Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not the most knowledgeable about any of those dudes but based on what little I do know, I'd say Otto von Bismarck is the most influential out of those. He unified Germany. Churchill led the UK through the tough times of WWII but it can be argued that he helped hasten the breakup of his own empire.
Spain and Italy are relatively minor players on the global scene and Mussolini and Franco were jerks anyway.
Charles de Gaulle...I really need to learn more about him. Other than leading the French Resistance I know little unfortunately.
I'm not the most knowledgeable about any of those dudes but based on what little I do know, I'd say Otto von Bismarck is the most influential out of those. He unified Germany. Churchill led the UK through the tough times of WWII but it can be argued that he helped hasten the breakup of his own empire.
Completely agreed about Bismarck. Also, though, in regards to Churchill, it is worth noting that the British Empire was going to expire sooner or later in any case.
Quote:
Spain and Italy are relatively minor players on the global scene and Mussolini and Franco were jerks anyway.
Completely agreed.
Quote:
Charles de Gaulle...I really need to learn more about him. Other than leading the French Resistance I know little unfortunately.
Bismarck, because he was the one who fundamentally changed the power structure of Europe. Before him, what is now Germany was essentially a collection of small states with a common language. Afterwards, it was a power to be reckoned with. To me, the interesting question is what would have happened had Bismarck's vision had been fully implemented, rather than be dumped by Wilhelm II. Bismarck, as we know, was much more aware of Germany's newly-won prominence on other powers, while Wilhelm II was, to be succinct, an idiot.
If Wilhelm II had listened, would we have had World War I? Would we have had the collapse of Russia and Communism?
Churchill was influential only in his role in World War II. I am an admirer of the man, but the forces behind the decline of colonialism were just too great to be reversed, especially given how weakened Great Britain was by two world wars.
Mussolini, Franco, and DeGaulle? Nope. They were blips.
The question is who was the most prominent Western European political leader (after Hitler/Napoleon) of the last 300 years and the options in the poll are four leaders from the past one hundred years and one from the past 150 years. So the poll isn't really all that helpful in provoking a serious historical discussion.
Other leaders I would have included might have been Metternich the Austrian diplomat, William Pitt the Elder who laid the foundations for the British Empire through the 7 years war, Cavour who was the architect of Italian unification, Frederick the Great of Prussia and both Peter the Great of Russia and Catherine the Great.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Also, though, in regards to Churchill, it is worth noting that the British Empire was going to expire sooner or later in any case.
