Hero Worship is Unhealthy

[knowledgeispwr]

I think too many of us DUers often put certain admirable people on pedestals, elevating them to hero status. Almost inevitably, some of us end up horribly disappointed and even nasty when the "hero" is shown to not be so "perfect." Conversely, we have the blind supporters who will continue to practically unconditionally support said person and try to explain away or make excuses for whatever caused their "fall from grace."

We also, unfortunately, get black and white arguments (a la Bushco) when people challenge an action or statement of one our "heroes." For example, some who have questioned factual inaccuracies in Ms. Sheehan's recent statements or have asked about the wisdom of her congressional run are met with responses which say "don't you think a woman who lost her son has the right to speak her mind?" when that wasn't even the issue at all. Accusations like that put words in people's mouths and distracts from potentially rich discussion.

Our hero worship has also caused some of us to attribute things to our idols that are untrue. Cindy Sheehan did much to bring attention to the antiwar movement and was lucky enough to become the face of the movement for awhile, but she wasn't the first or the only voice in the antiwar movement. That claim is disrespectful to the other activists and besides, Sheehan's true actions in that time are laudable enough without exaggeration.

In short, I think we would be better off if we cut down on the hero worship and develop more realistic views of our leaders and idols.

[enigmatic]

1. Good luck with that

Cult Of Personality types cut across party and idealogical lines, and in political forums like this it's practically a given.

[Az]

2. I try never to put anyone on a pedestal

They inevitably fall off and shatter. Ideas however can be placed up there. People are complex. On some things they may have excellent insight. But in other aspects of their life they may be horribly flawed. Place anyone on a pedestal and you place all aspects of them up there flaws and all. I would much rather let them be human and praise them for the good they did and allow them the flaws I allow myself in the rest of their lives.

[Behind the Aegis]

5. I agree.

However, even ideas placed on a pedestal can also be "dangerous." Some ideas and ideals are just as complex as people, though the human element is not included, often.

[Az]

14. True enough

I thought of adding that caveat to my comment originally but decided to remover it as there are more emotions invested in praising a person than in an idea. Or rather that at least the idea can only be torn down by its own failure. A person praised for an idea can be toppled for an entire array of reasons none of which are connected to the idea.

[Behind the Aegis]

16. I am familiar with your posts.

I figured you "left out" a caveat. :)

I agree with you that to topple a person is much easier, and more likely IMHO, than it is to topple an idea.

[yurbud]

3. I think that's what Cindy is doing with Pelosi and other Dems, while the corporate wing of the party

just wants us to go back to sleep until the next election.

[Cleita]

4. Was Cindy placed on a pedestal?

I remember her as a gutsy, lone woman who stood up to a fiend we call our President where no one with more political clout and power than her would. She started a revolt against the lemming mainstream "patriotic" faction that has been dominating our country. I would never take that away from her. The same trait that made her do this is the same one that is still making her buck the odds and irritating a lot of other mainstream lemmings. Heroes incidentally have to be forged in fire before they are lifted to their pedestals.

[knowledgeispwr]

7. Yes.

I do think many (but not all) of us who have been anti-war did place her on a pedestal because she became the face of the anti-war movement.

I think that fact is evident in seeing how many would rather attack those who question Sheehan's latest actions than reasonably and factually address those thoughts.

Please keep in mind that I'm not trying to take away from the good that Sheehan has done; rather, I'm asking us to re-evaluate how far we elevate public figures that we forget are very human.

[Cleita]

10. So why not appreciate her for that which you agree with her on?

Does everyone have to attack her for the things they don't agree with? It's true. She is human and none of us are going to be one hundred percent in agreement with anyone we know. If we are, then we are lemming, freepers who have drunk the koolaid. I believe she is important as a figurehead for the anti-war, anti-neo-con revolution, not a person to be put on a pedestal. I don't think she should go into politics because she's too honest and quite honestly doesn't know how to lie well enough to not irritate at least someone.

[knowledgeispwr]

18. I do appreciate some of what she's done...

I did recognize in my original post that she became "the face" of the anti-war movement and she persevered. I'm not attacking her, and while some have said some nasty things about her, many others have made reasonable observations, asked good questions or respectfully disagreed with her. A contrary opinion isn't necessarily an "attack" (I'm speaking in general here, not particularly to you because I don't know the sense in which you're using the word. Others on this board have taken contrary opinions to mean "attack").

[Cleita]

25. There have been nasty things said, not by everyone, but enough

here and usually they aren't well parsed out or proven, just statments like Cindy has lost it or is batshit crazy. I mean Ann Coulter is batshit crazy and there are streams of video to prove it. To say the same things about Cindy or even Hillary Clinton if you get right down to it is disingenuous and without content.

[LostInAnomie]

6. You are exactly right.

It's shameful how many people post "Cindy Sheehan speaks for me" as if it's some kind of badge of honor to support a leader without reservations.

What Cindy did with Camp Casey was great, but that does not make her the undisputed leader of the anti-war movement, or that she deserves total credit for the public turning against the war. There were millions upon millions of Americans that were against this war long before anyone had ever heard of Cindy Sheehan.

I think it's ridiculous whenever anyone tries to stifle debate about legitimate issues and public figures. It is perfectly legitimate to question the actions and motives of a public figure without being shouted down with "What have you ever done!?", "How dare you attack a grieving mother!", or "Whenever you lose a son, then you can question her!"

