Lots of discussion of war heroes on the threads arising from the recent election. I thought I’d start a thread just about that.
Someone said they cannot understand how heroes and war go together. They suggested that heroes are people like firefighters, nurses, etc.
I see their point, but the origin of the word related to war. Originally, a hero was a Greek warrior. Later, the word was applied specifically to warriors who had been especially brave and successful in war. Then it became widely applied to anyone who had been brave and self-sacrificing. Now it is used to describe anyone who is admired - e.g. guitar heroes!
the point being that the association between the word “hero” and the idea of war is ancient.
Someone asked about German war heroes fromm WW2, or they may have said “Nazi” heroes. I can’t remember. An associated point was that the heroes always seem to be on the winning side.
I think by definition there can be no “Nazi heroes” because the Nazis were without doubt the bad guys. However, there were plenty of Germans who were not Nazis, and were fighting for their country. Some of those were heroes. A lot of Germans behaved with considerable chivalry and courtesy towards their enemies in both world wars, and considerable bravery in combat.
Sometimes the hero is the one who stands up for what is right in the face of what his own countrymen are doing. There were plenty of German heroes, some of whom were executed.
For an example of a hero who stood up to his own countrymen in a later conflict, read about this chap: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Thompson,_Jr. One of the greatest of true American heroes.
Mike,
I’m the guy who brought that up in a thread which was not a place for such a debate, and with words that can hurt some people arround here.
I’m not proud about this and I apologize If I’ve been disrespectfull among you, some of your relatives or other unicyclist.com members.
I think you got the idea I was expressing despite the “unclassy form”… This said, I thank you for the ethymologic (sp?) and Historical (??) precisions.
Starting a new thread to discuss that was a good idea too.
That there exists the phrase “war hero” means that wars will continue.
I don’t know which comes first, no “war heroes” or no war, but they will always go hand in hand the one feeding on the other. As long as we glorify the warrior there will always be war.
Needless to say it is quite likely that neither no war nor no war heroes will ever be the state of affairs.
I think there is a difference between “hero worship” and “respecting heroism”.
I’ve never fought, and I hope I never will. However, my understanding from what I’ve read and what I’ve been told are that soldiers don’t fight for democracy, their country, or a principle. They fight for their mates next to them in the line.
The hero isn’t the man who kills the most enemies. He’s the man who takes personal risks or makes personal sacrifices to minimise the loss of life on his own side - and on both sides if possible.
I don’t disagree with anything of what you’ve said. And I don’t know what it’s like over there, but here we have Veterans’ Day, Memorial Day, Flag Day and others. During all of them we are reminded to thank a vet and the local papers are full of letters exhorting us to do so and reminding us what heroes all those who serve are. There are parades and flag waving and all manner of patriotism. It is virtually never ending and rarely is the question asked, “What are they all marching for?”
I actually wrote a letter once suggesting that we should have a Conscientious Objector day to recognize the heroes who refuse to serve and instead go to prison. You can imagine the letters in response to that one.
But the truth is, if it were the due respect we were giving I might not even be so put off. What I see going on is worship for the most part.
Here, for example, is a video we see every time we go to the movies:
And I have to say for the record that I am not in any way suggesting that we disrespect those who serve in the military. I am simply exploring what a peaceful world might look like.
I a nation where you have a constitutional right to freedom of speech, I should imagine a lot of people wrote in saying, “I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Am I close?
In a nation where a mainstream Democratic candidate for the presidency is called a marxist, I’ll have to say no. Although in fairness, that is said sometimes.
On a related note, I often am told that if I enjoy my freedom of speech I should thank a vet/soldier. I’m never told to thank Peter Zenger, though, who is said to have said, “No nation, ancient or modern, ever lost the liberty of speaking freely, writing, or publishing their sentiments, but forthwith lost their liberty in general and became slaves”.
I thought we were clearly the bad guy over in the middle east? Makes sense, they did nothing to us, in turn we go over and raid their land, take their resources, kill people. All on an event that no one has proved yet. Um… Innocent until proven guilty? Shouldn’t that be a world right?
Well, maybe not our brand of freedom of speech. Though 47 million more people would have access to health care.
That said, in the world as it is, I’m not saying we don’t owe some gratitude to soldiers. I am saying that the gratitude should be spread around a bit.
There will always be war. It is human nature. You (a country or society) must be willing and able to defend with force what you have or what is right. Sometimes that means being the aggressor or taking a preemptive stance. There will always be heroes in such conflict.