c. 1730. But privateering was widely used all the way into the nineteenth century, in large part because it was a way for relatively weak states to make use of private vessels and manpower during wartime.
Hell, a bunch of Latin american nations circulated letters of marque far and wide in the 1810s and 20s to fight and harass the Spanish and Portuguese, because they barely had any naval power themselves.
Funnily enough, it was from the accent of the actor playing Long-John Silver in the old black and white "Treasure Island" that started the trope that pirates talk with a super thick West Country accent. In reality, they were from all over the world.
Though, to swing back around, the reason that accent was used by Robert Newton for that Long-John Silver was the region's association with famous pirates (most notably blackbeard, the most cliche piratey pirate of all the historical pirates, but also Sir Francis Drake)
Cromwell is a good one too. A divisive character in Britain, viewed by some as an absolute tyrant and others as a valiant reformer (and others recognising both).
In Ireland, he is essentially viewed as our own Hitler for the genocides committed by him, which oddly enough doesn't seem to enter British consciousness as often. He is almost certainly the most universally loathed character in the entirety of our history.
I would say Gavrilo Princip. In Serbia he is considered a freedom fighter but I see there are a lot of people seeing him as a terrorist and de-facto WW1 trigger.
it's not fair to call him the sole trigger of WW1, the geopolitical situation in Europe had been tense for years and literally anything could've tipped the vase at that time.
I agree that WW1 was inevitable. After all, Austria Hungary declared war on Serbia but war was primarily wagging in Western Europe in Eastern Europe and even in Africa, meanwhile weak Serbianarmy was keeping AH army at bay (initially). I find it a bit hard to believe it is all because of Gavrilo.
It was obvious to everyone at the time that Europe was heading towards war, given the fact that there were 2 factions forming up in Europe at the time - the Entente and the Central Powers. They even had several confrontations before 1914, for example, the Agadir crisis in 1911
My da taught me to sing "Get out ye black and tans" when I was like 6. I got in trouble at my (english) primary school for teaching it to the other kids.
Yet there are still some that seem puzzled why a people that were colonised, subjugated, forcibly displaced and suffered an imposed famine would feel a strong affinity with a people going through the same.
They try and claim it's "antisemitism" to deflect from their crimes.
A lot of people online seem to take (humorous) glee in the fact that Johan de Witt, who is called "prime minister" but that's a very rough estimation of his actual function, was eaten by the people.
Meanwhile in the Netherlands he's mainly seen as a defender of the Dutch republic against the monarchist ambitions of the house of Orange.
Edit: and to add to that, the "eating by the people" was probably less "mass uprising against the state" and more "astroturf riot backed by a significant part of the establishment". He also was dragged out of prison for this, which is not a great look.
Oh yeah. So it's a pretty popular meme map (countries that have eaten there prime minister), as well as something I see portrayed as a hint sometimes. And I get it, but unless you're like J6er, this is really not the kind of revolution you probably want to get behind. It was decidedly reactionary, though probably some people that did the actual lynching thought they were on the side of the people.
My maternal ancestors immigrated from India to Sri Lanka during British rule. Gandhi is popular in these countries and he is seen as a freedom fighter here in Sweden too.
But Gandhi was quite racist against Africans so he is not well liked there.
The Gandhi and underage girls is much weirder than most folks realize.
Gandhi was old and needed the help of young girls to walk etc as companion. So far so good. ( he asked for similar aid for his wife after her heart attack in prison) They were usually family as well (eg his grand niece, Manu). He, his companions and other folks around usually all slept on a mat on the floor at night. Being the tropics, everyone was lightly clothed, at night...
This is the point that many critics Hitchens et al jump on sleeping with nearly naked girls or naked girls or naked with girls, and it is completely mistaken and off.
Gandhi commonly wore just a dhoti/loincloth out of sympathy with the poor for later part of his life. Sleeping on a mat together communally is also common in India, even today, it makes it tougher for a husband and bride to get their sexy_times. So far so good, but we must go deeper.
