time mag, is, and always has been, a r/w rag.

[NuclearDem]

32. Hitler's Man of the Year article is hardly flattering:

Last edited Thu Dec 12, 2013, 12:17 AM - Edit history (1)

http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/projects/hitler/sources/30s/391time/391timemanyear.htm

It was noteworthy that few of these other men of the year would have been free to achieve their accomplishments in Nazi Germany. The genius of free wills has been so stifled by the oppression of dictatorship that Germany's output of poetry, prose, music, philosophy, art has been meagre indeed.

The man most responsible for this world tragedy is a moody, brooding, unprepossessing, 49-year-old Austrian-born ascetic with a Charlie Chaplin mustache. The son of an Austrian petty customs official, Adolf Hitler was raised as a spoiled child by a doting mother. Consistently failing to pass even the most elementary studies, he grew up a half-educated young man, untrained for any trade or profession, seemingly doomed to failure. Brilliant, charming, cosmopolitan Vienna he learned to loathe for what he called its Semitism; more to his liking was homogeneous Munich, his real home after 1912. To this man of no trade and few interests the Great War was a welcome event which gave him some purpose in life.

...

The situation which gave rise to this demagogic, ignorant, desperate movement was inherent in the German Republic's birth and in the craving of large sections of the politically immature German people for strong, masterful leadership.

...

What Adolf Hitler & Co. did to the German people in that time left civilized men and women aghast. Civil rights and liberties have disappeared. Opposition to the Nazi regime has become tantamount to suicide or worse. Free speech and free assembly are anachronisms. The reputations of the once-vaunted German centres of learning have vanished. Education has been reduced to a National Socialist catechism.

Stalin's actions with M-R were labeled "positive", "inspiring", and "world-shattering."

http://www.swcs.us/~jennie.joseph/FOV1-000365DC/S087EF766-087F1B61.7/Stalin.pdf


So look, I know what you're saying about Time being a right wing mag, and I know they have a history of looking down on progressive ideas, but Hitler getting an utterly scathing review and Stalin getting praised is pretty much the opposite of what you were arguing.

If you're referring to Chiang Kai-Shek, then absolutely, you're right, and I wouldn't have even said anything if you'd used that example.