YES: The societal conditions, criteria and circumstances for assessing politicians change over time, significantly affecting political reputations for the worse.
The political conditions which favor some leaders may change drastically over time, making previously popular leaders, such as authoritarians, less respected or even vilified by the masses.
Some politicians and leaders may have won the respect of citizens on the basis of their economic visions for the country but suffer a rapidly tarnishing reputation when their bold plans fail to deliver on actual material outcomes such as job creation, control of inflation and greater income equality.
New information regarding a politician’s life and work, such as the release of classified documents or scandals uncovered by investigative journalists, may lead to public reassessment or even vilification of a previously respected leader, especially if the new information exposes acts of moral or ethical duplicity.
NO: There are universal and constant criteria to judge politicians, preserving political reputations despite changes in societal conditions and circumstances.
Political conditions may change drastically over time but some politicians retain their reputation and respect amongst the masses as they are perceived to have contributed significantly to national well-being or humanity as a whole, often in the role of elder statesmen or transformative leaders.
The economic policies and directions set by astute politicians may have been the basis for a country’s long-term economic transformation and prosperity, ensuring that future generations continue to revere them even after their deaths.
The release of information that is potentially compromising to a politician’s reputation may be countered by a savvy public relations response or an effective discrediting of the released information, thereby leaving the politician’s reputation largely intact.