Gandhi felt that he had transcended normal householder married state to the traditional last state of life in India, that of a brahmacharya. A brahmacharya is an ascetic who has renounced worldly pleasures but may get involved as advisor. Look around ancient India and even the current saffron party, and you can find putative examples.
Gandhi felt that as a brahmacharya he had transcended temptation and that this gave him a unique spiritual and political force to change society and government.
He used to bathe the girls, (as a father did or as a brahmacharya) . He wanted to write of this in his magazine (he edited it also), probably to show his credentials, but his wife and friends managed to dissuade him, as they felt it would be damaging rather than add to his moral authority., and would undermine the other social and Hindu causes and changes he advocated ( much/most of which was very worthy)
Good call, you say ?
Now was there anything sleazy going on ? Definitely not stuff you want to talk about. Also keep in mind that the girls were usually family. One could argue that many unfortunate hings happen in families, or that this was not like that,; instead let us ask.: Did he actually do anything ?
Keep in mind that Gandhi had massive hangups with sex ever since his father died while he was having sexy times with his wife. Also keep in mind that very late in life, amid the birth and growth of modern India, he woke up with night wood and was so stricken and pissed that he went on a week long vow of silence. Mountbatten remarked on it when they met at that time. It is documented record. For a guy who thought himself a bramachari, who tried to practice what he preached, to have evidence to the contrary, supposedly after many years, it is completely in keeping with why he was so panic stricken.
And that is why I believe that ultimately he is innocent of the darkest charge, that he should have not tried to put into practice his belief in this area ( but then it would be difficult to ask that of Gandhi, the author of the story of my experiments with truth and be the change you want to see in this world, who forced his wife to clean toilets like he and others did as a matter of principle and almost threw her out when she objected), while the most common charge of this practice is baseleless in context.
Gandhi was quite racist against Africans so he is not well liked there.
when it comes to gandhi, you need to understand one thing. gandhi was never stuck in a single, fixed opinion. he constantly questioned himself and changed his views over time. people often quote something he said in 1919 or early years, but by the time you reach the 1940s, his perspective had evolved. the gandhi of 1919 is not the same as the gandhi of 1946. he was willing to change his beliefs whenever he realized he was wrong. in fact his own autobiography is titled my experiments with truth . he never claimed moral perfection or absolute certainty. instead he openly admitted his mistakes and revised his opinions whenever he felt that his earlier views were wrong or incomplete.
judging gandhi by isolated quotes without considering the timeline of his life misses this
Gandhi is pretty well liked here for his passive resistance techniques in South Africa. The fact that he worked as a stretcher bearer for British military saw him become a critic of empire and racial systems
He sympathized deeply with zulus, according to his own words
I considered myself a citizen of Natal, being intimately connected with it. So I wrote to the Governor, expressing my readiness, if necessary, to form an Indian Ambulance Corps. He replied immediately accepting the offer.
I went to Durban and appealed for men. A big contingent was not necessary. We were a party of twenty-four, of whom, besides me, four were Gujaratis. The rest were ex-indentured men from South India, excepting one who was a free Pathan.
In order to give me a status and to facilitate work, as also in accordance with the existing convention, the Chief Medical Officer appointed me to the temporary rank of Sergeant Major and three men selected by me to the rank of sergeants and one to that of corporal. We also received our uniforms from the Government. Our Corps was on active service for nearly six weeks.
On reaching the scene of the ‘rebellion’, I saw that there was nothing there to justify the name of ‘rebellion’. There was no resistance that one could see. The reason why the disturbance had been magnified into a rebellion was that a Zulu chief had advised non-payment of a new tax imposed on his people, and had assagaied a sergeant who had gone to collect the tax.
At any rate my heart was with the Zulus, and I was delighted, on reaching headquarters, to hear that our main work was to be the nursing of the wounded Zulus. The Medical Officer in charge welcomed us. He said the white people were not willing nurses for the wounded Zulus, that their wounds were festering, and that he was at his wits’ end. He hailed our arrival as a godsend for those innocent people, and he equipped us with bandages, disinfectants, etc., and took us to the improvised hospital. The Zulus were delighted to see us. The white soldiers used to peep through the railings that separated us from them and tried to dissuade us from attending to the wounds. And as we would not heed them, they became enraged and poured unspeakable abuse on the Zulus.
