The Worst of BG

[NynJa]

Hol’up. There’s a Sofia Vergara sex scene somewhere?

I can picture this nigga loading up google, bing, yahoo, askjeeves, tor, kazaa...everything

[Koyangi]

I think Churchill is worse than Stalin, easily. That really doesn't matter though. There be no reason to vaguely measure them this way.

lol

[Demosthenes]

What the actual fuck?

[Zealot]

Been awhile since we had a legit Worst of BG addition but this one makes the cut.

[Rhyis.]

I forgot about this thread... definitely worth rekindling it for that one lol

[Spicyryan]

lol

However, it is just as funny to me as it is to you guys.

[Rhyis.]

[Spicyryan]

There is out of touch, and there is is a different historical understanding and perspective. Everyone is latching on to the comment, and I suspect it's not because they are history buffs or anything.

[Koyangi]

AG can curbstomp 99% of the posters here when it comes to world history, perhaps he can enlighten all of us.

[Spicyryan]

AG can curbstomp 99% of the posters here when it comes to world history, perhaps he can enlighten all of us.

Sure, but it is a rabbit hole best avoided. It was in response to it being brought up.

[Zealot]

There is out of touch, and there is is a different historical understanding and perspective. Everyone is latching on to the comment, and I suspect it's not because they are history buffs or anything.

No, it's pretty easy to understand. You are allowing the worst dictator in modern human history to be judged through some sort of lens of time and circumstance and yet holding another world leader who was a contemporary of the first to an objective present-day leftist standard. All you had to say was "Churchill was also a bad guy," and probably most people would say "yes, even by the standards of his day, the British people removed him from power as soon as the war was over." They even gave him another chance later and immediately said "ah, nope, he's still a right bastard, out with him and his government." Remind me how it was Stalin assumed power to begin with and what happened to the entire Soviet political structure following his rise.

[NynJa]

However, it is just as funny to me as it is to you guys.

[Rhyis.]

imagine tripling down on your stupid in the thread that was created to point out stupid

[Spicyryan]

No, it's pretty easy to understand. You are allowing the worst dictator in modern human history to be judged through some sort of lens of time and circumstance and yet holding another world leader who was a contemporary of the first to an objective present-day leftist standard. All you had to say was "Churchill was also a bad guy," and probably most people would say "yes, even by the standards of his day, the British people removed him from power as soon as the war was over." They even gave him another chance later and immediately said "ah, nope, he's still a right bastard, out with him and his government." Remind me how it was Stalin assumed power to begin with and what happened to the entire Soviet political structure following his rise.

First off, Churchill wasnt voted out because he was unpopular or a "right bastard." He was a war time leader, and they were voting for peace time. It was an election of Conservatives against Labor and not a singular issue of Winston Churchill. Although to the Conservatives platform was pretty much Churchill, it was not so for Labor.
Labor having been in charge of organizing the Homefront well and getting lots of credit for that. Conservatives did not believe the polling and the social programs labor offered which Churchill criticized in his classic idiocy as socialism that would see Labor bring the Gestapo to Britain. So, Churchill got the credit and reverence for being a national symbol and war hero, but only the conservatives or your retelling thought he was all the election was about.

Otherwise, I'm still not interested in going down this road on "dictators" because I know that it be a fools errand steeped in Cold War propaganda. Which, before someone jumps to it is not me functioning as an apologist for Stalin. However, it absolutely is appropriate to measure someone for their time and circumstances. That line from you stating otherwise certainly drew my attention.

So no, I don't just think Churchill is "a bad guy". I think he was, in my opinion, a worse individual than Stalin. I know we are institutionally driven to measure Stalin as an equal figure of evil to Hitler, and that causes these exaggerated reactions, but I disagree with that too.

imagine tripling down on your stupid in the thread that was created to point out stupid

I "triple down" in this instance because I believe in the statement. It's not something said out of ignorance, but of a viewpoint.

[Krandor]

Your viewpoint is based on ignorance but go on

[Zealot]

Ok well as a Jew let me check who my grandparents thought was a better person in light of their time and circumstances.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[Zealot]

Unbelievable stance given that these aren't even distant historical figures whose impacts and circumstances can be debated and interpreted. These are men whose time in power happened within living memory.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[Mertron]

yea but did the trains run on time

[Krandor]

Your viewpoint is based on ignorance but go on

no wait actually, don't go on.

get out

[Andalusian girls]

AG can curbstomp 99% of the posters here when it comes to world history, perhaps he can enlighten all of us.

100%