Is the age of great men over? This perpetual peace...

wait for the space age
that's when shit will get interesting

If this (mostly) global peace persists, we're probably going to start re-evaluating are criteria for Great Men, since in the past that criteria was basically how much land they conquered. But now that all the world is becoming more tightly intertwined, conquering isn't really that feasible anymore.

In the future, I predict the Great Men will probably be technological innovators in the vein of Elon Musk, that is if Elon Musk actually ends up accomplishing his projects instead of just coming up with cool ideas.

>This perpetual peace,

There's war everwhere. The time for Great Men, is areas like Syria and the developing world.

Though a simplification, under One Man Rule, the individual is pretty important.

The "great" men (meaning, the people who greatly affect the world's progression) nowadays are the scientific and technological innovators. It has been this way for at least the last several centuries. A scientist who is responsible for major breakthroughs affects the world more than a Napoleon or Hitler.

>What would Alexander be without the army his father left him?

In this case, we actually have a control by way of Philip III. Even with his father's army, he didn't accomplish very much. That's why Alex is a great man. Were he merely Alexander the Ordinary, he would have used the foundation his father built to assume hegemonic dominance over Greece, perhaps becoming recognized as the first king of a United Greece. But since he was Alexander the Great, he went beyond that to try and make an empire

I'd like to point out though, that men come in varying quality, some are great, others are meak. Could Caesar, a man of a declining noble family, end up as a populare dictator even though he had having many great figures competing with him if he wasn't as great of a man? I think it's certainly possible, for another great man to substitute another great man, but replace a great with the mediocre and things might not go well.

His hyperloop train got approved for construction

I was thinking exactly about this today. The exaggerated numbers of information (much of which is actually garbage) and the oversaturation makes it worse.

At the same time makes you think about the things in another perspective: how many of the great men and sages of past times would be today just another blogger or just a butthurt frustrated person?

>Is the age of megalomaniacal rulers having absolute power over vast armies of slaves and war prisoners over?
>Is the age where hereditary rule allowing Kings to take control of unconscionable amounts of wealth they didn't do a single thing to earn over?
>Are we in an era where fame and prestige are closer to being based on personal merit and abilities than ever, relative to the past?

Gee OP I don't know

>Are we in an era where fame and prestige are closer to being based on personal merit and abilities than ever, relative to the past?
Top lol

Fame and prestige today are based on money, ostentation and nepotism more than ever

...He has already accomplished many of them? Why do you people forget what he has done and focus on what he is planning to do, perpetually saying "but he didn't do that one thing he promised yet"

He already made Tesla and SpaceX what they are today, that alone cements him into the annals of history as a great leader.

>Fame and prestige today are based on money, ostentation and nepotism more than ever
No, not more than ever

It's bad right now and this is rampant, but human quality of life has been steadily increasing forever. It used to be that literally a select handful of people had everything, and the rest had nothing and had to live off the land. It's still that way in much of the world, but less so because of modern technology, and in the civilized work this is simply not the case. Even destitute gibmedats have houses and cars and modern medicine.

>human quality of life has been steadily increasing forever. It used to be that literally a select handful of people had everything, and the rest had nothing and had to live off the land. It's still that way in much of the world, but less so because of modern technology, and in the civilized work this is simply not the case. Even destitute gibmedats have houses and cars and modern medicine.
That has nothing to do with fame and prestige.

Should have begun at hard times.

>Are we in an era where fame and prestige are closer to being based on personal merit and abilities than ever, relative to the past?
>Are we in an era where fame and prestige are closer to being based on personal merit and abilities than ever, relative to the past?
>Are we in an era where fame and prestige are closer to being based on personal merit and abilities than ever, relative to the past?
uhmm maybe like 3% closer

Nothing but weak men today.

How?

The "Great Men" of the past maintained position by domination, requiring to constantly point at themselves to project themselves as a threat. They are dominated by competition, they had to constantly fear being usurped by other rival "Great Men," such that their nihilistic egotistical existences were miserable mockeries of human potential.

The great people of the future maintain position by giving power, by how they can elevate their fellow human beings, sharing in the great mutual benefit to everyone this provides. They don't point inwards but outwards, to the value in other people, their goal is to make everyone as great as they can be; they are teachers in the most abstract sense. They don't fear "rivals" because those who are more competent share the same goal of mutual advancement. Great people are fountains of the creation of human wellbeing.

The future is the realization of humanity's true nature as existential artists who co-create the tapestry of shared existence. Your worship of the struggle for existence is rooted in the deepest nihilism that sees value only in the destruction of it.

Here's one good role model I like: youtube.com/watch?v=sYEI6jWT244