Skip Navigation

Why do we glorify horrible people from the distant past?

Julius Ceasar, Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan and many more...

These people had beliefs and worldviews that were so horribly, by today's standards, that calling them fascist would be huge understatement. And they followed through by committing a lot of evil.

Aren't we basically glorifying the Hitlers of centuries past?

I know, historians always say that one should not judge historical figures by contemporary moral standards. But there's a difference between objectively studying history and actually glorifying these figures.

112

You're viewing a single thread.

112 comments
  • Julius Ceasar wasn't so bad. Parenti's book The Assassination of Julius Caesar: A People's History of Ancient Rome is an interesting read, looking at his assassination as a reaction from the ruling class who felt threatened by his reformist policies that benefited the lower classes.

    In general though we do seem to value the lives and experiences of people in even recent history as lesser. I don't know why, it's a good question.

    • I think you have to ignore large parts of his legacy to consider a genocidal warlord like Caesar "not so bad".

      Pursuing the agenda of the populares may have made him less domestically odious than some of his fellow patricians from the optimates, but he was still a member of the ruling class monopolizing power in his person. On top of the whole brutal genocidal warlord thing.

You've viewed 112 comments.