Who are some of the most over rated people in history?

Hitler

Every major figure in WW2

The guy was the Caesar of a Rome created in 12 years. No small feat.

Hadn't happened since Bonaparte.

Hot, talented, and rich as fuck. Wonder what she was like in bed.

Churchill. People fucking act like he won the war

I think Napoleon was not so great.

Obviously, he was a reactionary tyrant and should be remembered as such.

But I would also argue that he was not an extraordinarily talented reactionary tyrant.
First because he had no vision, he was just riding the waves of the times, only going after what opportunity offered him.
Secondly because in the end he made a series of stupid mistakes and ruined everything for everyone.
Thirdly because even when he was winning, at his favourite game which was war, he generally did so because of good luck, excellent officers, and enthusiastic soldiers.

Not an Anglo btw.

But no one overrated Caesar's state-building skills.
If anyone gets undeserved credits on that point it's Augustus.

Columbus with his faulty calculations

>da vinci

Post feet.

Theodore Roosevelt

>Whoever made this meme is a brainlet.

They challenged the Emperor of Rome in the name of God - and they spend eternity in hellfire for it.

Moses is a proven liar. Does "God" sound like something you a mortal should run around spreading lies about - particularly murderous, rapine lies?

youtube.com/watch?v=0grTe8VTTkk

luck is a skill
Kaiser W*lhelm ii is generally overrated

It's true though. Leonardo wasted most of his talent on procrastination and mindless study. He never made any great sculptures or works of architecture.
Most of his paintings were unfinished, and he actively ruined at least two of them because of his impatience: The Last Supper is a shambles, because he refused to work quick enough for wet fresco, and the Battle of Anghiari melted off the wall, because he tried to paint with oils on improper support. Sebastano del Piombo would later master oil frescos, and you've never heard of him.

The person Leonardo wanted to be already was, and his name was Brunelleschi. Brunelleschi did everything Leonardo wanted to do; revolutionize architecture, make incredible advances in painting by developing Linear perspective, and publishing influential treatises.

Can you explain to me what a gay pop singer from the 80's death has to do with literally anything else in this image?

I want Elaine to be my wife.

Excellent officiers and enthusiastic soldiers aren't enough to crush whole europe 5 times
Furthermore, with his laws, civil code and institutions (still used today btw) , he is literally the father of modern france and one of the largest responsable of what modern europe look like

>reactionary

Opinion discarded.

DELETE

probably some ancient Greek philosopher
Aristotle kinda fucked things up, mostly cause people got obsessed with his stuff.

>Excellent officiers and enthusiastic soldiers aren't enough to crush whole europe 5 times
With some luck, yes it is, as he demonstrated.

As for his administration... codification was what everyone wanted to do, and his institutions mostly disappeared with the empire except for Polytechnique, la Legion d'honneur, and the parisian police.

His individual legacy is not more important than that of Louis XVI, Robespierre, Adolphe Thiers... And it is less important than NapoIeon III's.

>Can you explain to me what a gay pop singer from the 80's death has to do with literally anything else in this image?

I have no idea, it's just random words and numbers - they don't mean anything to me or other mortals.

youtube.com/watch?v=kmDEwHFCdxw

Did he want to stop the revolution and go back on several advances it achieved ?
Yes.
He was thus reactionary.

...

Churchill
De Gaulle
Rommel
McArthur
Marie Curie
Einstein
Leonidas

Plato
Descartes
Nietzsche
Marx
Che Guevara
Einstein
Tesla
Gandhi
Mandela
Darwin
Oscar Wilde
Henry V, VIII and most english kings

To be honest, not many of those known by the vast normie masses are up to their name; only a very few like Napoleon, Caesar or Newton.

>the most influential (or the 2nd, if you're a Stalin fanboy) person of the 20th centry is overrated

>all enlightenment philosophy was egalitarian, democratic and anti-authoritarian
blatantly false. Napoleon took the revolution in a different direction. that’s all.

kind of did, bombing the everloving fuck out of germany helped sustain a victory overall.

I think Russia is overrated in that regard.

>Socrates
Basically only asked "hey, what if good thing.... not actually good thing?" and then the Athenians poisoned him. He did influence Plato who actually DID do something.

