Yikes. The person of the decade is either George W. Bush or Osama bin Laden. So says the The Washington Post, whose editors have created a march-madness style bracket to determine the most influential person of the 2000s, replete with live interviews, discussion groups, and an interactive bracket (like the picture here, but larger). On December 21, voters will decide between finalists Batman and the Joker Bush and bin Laden.The original list of 16 candidates is as follows: George W. Bush, Timothy Geithner, Lance Armstrong, Paris Hilton, Dick Cheney, Ben Bernanke, Larry Page and Sergey Brin (one entry), Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Hu Jintao, Steve Jobs, Jon Stewart, Osama bin Laden, Mark Zuckerburg, Al Gore, and J.K. Rowling. It’s kind of an awesome list. Kind of.Via Yglesias, whose post offers the poignant (if playfully reductive) rejoinder that, although this bracket reveals the 2000s to be a pretty lousy decade for Americans, 43 percent of the world’s population (the inhabitants of India, China, Indonesia, and Brazil) had a very good decade.
Tags
advertisement
More for You
-
14 images of badass women who destroyed stereotypes and inspired future generations
These trailblazers redefined what a woman could be.
Throughout history, women have stood up and fought to break down barriers imposed on them from stereotypes and societal expectations. The trailblazers in these photos made history and redefined what a woman could be. In doing so, they paved the way for future generations to stand up and continue to fight for equality.
-
Why mass shootings spawn conspiracy theories
Mass shootings and conspiracy theories have a long history.
While conspiracy theories are not limited to any topic, there is one type of event that seems particularly likely to spark them: mass shootings, typically defined as attacks in which a shooter kills at least four other people.
When one person kills many others in a single incident, particularly when it seems random, people naturally seek out answers for why the tragedy happened. After all, if a mass shooting is random, anyone can be a target.
Pointing to some nefarious plan by a powerful group – such as the government – can be more comforting than the idea that the attack was the result of a disturbed or mentally ill individual who obtained a firearm legally.
advertisement

