Poll: Greatest leader of the 19th century

Greatest leader of the 19th century

  • Alexander I of Russia

    Votes: 3 1.5%
  • George IV of the United Kingdom

    Votes: 1 0.5%
  • Charles X of France

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Willem I of the Netherlands

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Nicholas I of Russia

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Mahmud II of Turkey

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Nasr ed Din of Persia

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Abdulmecid I of Turkey

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Victoria I of the United Kingdom

    Votes: 13 6.3%
  • Alexander II of Russia

    Votes: 1 0.5%
  • Franz Josef of Austria

    Votes: 2 1.0%
  • Bismarck of Prussia

    Votes: 88 42.9%
  • Andrew Jackson of the United States

    Votes: 5 2.4%
  • Jose de San Martin of Argentina

    Votes: 1 0.5%
  • Simon Bolivar of Colombia

    Votes: 10 4.9%
  • Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana of Mexico

    Votes: 1 0.5%
  • Abdulhamid II of Turkey

    Votes: 2 1.0%
  • Abraham Lincoln of the United States

    Votes: 69 33.7%
  • Napoleon III of France

    Votes: 4 2.0%
  • Mehmed Ali of Egypt

    Votes: 5 2.4%

  • Total voters
    205
Ua, What? Bizmarks diplomacy is directly responsible in creating European peace in the 40 years after the Franco Prussian war and it was the destruction of that policy after he was fiered, blaming ww1 on him is like blaming it on napolion becuse he spread nationalism throut Europe.

He might have created 'his' peace for 40 years but once he was forced to retire, that peace did not last very long did it. The natural thing would be to reform the state to cement his achievement. It is well known that Frederick III wanted to reform the state along the lines of Victoria and Albert. Bismarck even predicted the cause of World War I and the day it would start in retirement. Once he was out other people took his achievement and poured it down the drain. However, his militaristic state, Germanisation policy and jingoism caused the birth of the Nazis. Tirpitz, Hindenburg and Ludendorff are creatures of his making which gave rise to Hitler.
 
Lincoln or Bismarck. Voted Lincoln. He edges out Bismarck not least due to not being involved in ending the springtime of the people.
 
1. Polk (single handily created a superpower which others could build upon, this remains preserved until the present day and long into the far future. Should have ran for a second term to build 4 Nicaragua canals, sticking all world trade through it. (Eccentric idea)

Territorial gain doesn't mean greatness.
 
Territorial gain doesn't mean greatness.

The reason I picked Polk as first was not because of his greatness or how famous he is. He is not relatively well known in comparison to Lincoln. All of the territory he annexed from Mexico had a direct consequential affect in space and time. You could say that everything that has happened within that annexed territory since is a direct result of him, because widespread society was not there when he annexed the territory.

His support of slavery and anti-Mexican stance is the dark/evil side of his personality but he would not of annexed the territory without these ideas. Lincoln basically altered and corrected the state as Polk had expanding slavery. I think in people’s minds Lincoln is probably 1 because he became the symbol of freedom across the globe which attracted immigrants to the US.

The point is if Polk had never got elected and Lincoln did, the US probably would never have annexed the territory thus not becoming a superpower.
 
The reason I picked Polk as first was not because of his greatness or how famous he is. He is not relatively well known in comparison to Lincoln. All of the territory he annexed from Mexico had a direct consequential affect in space and time. You could say that everything that has happened within that annexed territory since is a direct result of him, because widespread society was not there when he annexed the territory.

His support of slavery and anti-Mexican stance is the dark/evil side of his personality but he would not of annexed the territory without these ideas. Lincoln basically altered and corrected the state as Polk had expanding slavery. I think in people’s minds Lincoln is probably 1 because he became the symbol of freedom across the globe which attracted immigrants to the US.

The point is if Polk had never got elected and Lincoln did, the US probably would never have annexed the territory thus not becoming a superpower.

Oh, Polk is highly important, I agree. My point is that importance does not mean greatness (which, to my mind, implies unquestionable good). Stalin was important too, but no-one would call him great.
 
Oh, Polk is highly important, I agree. My point is that importance does not mean greatness (which, to my mind, implies unquestionable good). Stalin was important too, but no-one would call him great.

It’s difficult to define what exactly ‘greatness’ is. However Lincoln is more highly rated for his achievements as being ‘great’ than Polk is because of his political beliefs which are barbaric and 16th century. However Polk’s achievement is underrated. I don’t think people quite realise and understand the gravitas of his achievement.

It would have been nice if Polk had lived and Lincoln installed him as his VP candidate in 1861. Then Lincoln has this tortures mission to transform him into a free slaver. They become great friends but only in Lincoln’s death does it propel Polk in becoming a free slaver. This gives Polk his second/third term in office. Now a true republican he implements radical reform but also controversially carries out the Annexation Bill of 1866.

You could also say he could have become the president of the confederate states. He is more likely to win the civil war because he is more of realist than Jefferson Davies and had already won a war. This forces Lincoln to offer him the VP candidate.

At this point it’s down too loyalty towards the union he once served.
 
He might have created 'his' peace for 40 years but once he was forced to retire, that peace did not last very long did it. The natural thing would be to reform the state to cement his achievement. It is well known that Frederick III wanted to reform the state along the lines of Victoria and Albert. Bismarck even predicted the cause of World War I and the day it would start in retirement. Once he was out other people took his achievement and poured it down the drain. However, his militaristic state, Germanisation policy and jingoism caused the birth of the Nazis. Tirpitz, Hindenburg and Ludendorff are creatures of his making which gave rise to Hitler.
So like saying Napoleon caused ww1, it was the destruction of his policy the helped cause ww1 and even then it was such a complicated issue that you can't even fully blame it on that. The rest I'm not going to comment on other then saying that is Ludacris at least more so then the ww1 argument.
 
Top