Kek is overrated
>No happening for months
>Cockteases ww3 bluebeam and rapture
Yet nothing ever happens

She's not hot but those titties are nice in that pic

That's because Wihelm II was a fucking retard.

The Spartans are easily the most overrated people in history.

the canadian equivalent is even worse
i don't even remember her name, and she's going to be on the 10

"adventurer" militaristic types of kings who usually taxed/drafted the shit out of their people went outside of their country, pillaged some shit but ultimately did nothing beneficial that lasted for longer than their reign
some examples: richard the lionheart, sobieski, attila,

Literally who?

>he was a reactionary
Absolutely based.

overrated?

Da Vin*i, Galileo, S*crates, Pl*to

Underrated:

Archimedes, Euclides

In regards to Washington, can someone explain to me why, besides fanboyism, people consider him to be great? Wasn't he just some half decent general?

I think he just had a disproportionate depth he could have brought the country and was able to avoid it. He was in a period of much greater risk and poor options and was able to carry a vulnerable country through it. The US will get into sticky situations in the war of 1812 and the civil war in which the institutions of the country will carry on despite men who deliberately make poor decisions. Keeping the army alive and being modest in his presidency is more brave and important than any later actions of presidents or generals, which are often tough but clearly honorable and in line with our institutional ideals.

Washington went without that guidance and against easy glory to do what was right. He took the risk and deserves the recognition for what he did.

Oh, I can totally see that as a great boon to his country. However I still don't see how that makes him a great person rather than a good and wise statesman, who managed to act with prudent meekness. Maybe it's just a question of grading.

This 100x
How?

This absolutely. Hes an interesting character but his “genius” is overrated

This is true. One of the most important things you forget though is how disastrous his last years were. 100 days campaign is “epic” but it was the desth knell of france as the sole hegemon of europe. Because of the Hundred Days France was plundered and occupied and forced to pay huge reparations and was also subject to food and labor shortages cause of dislocation of occupiers climste and years of war. It probably accelerated the french demographic/manpower crisis of the 19th and 20th centuries. All of this could have been avoided had the bourbon restoration was allowed to stay put and napoleon accepted defest abd exile in elba

Wise statesman and great man are synonomous senpai

He was a pragmatist who used unconvential strategy and everything available to win. We hired a gay Prussian General to train his men at Valley Forge even though no one wanted him because he knew his skills were invaluable. He used spies, militias and built up a team of talented, veteran diplomats to get France and Spain to join on there side. He fought for 5 long years and beat the greatest military on earth at the time. He had absolute power and gave it all up because he beleived in his cause. He was objectively the single greatest American President. The only one to ever even lead troops in battle.

He deserves respect, but I also think that he should be less famous and idolatred than Augustus. The first Princeps is the real genius of the "family"

Also the Civil Code also played a significant part in demographics crisis by making inberitance equal among children, leading to infanticide abortion and mass abandonment of children at orphanages (widely attested in records, literature and obsevstions of the time. And btw abandonment was basically a death sentence as most orphans died of disease and such)

The 'problem' with Augustus is that he's clearly human filled with flaws while Julius Caesar comes down to us as almost the perfect being with just a few token traits, that can hardly be considered flaws, such as being a balding dandy. He was basically a real life Mary Sue. He even died a martyr's deaths.
Augustus meanwhile comes down to us as a brilliant man but a coward who relied on other men to win his battles, with a failed family life and who's conservative morals were the secret laughing stock of society.

Lincoln

No one could do that, Sulla and Marius had broken the spell of the sanctity of political office decades before Caesar's civil war, the republic was doomed to having multiple strong men fighting to exert power over the city and empire through violence.

>reactionary
He wasn't even a true reactionary. If he was, he'd be good.
And we can tell you're not Anglo by your hatred of "reactionaries."

She's not wife material.

Wilhelm II was a retard but so was the idea of an omnipotent imperial chancellor. Giving all the power to a single person and then hoping hes good at it proved to be a terrible idea centuries before Bismarck, during the era of absolute monarchies. He should have known that he wouldn't live (or hold his job) forever.

>Kaiser W*lhelm ii is generally overrated
By who? Reichaboos?