Time Magazine's Man of the Year 1938

Discussion in 'History' started by LogikAndReazon, Jun 20, 2012.

  1. LogikAndReazon
    Offline

    LogikAndReazon Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Messages:
    4,850
    Thanks Received:
    614
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Ratings:
    +1,285
    He had been something of a bohemian in his youth, and always regarded young people and their idealism as the key to progress and the overcoming of outmoded prejudices. And he was widely admired by the young people of his country, many of whom belonged to organizations devoted to practicing and propagating his teachings. He had a lifelong passion for music, art, and architecture, and was even something of a painter. He rejected what he regarded as petty bourgeois moral hang-ups, and he and his girlfriend "lived together" for years. He counted a number of homosexuals as friends and collaborators, and took the view that a man's personal morals were none of his business; some scholars of his life believe that he himself may have been homosexual or bisexual. He was ahead of his time where a number of contemporary progressive causes are concerned: he disliked smoking, regarding it as a serious danger to public health, and took steps to combat it; he was a vegetarian and animal lover; he enacted tough gun control laws; and he advocated euthanasia for the incurably ill.


    He championed the rights of workers, regarded capitalist society as brutal and unjust, and sought a third way between communism and the free market. In this regard, he and his associates greatly admired the strong steps taken by President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal to take large-scale economic decision-making out of private hands and put it into those of government planning agencies. His aim was to institute a brand of socialism that avoided the inefficiencies that plagued the Soviet variety, and many former communists found his program highly congenial. He deplored the selfish individualism he took to be endemic to modern Western society, and wanted to replace it with an ethic of self-sacrifice: "As Christ proclaimed 'love one another'," he said, "so our call -- 'people's community,' 'public need before private greed,' 'communally-minded social consciousness' -- rings out...! This call will echo throughout the world!"


    The reference to Christ notwithstanding, he was not personally a Christian, regarding the Catholicism he was baptized into as an irrational superstition. In fact he admired Islam more than Christianity, and he and his policies were highly respected by many of the Muslims of his day. He and his associates had a special distaste for the Catholic Church and, given a choice, preferred modern liberalized Protestantism, taking the view that the best form of Christianity would be one that forsook the traditional other-worldly focus on personal salvation and accommodated itself to the requirements of a program for social justice to be implemented by the state. They also considered the possibility that Christianity might eventually have to be abandoned altogether in favor of a return to paganism, a worldview many of them saw as more humane and truer to the heritage of their people. For he and his associates believed strongly that a people's ethnic and racial heritage was what mattered most. Some endorsed a kind of cultural relativism according to which what is true or false and right or wrong in some sense depends on one's ethnic worldview, and especially on what best promotes the well-being of one's ethnic group.


    Who was he? He certainly sounds like the ideal presidential candidate of a Pacifica Radio Network listener or Mother Jones subscriber -- or, to make a more timely reference, a contributor to MoveOn.org. It can only add to his appeal for such people that he was a target of American and British bombing raids and had to flee to the safety of an underground hide-out. And he was none other than Time magazine's Man of the Year for 1938: Adolf Hitler.

    The Mustache on the Left - TCS Daily
     
  2. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,317
    Thanks Received:
    19,834
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,369
    Time explained its selection of Hitler as Man of the Year as the person "for good or bad" had the most influence on world events. Who else should have been selected?
     
  3. whitehall
    Offline

    whitehall Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    27,809
    Thanks Received:
    4,340
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Western Va.
    Ratings:
    +10,773
    Time magazine was (maybe still is) in the business of selling magazines. They could put the photo of any fool on the cover and if you bought the subscription they achieved their purpose. The problem with Americans is that they often fail to understand that so-called news based magazines are opinion based and their opinions are often biased and skewed by political agendas. "Man 'O the year" is just a corporate decision like thousands of others.
     
  4. geauxtohell
    Offline

    geauxtohell Choose your weapon.

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Messages:
    15,125
    Thanks Received:
    2,153
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Out here in the middle.
    Ratings:
    +2,155
    Must be an election year if this shit is getting drug up again (originally farted out by some right wing blogger in 2004).
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. whitehall
    Offline

    whitehall Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    27,809
    Thanks Received:
    4,340
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Western Va.
    Ratings:
    +10,773
    Back in the good old days, pop-culture fools used to salivate over Time's "man'O the year" cover as if it actually had significance. Thank God those days are over.
     
  6. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,317
    Thanks Received:
    19,834
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,369
    No they aren't.

    Only over for the Fox News crowd
     
  7. Greenbeard
    Offline

    Greenbeard Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,809
    Thanks Received:
    1,200
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    New England
    Ratings:
    +1,323
    If they had stuck with that criterion, I imagine Rudy Giuliani wouldn't have gotten the nod in 2001.
     
  8. Peach
    Offline

    Peach Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    17,179
    Thanks Received:
    1,708
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,965
    Yes, it has always been most influential, not most "admirable".
     
  9. Artevelde
    Offline

    Artevelde Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2012
    Messages:
    3,431
    Thanks Received:
    262
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brussels, Belgium
    Ratings:
    +262
    Once upon a time it was interesting who Time chose as Man of the Year. A good example was their choice of Khomeini. But the last few decades it's become pretty tame and irrelevant.
     
  10. konradv
    Offline

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,560
    Thanks Received:
    2,558
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,673
    Yep, that's how Giuliani got it over bin Laden. By their long-established criteria, world-wide influence, Osama had it hands down, but the corporate suits didn't want to take the subscription hit that choice would have brought.
     

Share This Page