…Hard to believe that it was only 50 years ago. In one of her last lengthy interviews with the Detroit Free Press in 1995, she spoke of what she would like people to say about her after she passed away.
“I’d like people to say I’m a person who always wanted to be free and wanted it not only for myself; freedom is for all human beings,” …
**
Rosa Parks, whose refusal to give up her bus seat to a white man sparked the modern civil rights movement, died today. (ABC News)
Wow, a part of history. Let us hope that as ignorant as humanity can be, that history does not repeat itself (as it often can/does), WWI was supposed to be the war to end all wars - until WWII. There will always be something - hopefully some of us will have courage like her to possibly change the course of history. One person can make a difference (i.e. Rosa Parks, Napolean, Hitler, Ghandi, etc.)
I know you probably mean well, but putting Napoleon and Hitler in the same list as Ghandi or Rosa Parks…
I though that was a bit odd as well, but he is right and that was the point of the statement. One person, for bad or for good, can make a difference. You could add a certain polarizing person of the moment to that list as well.
I remember seeing an interview with her years ago, perhaps with Bradley on 60 Minutes? She has earned her place in American history. May she R.I.P.
I remember a question on a board some time back, may even have been here, where the question was asked “What historical figure would you most like to have lunch with?” I listed Rosa Parks. I guess that lunch will have to wait for eternity…
She just has a resolve that I respect so much.
Say a prayer with her… her spirit will smile.
May Mrs Parks rest quietly now.
Oh harden up.
Napolean and Hitler certainly made as much if not more of a difference as the others on the list.
Sure they were very bad people and their difference was negative, but it can’t be argued that they didn’t make a significant difference.
Rosa Parks also made a difference. Most people (me included) would argue that she made a positive difference. Many, particularly the white guy who wanted her seat, probably thought she made a negative difference, particularly taking into consideration all the upheaval she unwittingly sparked.
Why was Napoleon bad? because he wanted the whole of Europe?
Isn’t it the same thing the ‘pioneers’ did with the native americans?
From a, political, constitutional and scientific point of view, Napoleon did a lot of great things for France, but also for the rest of Europe…of course, he was seeing a bit too big for other Euros. Lots of negatives, and lots of positives…
Napoleon was French…nuff said 
Seriously tho’, any guy that goes around creating that much war has gotta be bad. Killing people, even for a good reason, still ain’t exactly a path to greatness if you ask me.
The Bush men (from the Etat Unis) will go down as bad guys I reckon, 'specially the little one.
The Bushmen from Oz too…the massacre of aborigenes was just as bad as the one with american indians.
As for Napoleon…give it a bit of time…I am sure Julius Cesar was seen as a Tyrant in 200AC…and most historians see him as a great man.
Actually, I’d agree with you…let’s have the Napoleon before 1807 roughly as the one that will likely be seen as the ‘good’ guy in centuries to come…and the post 1807 guy as the bad guy…