No More Heroes

[phantasm]

Heroes fight injustice.
If the injustice is large, people join them in the fight.
This will never happen again.
If you see injustice in the world and attempt to fight it today, you will not find anyone willing to join you.
It will be a battle that you fight alone, and maybe with a few close friends.

William Wallace from braveheart in today's world, would never have anyone on his side, he would be a small blip easily destroyed by not wanting to disturb the comfort of the system.

I just watched a movie called Ned Kelly on hulu, comparing him to william wallace in braveheart the story is similiar, and he could have been a huge hero, but no one joined his fight.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/93514/ned-kelly

So, enjoy your lives as slaves to the status quo and die knowing that there will never again be any heroes to come to your rescue.
Because, if they did, you would just ignore them and continue with life as usual.

[4a6c1]

Nice. An actor in blue paint.

This is a real hero. And he faught injustice. RIP Wilson.

[phantasm]

Wilson might be a possible hero. Please fill in the details, what injustice was he fighting, how many people were with him in his cause etc...

[Gelston]

Wilson might be a possible hero. Please fill in the details, what injustice was he fighting, how many people were with him in his cause etc...

If you don't think the men and women that fight and die for your country are not heroes, you are fucking retarded. If you don't think the police that keep you safe at night are not heroes, you are retarded. If you don't think the firemen that risk their lives to put out fires and rescue people from burning buildings are not heroes, you are retarded.

Might I also mention the people that take their time to volunteer for big brother/big sister. The people who slave away in homeless shelters. The social workers that spend LONG hours trying to look out for the welfare of mistreated and neglected children.

There are plenty of heroes out there. The best ones are the ones that do their job without any care of recognition.

[4a6c1]

The point I am making to you by posting a picture of Wilson is this...

I saw your question: "If heroes arise, will people even follow them?" and I raise another question, very relevant, "Do we as a society know what heroism is?"

You may percieve injustice while another may only feel inconveniance. I assert that heroism is not to fight injustice, but to serve with the willingness to give all.

Mel Gibson, though a cool guy, as he is in that picture is definately not a hero. He is playing a hero and you posting that picture to define heroism stands to prove my point. We as a society recognize heroism as synthetic because we are synthetic. You for instance seem to relate to Braveheart better than you do to a picture of an fallen American Soldier. Now imagine you are hundreds of thousands of people with that perspective. Where does that leave our military? I see a problem and stand to reason that we are lucky your perspective is in the minority.

[TheEschaton]

I assert that heroism is not to fight injustice, but to serve with the willingness to give all.

This leaves open the possibility that heroism can be bad, because one can "serve with the willingness to give all" to unjust, evil causes....

...or unjustified, unnecessary causes.

In that case, what is the point of such heroism? That a person died in a noble fashion for a wrong cause? This is the psychological question of both Vietnam and Iraq, where our soldiers are asked to do something unjustified, and in order for them to justify it, their actions are dubbed "heroic," while those who didn't serve and question the justification suddenly become traitors and pussies.

I somewhat agree with the OP, heroism requires justice, or literally, a just cause.

-TheE-

[Xanator]

This leaves open the possibility that heroism can be bad, because one can "serve with the willingness to give all" to unjust, evil causes....

...or unjustified, unnecessary causes.

In that case, what is the point of such heroism? That a person died in a noble fashion for a wrong cause? This is the psychological question of both Vietnam and Iraq, where our soldiers are asked to do something unjustified, and in order for them to justify it, their actions are dubbed "heroic," while those who didn't serve and question the justification suddenly become traitors and pussies.

I somewhat agree with the OP, heroism requires justice, or literally, a just cause.

-TheE-

So that also opens the discussion to the issue of perspective, as a cause that's "unjustified" or "unnecessary" to you and me might not be to someone else. Take William Wallace, if he's the OP's definition of a hero. Wallace led Scottish resistance during the early stages of their wars for independence (this after Scotland engaged in secret negotiations with France to aid in an invasion of England). I think it very likely that the English didn't feel they were wrong in a) defending themselves from the threat of invasion or b) protecting their claim to Scotland, which they had officially established (nobly or not) a few years prior when the King was asked to moderate claims between competitors for Scotland's throne.

It has been said that Wallace was a petty criminal early in life and it's pretty widely accepted that he condoned and even engaged in the mutilation of his fallen enemies. He was a hero of Scotland, for sure, but how do you suppose the English felt about him? As time has progressed, England has come to be perceived as the bad guy in this conflict. Wallace was betrayed and turned over to England by a Scottish knight loyal to the English King. Was that knight a hero or a traitor?

[4a6c1]

This leaves open the possibility that heroism can be bad, because one can "serve with the willingness to give all" to unjust, evil causes....

...or unjustified, unnecessary causes.

-TheE-

One persons hero is anothers guerilla insurgent? I dont completely disagree with you on this. I wont debate causes. My position is clear, obviously. Since I signed a contract to support my position.

I will clarify my point and state it again.

Phantasm made this thread in response to a post I made in the "Schoolchildren singing to Obama?!" Thread. If not, big coincidence.

Anyhoo, over there I was commenting on how popularity does not equal heroism and I was (still am) baffled as to how a celebrity (Obama) who has done nothing is merited heroic ballads in his honor.

?!

[Gan]

I think many people perform heroic deeds; however, I really have not found someone to be considered truly heroic in everything they do.

I believe a hero not only does heroic things but lives heroically. Too many folks try to portray themselves as heroic on the outside but are much less so when we see how they live on the inside.

[Ashliana]

Opening this thread and seeing Mel Gibson, and not Travis Touchdown.. sucks.