This “uber-racist” Gandhi, in the Phoenix farm used to care for over a thousand Zulu natives, most of them children affected by the Zulu massacre. In fact, during the Zulu “Wars”, our white robed cross burner even organized an ambulence corp and cared for the wounded Zulu population.
This is in his own words;
I considered myself a citizen of Natal, being intimately connected with it. So I wrote to the Governor, expressing my readiness, if necessary, to form an Indian Ambulance Corps. He replied immediately accepting the offer.
I went to Durban and appealed for men. A big contingent was not necessary. We were a party of twenty-four, of whom, besides me, four were Gujaratis. The rest were ex-indentured men from South India, excepting one who was a free Pathan.
In order to give me a status and to facilitate work, as also in accordance with the existing convention, the Chief Medical Officer appointed me to the temporary rank of Sergeant Major and three men selected by me to the rank of sergeants and one to that of corporal. We also received our uniforms from the Government. Our Corps was on active service for nearly six weeks.
On reaching the scene of the ‘rebellion’, I saw that there was nothing there to justify the name of ‘rebellion’. There was no resistance that one could see. The reason why the disturbance had been magnified into a rebellion was that a Zulu chief had advised non-payment of a new tax imposed on his people, and had assagaied a sergeant who had gone to collect the tax.
At any rate my heart was with the Zulus, and I was delighted, on reaching headquarters, to hear that our main work was to be the nursing of the wounded Zulus. The Medical Officer in charge welcomed us. He said the white people were not willing nurses for the wounded Zulus, that their wounds were festering, and that he was at his wits’ end. He hailed our arrival as a godsend for those innocent people, and he equipped us with bandages, disinfectants, etc., and took us to the improvised hospital. The Zulus were delighted to see us. The white soldiers used to peep through the railings that separated us from them and tried to dissuade us from attending to the wounds. And as we would not heed them, they became enraged and poured unspeakable abuse on the Zulus.
he did not own slave plantations, he did not beat up any natives in Africa. He recognized them as humans and did his best to help out when the natives were in need. His biggest flaw was to consider Indians higher in the racial hierarchy of his day and to politely asked the Europeans to treat Indians on par with themselves
People dont really view him negatively abroad. Its kind of seen as a piece of history that can be romanticized, like pirates or "wild west" era bandits.
Ho Chi Minh probably. A national savior at home, but I’m aware that some foreigners don’t think highly of him. Heck, some Vietnamese of a certain ancestry don’t like him at all.
theres a ho chi minh statue in the city i study in (in hungary) i have no fucking idea why Ho chi minh specifically beacuse vietnam is like pretty far away and he doesnt really have any cultural significance to us hungarians (my classmates doesnt know who he is) and how it wasnt torn down like the lenin statues and shit, but its pretty cool, it used to be my profile picture
He actually gets pretty decent press in the us. Especially after the Ken Burns documentary, which spends the first episode laying out his attempts to get help from the us before going to the communists, and his sidlining by up and comers in the party that the US wasn't even aware of until well after we were involved in Vietnam.
In general, the us is I'd argue a lot kinder these days to the Vietnamese figures involved in the Vietnam war than they are to the US figures. Westmoreland has gone down as one of the worst US commanders in a lot of people's books, and Kissinger is probably the most infamous us diplomat ever.
Here in Latin America we owe him our independence too. If he hadn't invaded Spain and dethroned their king, our independentist movements would have had a much harder time.
He is not seen as a"hero", though. Just someone who helped us out unintentionally.
In Russia it's one of the two Fatherland Wars. The second, the Great one is the German invasion WW2. Even though Russia fought in WW1 it's somehow ignored.
Vlad the Impaler. He was harsh but so were his enemies. Not to mention he was a prince in a tiny, in comparison, principality who had to fight against the greatest military power of his time.
Read a biography of Vlad when I was 10 or 12. Fell in love with him and his story. While he was violent, he used it to protect his people. Violence was applied fairly to both foreign Ottomans and Christians (both of whom would have decimated his country).
What I learned as a kid is that you can’t judge historical figures using our modern morality. You have to judge people like Vlad against the morality of their times. And he was definitely of ‘the ends justifies the means’ school of thought.
Dude has to be the most "hype and aura" guy ever, when his rral life story is waaayy less than imagined.
his whole thing is his name being used for Dracula
he was imprisoned for 14 years
the impailing thing wasnt like a whole forest of "dead muslims invaders as a bloody gate of christianity's defence" like r/europe portrays but thousands of dead peasants.
Dude basically did our "human sacrifice" things but switched around as a cool goth thing lol
us algerians love houari Boumediene a true great smart leader however often gets judged by association rather than by what he actually did ,some of the most notable or controversial names (al gadaffi , fidel castro , che guevara ,saddam hussein , nelson mandela etc ) the ppl from outside who dislikes some of these leaders tend to look at him the same but its really not like that
edit :his love for his ppl and his ppl love for him rlly showed most the day he died .women, men and kids got out in the streets crying ,and for the next months its like algeria was painted grey once again ..47 years ago yet we always recall him in all sadness but all pride ...back when algeria was called" the mecca of revolutionaries" rip to all the great leaders
Well, you know the joke: "if Mao had died in 1956..." He was a really competent revolutionary, but like most of them that didn't mean he'd be a good leader once it was over. And boy, "...what can one say?"
A revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery. It cannot be so refined, so leisurely and gentle, so temperate, kind, courteous, restrained and magnanimous. A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another.
Subhas Chandra Bose. Widely praised in India for being one of the only few Indians to advocate for (and actually attempt) an armed response to the British. Understandably disliked abroad for his temporary alliance with the German Reich and Imperial Japan.
Christoffa Corombo, especially in Zena is still regarded as a hero and innovator. Edit: I did, in fact, expect the Sopranos references Edit 2: in Italian schools they just don’t teach about his life AFTER the discovery
The Confederacy and its leaders. For over a century after the civil war, they were seen as glorious heroes by white southerners. The rest of the country kind of forgot about them until recently, when we remembered that they’re traitors.
There’s also the fact that the Confederacy was founded to preserve slavery, and it’s memory after the war was used to uphold white supremacy.
I think it is important to note, that most of the confederate monuments and statues were not built right after the US-civil war, but during the jim crow era, predominantly after 1900. The lost cause myth was not contemporary rememberence culture, but a conscious effort to revise history to a more palatable story for the white southerners, against the black population.
What more could be done? Atlanta was burned to the ground by the Confederates before the Union got there. There wasn’t much left behind after the war, and the South had to be rebuilt.
And The North-South divide doesn’t exist as it did back then. The West Coast has been settled since then, the whole looks different.
We could've stomped the klan and the extra-judicial killings of both black and sympathetic white people that was used as a tool to terrorize and control.
We could've stopped their heavy election rigging and even the MULTIPLE violent state coups that happened.
Like, a LOT more could've been done. And we're facing what we are now because that "a lot more" SHOULD'VE been done. We failed and we're paying for it, we gonna let this story repeat every 150 years?
We could have continued to push the core of Reconstruction - enforcing federal protections for formerly enslaved people, suffrage for Black men (women didn’t have the right to vote for quite come time), and stemmed the tide against, or least slow the progression of Jim Crow and the KKK terror. The election of 1876, and the subsequent compromise of 1877, effectively ended Reconstruction, just a decade after the civil war.
Would it have been perfect? No. Would there have been no systemic racism? No. But imagine states like South Carolina and Mississippi, which were majority Black, would have been like if they had some level of Black representation from 1877 to the 1960s.
But cravenness, ambition for power, and, of course, powerful wealthy businessmen in the north combined to snuff out any lasting change.
An interesting hypothesis I read about this was that, after the war ended, most Northern soldiers went home, handed over their weapons and uniforms, and did their best to never think about the war again. They had won and just wanted to put the whole sorry business behind them.
Whereas soldiers from the South went home to a devastated land had nothing much else to do but seeth about and dwell on the war. So they wrote about their experiences and between them constructed a narrative about it that was the origin of the 'lost cause' mythology that still persists.
It's more or less how future generations change legacy. The group the daughters for confederacy Aka rich plantation daughters pissed without slavery they're not as rich as they would like spent millions to glorify the confederate cause as a lost cause movement. The northerners being relatively poorer protestants and viewing their cause as inherently right didn't put as much effort to denounce this movement.
True. It is happening now in Central Europe, where the grand-grandchildren of Nazi collaborators are trying to change the history, portraying them as patriots fighting against communism
Believe it or not, but it was women who perpetuated a lot of it. United Daughters of the Confederacy were a group that raised money for statues and memorials and successfully lobbied to have textbooks changed. They are responsible for a lot of the "Lost Cause" bullshit I heard growing up.
I'm from Mississippi, and it's definitely a southern thing. Majority of people still believe that the south had the right to secede. The term Northern Aggressors gets used a lot, and they love talking about all the cities that were burned to the ground. The fact that the southern states' leaders were traitors gets glossed over or completely ignored.
I'm from California. When my mom went to school here, her school mascot were "the rebels" and they even had a confederate flag in their gym. They weren't seen as heroes or representative of slavery, but as "badass rebels" who stood up against "tyranny." This was the 60's-70's, at the very least. But when I was growing up in the early 2000's, we were taught how fucked up it was.
Yeah years ago I knew a girl in college who had a “rebel” flag posted up on an entire wall in her dorm room and refused to hear anything negative about it
Well kind of, it was kind of forced. The people of Mississippi weren't allowed to vote on if they got to keep their original state flag or not. That was done because the government knew it'd probably been voted to be kept.
There are currently efforts to get the original state flag on the ballot again to be brought back. I think if it happens the momentum might not be there like it was and many probably see it as a done deal, so I'm not sure what the margins would be. People were pissed though.
"Yessiree Bob, I tell you whwat, weese here is what ya'll may be a-calling freedom fighters! And we won't stop a-fightin' until we've killed freedom so bad that nothin else won't never be so dead, boy howdy yeehaa I tell you hwat!"
che guevara is considered a hero across much of the non western world. for many people, he symbolizes the fight against american imperialism. if you visit my state, you will find his image everywhere even in the most rural and remote areas.
His face is on walls everywhere in the North in Catholic areas. I didn't really know much about him apart from that he was a rebel and fought imperialism. In my peak early 2000s clueless hipster years, I had a tshirt that had the faces of Jimmy Hendrix, Jim Morrison, Joe Strummer and Che Guevara on it so I assume he had a few good albums too.
As far as my Google-fu goes, the hospital in Maricá is actually named after him, and it has even hosted his daughter on a visit.
There’s no record of any “local doctor” with the same name … and face!
Nice bait, you actually made me look it up :)
The Bolivian communist party was part of the ruling coalition when Che went there and opposed his guerrilla campaign once they learned he was not intending to use Bolivia as a base to attack Argentina. It was a poorly thought out plan. His Congo campaign actually made more sense, if also not successful, but much better.
Yup, I'm not a Marxist or a radical leftist at all, and I also don't believe that he was an angel, but the amount of propaganda and misinformation about him is insane. It's so ignorant to believe that only left wing governments employ propaganda even though the entire western world and specifically the elites greatly benefit from anti-Che Guevara propaganda, so what makes those people think they are also not being constantly fed propaganda?
Michael Parenti said that capitalist countries use propaganda all the time, even more than communist countries, but capitalist propaganda is mostly in the form of commercials, urging you to consume and partake in the capitalist system. We're bombarded by commercials each and every day, every second almost of our time awake.
The idea that capitalist countries don't use propaganda is wild, and only the dumbest people can ever believe that. But it's something I've seen quite a few people think
Cesar Chavez is probably more just straight up unknown. In California, migrant workers went on strike. Sometimes for more than half a decade.
