Obviously excluding like Hitler, that’s a gimme.

Can be a good or a bad person.

My vote goes to Churchill or Reagan. Absolutely ignorant people of history.

  • AlexandairBabeuf [they/them]
    ·
    4 years ago

    Genghis Khan. You shouldn't respect the world conqueror just because he did it on horseback & had some glowing histories written about him.

    It's cringe to admire any conqueror but at least like Napoleon or Suleiman didn't burn and slaughter every other city they captured

    • mazdak
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      deleted by creator

        • mazdak
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          deleted by creator

      • AlexandairBabeuf [they/them]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Not even 'refusing to surrender', it was anything short of sublication the day the Mongols showed up. God forbid you try to defend yourselves against a raiding party pillaging the countryside, Merv's garrison beat an early Mongol group but surrendered later, got massacred.

        In fact, it's totally fucked framing to act like self-defense is on the same level as an invading army, the Mongols did not deserve revenge for people making their conquest difficult

    • glk [none/use name]
      ·
      4 years ago

      What glowing histories? Histories of the Mongol empire make the black book of communism look conservative in its accounting.

      • AlexandairBabeuf [they/them]
        ·
        4 years ago

        the primary source that's most detailed--the secret history of the mongols--makes Genghiz look really good & justified