YOUR Man/Woman/Entity/Whatever of the Year!

[dutchfire]

Snowden
Fransiscus
Bashir Assad
Francois Hollande
The Higgs Boson

 

[SamSniped]

Stephen Colbert, of course.

 

[Wrymouth3]

Kim Dotcom a.k.a CFC Australians/New Zealanders/Whatever

 

[Omega124]

I would say Snowden, but I don't think anyone here mentioned Assad yet and therefore I will for the sake of the argument. Plus Snowden is mostly limited to the USA, while the Syrian Civil War is a much more worldwide crisis in comparison. Note also this doesn't mean I condone what Assad's been doing, but just that he's been the most influential man of the year.

Also, he wins at having the longest neck that I know of.

 

[Hygro]

So you're saying she never held a real job her entire life?

Are you seriously calling investment banking a "real job"?

 

[Takhisis]

I would say Snowden, but I don't think anyone here mentioned Assad yet and therefore I will for the sake of the argument. Plus Snowden is mostly limited to the USA, while the Syrian Civil War is a much more worldwide crisis in comparison. Note also this doesn't mean I condone what Assad's been doing, but just that he's been the most influential man of the year.

Snowden revealed what the US has been doing to every other country. Isn't that global enough?

Pope #1 anyway.

Also, he wins at having the longest neck that I know of.

The Kirahvimies award has a winner!

 

[Kyriakos]

I would say Snowden, but I don't think anyone here mentioned Assad yet and therefore I will for the sake of the argument. Plus Snowden is mostly limited to the USA, while the Syrian Civil War is a much more worldwide crisis in comparison. Note also this doesn't mean I condone what Assad's been doing, but just that he's been the most influential man of the year.

Also, he wins at having the longest neck that I know of.

So basically Time did not award this to Assad cause 'you can't mossad the Assad'?

 

[Borachio]

Is it just me and my eyes? Or is his neck too long and his head too small?

 

[Kyriakos]

^Some sub-saharan african tribes (and older kingdoms) used to deliberately have the royalty extend their necks by using some sort of helix made of rings. It had the nasty effect that the royal (eg a queen) could no longer support her neck without that series of rings, cause the muscles went into atrophy along with the neck expanding a bit. The images of that are pretty gruesome...

(it echoes a bit a short story by Borges, about the king of some race called - after Gulliver's final travel- 'yahoos').

 

[Borachio]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neck_ring

In a few African and Asian cultures neck rings are worn usually to create the appearance that the neck has been stretched. Padaung (Kayan Lahwi) women of the Kayan people begin to wear neck coils from as young as age two. The length of the coil is gradually increased to as much as twenty turns. The weight of the coils will eventually place sufficient pressure on the clavicles to cause them to deform and create an impression of a longer neck.

 

[Tahuti]

Hassan Rowhani

 

[bhsup]

Are you seriously calling investment banking a "real job"?

Sorry, I misread! I interpreted "without ever cashing in private sector style" as not ever having had a job outside academia.

 

[keli]

I would say Putin.

Even tho I oppose his doings in Ukraine quite much, preventing the Western military intervention in Syria and giving shelter to Edward Snowden balance this out pretty well.

 

[peter grimes]

Can anyone say why it's E.Snowden instead of just throwing out a name ? It's kind of like a throwing a boxful of x-mas lights on a tree in front of Your yard and calling it a day

I think it's Snowden over Pope Francis because Snowden has actually done something (unlike this pope, who has yet to actually change a single thing in the RCC - so far it's been nothing more than inspirational speeches).

Snowden's exposé has caused governments around the world to re-evaluate their relationship with the US. It's caused US companies to finally petition the government to change its policies - something they couldn't even talk about before. These documents finally prove exactly how mission-creep affects can lead to out-of-control government agencies.

This isn't nearly over, but already we've see just about ever sworn statement by the head of NSA and the DNI turn out to be false (perjury?), we have the White House running damage control for months on end, official inquiries in some EU countries, etc.

I think this is of a much greater impact on the world this year than a guy who's finally walking the walk and talking the talk in the Vatican.

 

[peter grimes]

As it happens, Edward Snowden was named as Foreign Policy's top Global Thinker of 2013 (suck it, traitor haitors!)

Here's his response, in which he fleshes out my reasoning:

It’s an honor to address you tonight. I apologize for being unable to attend in person, but I’ve been having a bit of passport trouble. Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras also regrettably could not accept their invitations. As it turns out, revealing matters of “legitimate concern” nowadays puts you on the list for more than “Global Thinker” awards.

2013 has been an important year for civil society. As we look back on the events of the past year and their implications for the state of surveillance within the United States and around the world, I suspect we will remember this year less for the changes in policies that are sure to come, than for changing our minds. In a single year, people from Indonesia to Indianapolis have come to realize that dragnet surveillance is not a mark of progress, but a problem to be solved.

We’ve learned that we’ve allowed technological capabilities to dictate policies and practices, rather than ensuring that our laws and values guide our technological capabilities. And take notice: this awareness, and these sentiments, are held most strongly among the young–those with lifetimes of votes ahead of them.

Even those who may not be persuaded that our surveillance technologies have dangerously outpaced democratic controls should agree that in democracies, surveillance of the public must be debated by the public. No official may decide the limit of our rights in secret.

Today we stand at the crossroads of policy, where parliaments and presidents on every continent are grappling with how to bring meaningful oversight to the darkest corners of our national security bureaucracies. The stakes are high. James Madison warned that our freedoms are most likely to be abridged by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power. I bet my life on the idea that together, in the light of day, we can find a better balance.

I’m grateful to Foreign Policy Magazine and the many others helping to expose those encroachments and to end that silence.
Thank you.

And yet we find in this very thread people who call this guy a traitor, when all he's done is exposed the incredible over-reach of government surveillance into our personal lives. A traitor would keep his fellow citizens ignorant of this stuff while selling it to a foreign nation for personal profit. Instead, Snowden has selflessly publicized these nefarious schemes through international journalists.

Sorry, but Saint Pope Francis doesn't measure up for me. Not at least until he actually changes some of the policies of the institution he leads. He's someone who can change things with the stroke of a pen - he's goddamn infallible, after all. But has he issued a writ distributing the immense wealth of the RCC to the favelas of Sao Paolo and Rio de Janeiro? No. Has he set up a new ministry that will use proceeds from RCC investments to bring free education to every child in poverty on earth? No. Has he issued a decree that "god changed his mind and condoms are good?" No.

He needs to be measured against a different standard than Snowden who was an "analyst", essentially equivalent to a Jesuit priest. Not the head of state that this Pope is.

 

[Hygro]

Sorry, I misread! I interpreted "without ever cashing in private sector style" as not ever having had a job outside academia.

She's worked outside of academia a lot without cashing in, as she's a Fed homegrown expert. She just never worked on Wall St. like a lot of people at the Fed. She's also worked in academia. Academia, is of course, a very demanding field to be successful.