Individuals in History: Who is the most misunderstood human in history?

[Waldo 96]

1 minute ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Only if you don't understand the difference between advice and an order. 👍

They're both attempts to manipulate and control. One is just more subtle (and so, arguably, more effective) than the other!

[ANGELFIRE1 10]

On 30/01/2019 at 20:52, choogling said:

this post is a perfect example of why this group sucks.

Go on then I'll fall for it, why exactly?.

 

Angel1.

[ANGELFIRE1 10]

Individuals in History:  Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill KG OM CH TD DL FRS RA, for obvious reasons.

 

Angel1.

[Waldo 96]

17 minutes ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

Individuals in History:  Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill KG OM CH TD DL FRS RA, for obvious reasons.

 

Angel1.

I'm curious, in what way is Churchill "somebody whose legacy you feel is often unfairly tainted, or perhaps isn't given enough credit for something they achieved that had a major impact on humanity or the natural world..."?

[Hots on 10]

Oswald Mosely and Enoch Powell.

[cressida 1,561]

Richard III

[Mister M 1,624]

7 hours ago, Hots on said:

Oswald Mosely and Enoch Powell.

What was much misunderstood about Mosely then?

[willman 10]

Liam Neeson

 

[Hots on 10]

12 hours ago, Mister M said:

What was much misunderstood about Mosely then?

I barely know where to start to be honest, later on maybe when I can be bothered.

 

I'll draw your attention to this speech from him though, which could have been from Jeremy Corbyn.

 

Edited February 6, 2019 by Hots on

[Halibut 12]

20 hours ago, Hots on said:

Oswald Mosely and Enoch Powell.

Lol, a racist and a fascist. I know which side you'd have been on on Cable Street.

[neworderishere 0]

Donald trump is very misunderstood. in the future he will be thought of as a great leader.

[Waldo 96]

1 hour ago, Hots on said:

I'll draw your attention to this speech from him though, which could have been from Jeremy Corbyn.

A very emotive and rousing speech, which no doubt many will admire!!

 

I find people tend to react on an emotional level to such speech, rather than scrutinise and coldly examine the content, the merit of what's actually being said, and the possible reasons why it's being said.

 

This kind of emotive speaking is often an attempt to shortcut the rational process of the listener. Such that they do not examine the merit of what's being said. The fact of someone speaking in that way, trying to avoid scrutiny but at the same time, recruit people to his cause; would be a massive red flag for me, and I'd be highly suspicious. People who actually have something of merit to say, rarely resort to this kind of manipulation, they don't need to, the merit of what they're saying speaks volumes.