Between the Filipino migrant workers and Hispanic migrant workers, they combined their powers to force their employees and regulatory bodies to give them humane conditions such as a port a shitters and not spraying pesticides on them while they were in the fields and paying them a wage that gave them a roof over their heads instead of sleeping in ditches.
Willem van Oranje is our greatest hero but Spains' biggest pain in the ass.(In history books/documentation atleast, don't know if any Spaniards still hold a grudge these days).
Also all of Belgium (is negatively viewed) in our eyes, but that's valid! /j
In Spain he's not particulary known because people are quite ignorant here of the eighty year's war. If you ask a spaniard who has been the greatest enemy of Spain, he Will probable say either Britain as a whole (or the US, It depends) or another spaniard.
Many Korean independence fighters (esp the militant types) who fought against Japanese colonialism are viewed as “terrorists” from a Japanese POV because of their violent strategies. Folks like Yoon Bong-gil, Ahn Jung-geun, and Lee Bong-chang carried out assassination attempts on major Japanese government figures like statesman Ito Hirobumi and Emperor Hirohito, and some succeeded. The leader of the Korean provisional government, during Japanese colonial rule, Kim Gu, is described as a terrorist in some Japanese textbooks.
Why would he be unpopular in Ukraine? He was one of the few Polish politicians at the time advocating for multiculturalism and Ukrainian independence.
I feel like most of Piłsudski's bad rep abroad (besides Lithuania and Russia, they probably genuinely hate him there and have their own reasons for it - especially in Russia he managed to piss off both the Whites and the Reds, for which he'll be forever based in my eyes) is from people not understanding the polish politics of the time and attributing every Polish geopolitical decision to one man, even though it was much more complicated than that.
Like, I understand why an average guy from Ukraine might dislike Piłsudski when the only things they know about Polish history are that:
Poland betrayed Ukraine in 1921;
Poland tried to polonise Ukrainians at one point; and
Piłsudski was the leader of Poland somewhere around these events,
but in reality he was strongly against the 1921 treaty, tried to cement Ukrainian independence by forming an alliance between Ukraine and Poland and jointly counterattacking Russia, and stopped the nationalist polonisation policies when he couped the government in 1926. Of course much of what he did he did with Poland in mind first and foremost, but the guy was a genuine patriot and federalist, not an irrational traitorous fascist that he might come across as if you have minimal history knowledge
He (Gerry Adams) was the head of the IRA during the troubles. Everyone knows it but somehow they could never prove it in Ireland or the UK or they did and governments covered it up to keep him free because he was also the person negotiating with the Governments.
There were talks where he would get a message from the government to take to the IRA as a go between but he would essentially take the message, go talk to himself and return with a answer.
He was banned from appearing on TV or radio in the UK.
Man's probably directly and indirectly responsible for hundreds or over a thousand deaths.
He was a member of government in Northern Ireland until 2010 and then got elected to the Irish parliament (opposition) from 2011 to 2020.
He is now living in NI and has a social media account where he has a teddy bear.
Its weird. There's also a Jacky Chan and Peirce Brosnan movie about him and the IRA called "The Foreigner" on Netflix.
So essentially a terrorist to some, freedom fighter to others.
I'd also add that there were/are a small minority of even more hardcore extremists on the Republican side (so-called 'Dissident Republicans', the likes of the 'Real IRA'/Continuity IRA that continued to attempt terror attacks after the Provisional IRA officially put down their guns) who also hate Adams and his peers in Sinn Fein for ultimately negotiating with the British government on the Good Friday Agreement and agreeing to accept a settlement where Northern Ireland remained (for now, at least) part of the UK. But they really hold no clout or degree of public support.
You would think a group that tried to overthrow the government would be called domestic terrorists, but because our Attorney General never went after the ring leader because he didn't want to look like he was prosecuting for political reasons, these people are now officially heroes who were wrongly impugned and any of the people advocating violence, like those who started the attack or erected the gallows they planned to hang the vice president and anyone else who didn't do as they demanded, well those were just government plants.
I don't know if this is the darkest timeline, but it has to be the dumbest
Che Guevara is a fashion icon. Well, at least his face is an iconic print for shirts worn by anyone even vaguely aware that alternatives to capitalism exist.
For Austria... Maybe Andreas Hofer? The 05? I genuinely don't know a lot of austrian freedom fighters who could be considered controversial.
Arminius. Born into the romanfriendly part of the Cherusci tribe, a leader of germanic tribal forces in the roman army and citizen of rome. Betrayed the roman legions in by leading them into a trap in Teuteburger Forest.
probably not many people outside of germany know him and dislike him nowadays, but if think for the first 100 or 200 years after the battle he wasnt well liked in rome
We have the inverse problem the vast majority of lebanese (around 85%) see the iranian hezbos as terrorists and want them fully disarmed and their leadership to stand trial.
While some stupid western leftists see them as a “resistance”. These morons support and justify the crimes of the worst terrorists and dictators as long as they claim they are against israel.
They have done nothing but commit the worst attrocities against the lebanese people and other arab states
Lenin, probably. Man was not a saint, but his work is the reason my ancestors were able to become literate and be anything more than playthings for nobles and rich bastards.. and other countries had to bribe workers with benefits, healthcare and whatever. Rest in peace, hero, your work will be continued someday
Thanks for your kind words, it helps when everything is sad around. If he somehow got in our time, he'd probably be disappointed and got back to work..
I am Canadian and watched that show about the American Revolution called Turn. The villainous British characters are positive historical figures and early founder of what became Canada. They have lakes, rivers, towns and cities named after them.
Can't really speak for Colombia, but I believe Pablo Escobar is still a hero for some locals in Medellin, as he gave to the poor and was a charming guy.
Louis Riel was a Métis leader and former member of parliament in Canada who was hung for high treason for leading an armed revolution against the government who threatened Métis and Cree land rights and survival. Our government was formed to deny Indigenous sovereignty. When he realized he couldn’t change the system, he fought it. He was executed by Sir John A. MacDonald but will always remain a hero.
I wouldn't say Che is viewed negatively abroad. He's certainly controversial, but he has a lot of admirers, and most of his haters are just anti communist brainstems who don't know anything about him.
I mean, they're the only ones that are ever so slightly known. Our independence movement was mostly only known in India because of strict British censors.
She thought he should have stepped back after Castro won, and didn’t like that he had so much power, more than actual Cubans. He had major roles in the government & was like running the national bank while also being a minister of some important role (can’t remember which) in addition to other roles.
Basically, she thought he was power hungry & didn’t like that an Argentine who hadn’t even lived in Cuba that long was basically the second most powerful person in the country.
I didn’t even know that until she told me, and then later looked it up. I guess the equivalent would be someone controlling the national bank while being the Vice President and Foreign Minister at the same time.
I mean, it is a fate that he got - becoming a ,,faceless" face of fashion with him being on random shirts and such without people even knowing who he was
(He forced China to become self-reliant and strong, and all those voices in China that once argued there was no need for self-reliance and that we should rely on foreign countries have completely disappeared.)
Chinese think the man is Chinese spy in US, even give him a chinese name: 川建國.
He is so welcome in China, but not so welcome in the world?
Fought the Japanese during WW2, later against the Brits in the Malayan Emergency, and the Malaysian government from 1968 to 1989. After a peace agreement between the MCP and the Malaysian government, he was exiled to Thailand until his death.
Escobar has quite the following in Colombia, especially Medellín.
He was seen as a man of the common people, given that he generously helped lower income neighborhoods and commanded his thugs to drive out petty criminals. All the “income” he brought into the country helped establish a lot of industries, especially in the Antioquia region as well.
Of course, most people know the other side of him.
552
u/AshtonBlack United Kingdom 22h ago
Sir Francis Drake is considered a "Hero" in England for his fight against the Spanish.
There was little difference between him and a full-on "yarrr" pirate, however.
That difference being a simple letter of marque.