[knowledgeispwr]

11. Thanks...

I find the stifling of debate particularly troubling. We've seen too often how the media, the right-wing noise machine and "conservative" politicians have shut down debate on issue after issue, especially in the last 7 years. It's extremely discouraging to see those who I believe have good intentions and are on "our" side doing the exact same thing.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

12. Exactly

It's the same as Fat Druggie's "mega-dittos" brigade.

I may be against the chosen war, and against Bush, and horrified at our troops being wasted in this way, but what the hell does Hugo Chavez have to do with any of that? She lost her focus.

[LittleClarkie]

21. Indeed, well done

I've just been hit with a new one now to add to your list. "You hate Cindy. Just admit it."

[LostInAnomie]

24. I saw that.

:crazy:

[knowledgeispwr]

27. Lord...

that's along the lines of "You just hate Bush./Why do you hate the president?" (and before anyone jumps on me I'm not comparing Cindy Sheehan with Bush, just pointing out it shuts down debate and avoids real discussion.)

[LittleClarkie]

28. That's was part of my reply

the person I said it to didn't seem to see what I was getting at. I can't hate her. I don't know her. But I can comment on a public person's public comments, and should be able to do so without being called a "hater".

[emilyg]

30. Thank you - you speak for me

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

36. "Whenever you lose a son, then you can question her!"

I have seen similar type premises too often here recently and agree it's ridiculous. There have been several mothers of fallen troops on the republican side that have been vehemently against us. Should we worship them as well? Of course not.

Problem is, I now look at Cindy as similar to them strategically (not personally, as she is far better a person than they), since she now attacks us the same though from a different angle of trajectory. Difference is one attacks us from the front, and now the other is attacking in the back.

[sandnsea]

8. What Noble Cause

If she'd only stuck to her original mission. This is the question they cannot answer, this is the question that exposes the lies.

[Swamp Rat]

9. Jesus, Mary, Zeus, Odin, Krishna, Buddha, Achilles, Ogun, Kali, Horus, Athena...

god. Aren't those 'realistic' heroes for many human beings scattered all over the Earth?

[Trajan]

13. I suppose you are trying really hard to be helpful ....

So I wont mention the fact that DU, being a collection of souls, a subset of humanity, if you will; That DU members think in approximately 100,000,000,000 different ways ... (The 100,000,000,000 spoken in the Dr. Evil voice, of course) ...

And yes: 100,000 DUers can have 100,000,000,000 different opinions ....

But alas .... Since you are trying to organize some rational, coherent discourse in a most innocent way .... I shant try to point out the impossibility of such attempts to control or direct the thoughts and beliefs of 100,000 DUers ....

I will say one thing though: Persuasive argument consists of more than critiques of heros, or their worshippers .... After all: Some 'Heros' are worthy of collective respect .....

[knowledgeispwr]

26. Two things...

To me, "collective respect" is one thing and "hero worship" is another. "Hero worship" is almost blindly following and praising an individual, lashing out at real or perceived detractors and ignoring flaws to the point of it clouding one's view.

Secondly, I'm not trying to control people's thoughts. In a sense, all DUers attempt to direct people's beliefs by having discussions, and supporting democratic ideals, issues and candidates. My goal here is to get a few more people thinking about what I see as the dangers of elevating people, just like you and me, to unrealistic heights in our minds. If you see that as trying to direct thoughts, fine. I see it as trying to exhort people to try to think a bit more rationally and critically when it comes to admiring people.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. HMMMM

"Nothing and no one worth remembering has come from the USA."


How about

Jonas Salk

Martin Luther King

Franklin Roosevelt

Muhammad Ali

for starters?

[Cameron27]

19. I thought he just forgot the sarcasm tag,

but lately nothing surprises me.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. Really

Good night...

[Swamp Rat]

20. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[Bluebear]

22. Holy trolly!

Barber's Adagio for Strings... just proved you wrong to begin with.

[Codeine]

29. Lots of that here

and it's not just, or even primarily, Cindy-related. Look at all the Chavez-bots, the Castro fans, the Mugabe-groupies (quieter of late, I've noticed), etc. At least the Cindy folks have chosen somebody harmless and basically good-hearted.

Nobody in power has your self-interest in mind. Nobody in power is on your side. The best we can do is get somebody who's a bit better than the other guy, but nobody who seeks power is to be fully trusted.

[knowledgeispwr]

32. I have noticed...

all the other "bots" and "fans." I was just using some of the Cindy-stuff because that's what's been engulfing DU as of late. I guess part of my point is that it is harmful even when the person being worshiped is basically good or has done good things in the past.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mmonk]

33. Pot, kettle.

And vice versa.

[devilgrrl]

34. Fuck that shit. Frank Zappa is God!

:eyes::sarcasm::eyes:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

35. You're 100% Undoubtedly Correct, Of Course.

Good post k.i.p.

[gentlegiant]

37. Well said.

Cindy was the topic of the morning on The Bill Press Show this morning. I agree with Bill that she should be running against one of the Republican seats that is preventing a veto-proof majority, and with a caller that pointed out that some people are more useful/successful outside of Washington DC. Cindy makes a better rabble rouser than she would/will a politician. She should take some time off, rest up, and then pick up her cross again. Nancy Pelosi will be more successful when we have enough Democrats in Congress to override vetos. Til then, bless them both.

[TahitiNut]

38. Canonization and demonization are messenger-oriented, not message-oriented.

As such, that focus is fallacious and a waste of bandwidth - not to mention a pollution of rational discourse.

:shrug: