posted
I am seventeen and old enough for die for my country, a perverse right granted at sixteen in Britain and seventeen here. If I did so an died, I would be called a hero, since I choose not to, I am unwanted. To oppose war at seventeen is naïveté, to join in is heroism. My generation is more valuable in death than in life, there is some sense to this, students are dangerously fickle and have toppled more than one established order. I do not seriously desire to do the latter, although I would like to see both more liberty and more equality. I do not wish to overthrow society, I wish to join it, but I am young and fit for patronization. A young person's voice, if it sounds at all, is but a voice in the wilderness. Rarely do such voices echo, and mine will not be among those that do. I have grown to accept that it is not given for me to lead men, although I have not yet grown accustomed to being blindly led. I stand alone, a blind seer gifted not with prophesy and a mad philosopher gifted not with thought. What a piece of work is man, and how like man I am, although great distance separates us as we wander in our lonely spheres.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wonder if increasing liberty is often at odds with creating equality?
Edit: By the way, since I was critical of your style in other threads, it's only fair to note that I found this post very readable. I'm impressed that you are willing to do that.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: If I did so an died, I would be called a hero
Wrong. We dilute the meaning of hero by applying it in a blanket manner to everyone. For a true description of hero, see this, Audie Murphy, and then tell me that Jessica Lynch was a hero.
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I wonder if increasing liberty is often at odds with creating equality?" Total equality, yes. But there is no liberty without equality of opportunity. It bothers me little that some should be rich and some poor, it bothers me much more that many are doomed to stay poor.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, Pel, I'm not intending to be patronizing about this, but you really ought to print out your post and threads here, and save them. I bet it would be really interesting for you when you are older to be able to look back and revisit the passions and opinions that you held dear at age 17.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A year toward what goal? The only goal I move irrefutably closer to each day is death. Adolescence is an existential state in which one is aware of one's ever encroaching death but cannot yet be certain that we will live.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:For a true description of hero, see this, Audie Murphy, and then tell me that Jessica Lynch was a hero.
It's interesting to note that your prime example of a hero is someone largely recognized as a hero for killing 240 people.
Not that I don't consider Audie Murphy a hero, but I do so because he most likely saved many of his fellow soldiers, not because of how many Germans he managed to kill.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Umm, I'd say that Phanto was referring to waiting a year till being granted adult priveleges such as being able to vote. This is the voice you are lamenting not having as a teenager, isn't it?
Posts: 3149 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:You know, Pel, I'm not intending to be patronizing about this, but you really ought to print out your post and threads here, and save them. I bet it would be really interesting for you when you are older to be able to look back and revisit the passions and opinions that you held dear at age 17.
The way our society treats its young people is schizophrenic and hypocritical to a large degree. I don't think that Pel's arguments are any less valid because he is one himself. If I wasn't about to go out for lunch, I would post more.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just want to jump in and agree that this is a much more readable and laudable post than others you have written recently. Good on ya'.
I'm not without sympathy for your position, and I recall being bitter about being old enough to die for my country and yet not old enough to have a beer. Age discrimination does indeed work both ways. Nonetheless, I can't deny that people change a LOT between 17 and 23. I also can't deny that I have changed more since 35 than I did from 17 till then. People are individuals, not textbooks. Unfortunately general policies, by definition, have to be based on general behavior.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Your situation has alot to do with the culture you are in too Pel. For example, when you said "To oppose war at seventeen is naïveté, to join in is heroism". This might be true where you live but it certainly isn't indicative of the general attitude towards war in the world (and even in the west). I for one would consider someone who refused to fight in a war they believed was unjust a "hero" in the same way people where you live would use it for a soldier. And please don't get too down about your lack of authority or voice in this world. You will find that as you get even a little older, opportinuties to make a real difference will become much more available, it is just up to you to refrain from being apathetic, and take up those opportunities (I'm thinking of things like that kid who started War Child).
Posts: 441 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
please correct me if I'm missing your point, but what I got out of this thread is that you think it's unfair that enlisting in the military generally garnishes respect towards young men and women while staying home and verbally opposing war is generally not.
The problem I see in the argument is that it's not taking everything into account. If the two routes were equal then the dichotomy would be unfair. i.e. people who turn left at this intersection are viewed as respectable while people who turn right are not.
This is largely not the case. When an individual willingly joins the military they are knowingly placing themselves on a path that will involve great sacrifice, physical and mental stress and quite possibly giving up one's life for a cause other than their own. it can show a great deal of commitment and is unarguably a life-changing event. I won't argue that there aren't some/many who join because they lack direction in life and yearn for a time when they don't have to make decisions and the basic necessities are provided for them. though even then it only slightly detracts from the honor of the choice as the same hardships must be endured.
On the other hand, stepping back and being a conciencious objector and perhaps vocal opposition to conflict does not garner the same respect (according to your argument). To a certain extent this is true. In the right small circles this kind of decision is highly respected (i.e. my highschool youth groups etc) but I'll admit that is few and far between. I would argue though that thoughtful, well-stated and even-handed opposition to war can in fact make you out to be both highly respected and in the eyes of many a hero, you just have to work for it a lot more.
So why does this choice not garner/warrant as much instant respect? to take this stance are you enduring any hardships? does your life change from whatever level of comfort that it started at? can you do this on some level without really putting any effort forth at all?
If you make an outstanding effort to be well informed on the matter, wade through communities where you must fight constantly to uphold your principles and make an outstanding effort to persuade others to your view (to the point of self-sacrifice) THEN you may approach the honor of being a hero. (think of Dr Martin Luther King Jr. Ghandi and many others)
I would say that in today's society you aren't looked down on for not enlisting, you just arent raised up instantly either. chosing not to enlist and/or to oppose war is as a first step merely refusing to throw yourself into the tempering fire that is the military. if you can find your own tempering fire then it's worth something, but otherwise it's not.
I can claim to refuse to take drugs, but until I am exposed to the decision and actively do something to avoid them it doesn't mean much.
note: all these arguments on the issue really are insensitive to age, and come from someone who has not joined the military or really gone through a tempering fire of any sort (barring perhaps a BS in engineering), but I also don't expect anyone to be praising my life extrodinarily at this point.
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I belive Pelegius attends a private high school in Texas with a long history of ROTC and military training.
I imagine that the views one might be hearing there are quite a bit different from the prevailing views in other parts of the country (and other high schools).
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pel, if you are interested I could send you links to all sort of peace organizations. You could have the opportunity to work and sacrifice for peace in the company of others.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jhai is right, to an extent. My high school has such a history, but this is tempered with a religious affiliation to a Church which is largely pacifist. This bizarre situation is mostly handled by ignoring it, but, in general, I would say that most faculty are liberal and antiwar and most students conservative and pro-war. On an interesting note, the NHS chapter would be spilt about 50-50 in a debate on the war, while the rest of the school would have a much smaller percentage of objectors.
However, military service was discussed more as an example of a situation than as an independent issue.
Edited by Pelegius becouse he had no idea what the last bit meant.
posted
Pel, don't be in such a rush to grow up. You'll get there eventually. Right now enjoy having so few responsibilities.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: It's interesting to note that your prime example of a hero is someone largely recognized as a hero for killing 240 people.
If you look at his MOH write-up, it is more about selflessly acting to preserve the lives of others.
The main reason that I chose Murphy is because Pel made a reference to serving in the military as a hero. The simple act of serving does not qualify you as a hero.
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you look at his MOH write-up, it is more about selflessly acting to preserve the lives of others.
I'd say this isn't quite accurate. He acted selflessly to preserve the lives of American others. His method of doing so was to take the lives of a massive number of German others.
This makes him an American hero, for sure, but I'm not sure the German people would recognize him as such. I'm sure there are comparable stories of German soldiers, but would you consider them heroes? I'd imagine not, which perhaps makes the term "hero" a very relative term, one which is subjective to the person making the claim.
It would be an interesting thread to discuss such things, and if I remember correctly we had a similar thread around the time of 9/11. Probably another around the Lynch publicity.
I myself am very unlikely to try and decide who deserves to be called a hero and who doesn't.
I don't see why someone like Lynch, who delivered supplies to our soldiers through dangerous areas, is less of a hero than someone on the front-line who kills several enemy soldiers. The front-line soldier is in more danger, and you may argue that makes him more of a hero, in which case we enter territory where there are degrees of heroes.
Edit:
Back to Murphy...
Do you think that if he had saved as many Americans as he had, as selflessly as he did, and under as much danger as he was in, in a way that did not involve mass killing, would he still be a national icon?
Let's say that he selflessly, and under great danger, allowed his fellow soldiers to escape by creating a diversion.
Would they have made movies about him? Would people, such as yourself, still hold him up as the ultimate hero?
I'm not convinced of this. I'd bet that a huge portion of his hero status is because he was very very good at killing people.
quote:I don't see why someone like Lynch, who delivered supplies to our soldiers through dangerous areas, is less of a hero than someone on the front-line who kills several enemy soldiers.
She was captured during the course of regular duty and did nothing to distinguish herself from any other soldier.
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:She was captured during the course of regular duty and did nothing to distinguish herself from any other soldier.
But isn't that soldier's "regular duty" to be at the front line and killing the enemy?
Or are you saying that the only heroes in the armed forces are those who perform their duty in an exceptional way?
If so, I'd imagine this involves taking a greater risk than normal, in a selfless way.
But say someone took a larger than normal amount of risk, but was unsuccessful in their attempt, and died without making any difference.
Say Murphy ran up to the forward machine gun and immediately was killed by the first German that shot at him. Would he still be a hero?
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Reading more from the wikipedia article, I also started thinking about this question:
If someone does something terrible later in life, and something heroic in their early life, are they still a hero?
Is being a hero a permanent status, or does it take your entire life into perspective?
What got me thinking about this was this:
quote:His first wife, Wanda Hendrix, often talked of his struggle with this condition, even claiming that he had at one time held her at gunpoint.
What if he had shot and killed her? Would you still have held him up as the ultimate hero? Would the fact that he performed heroic acts excuse his later misdeed? Can someone be both a hero and a murderer?
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote: Would they have made movies about him? Would people, such as yourself, still hold him up as the ultimate hero?
Please don't misrepresent what I said. Audie Murphy is not the ultimate hero. However; when speaking of the military and it's heroes, Audie Murphy will always be near the top.
quote: Say Murphy ran up to the forward machine gun and immediately was killed by the first German that shot at him. Would he still be a hero?
Yes, albeit a dead and unsuccesful hero. The nature of heroics rewards achievement, not failure.
quote: But isnt' that soldier's "regular duty" to be at the front line and killing the enemy?
I'm not entirely sure what your point is. Yes, it is their regular duty. It's what they signed up to do. It doesn't automatically qualify them as a heroic figure.
quote:Or are you saying that the only heroes in the armed forces are those who perform their duty in an exceptional way?
Such is the nature of heroism.
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, if he saved lives doing so, just as great a one. Google Sgt. Rafael Peralta for an example of someone whose heroism was similar to the situation you describe. His lack of recignition is more due to the unpopularity of this war and the lack of media cooperation, relative to WWII.
If he just ran up and died, with no effect on the battle, he'd probably be viewed as stupid.
As for Lynch, being in combat was most definitely not part of her regular duty and getting captured is a fairly unlikely and extraordinary situation for her.
Angio, your statement does a huge disservice to uniformed soldier. It is true that some "terrorists" may be "heroes" to some people, but the two labels are not equivalent and trying to make them so does a tremendous injustice to the language, much less to most actual heroes.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
I don't know. I guess it would be subjective to the situation. You could certainly hold up his Medal of Honor description and point to it as an act of heroism, and at the same time show examples of his typical behaviour later in life.
Edit: After some googling, I noticed that many articles were attempting to link PTSD to his later behaviour in life.
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
I think I read a series of books that had a main character that dealt with this dilemma. I can't remember the name though... 'something Game' I think?
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Yes, it is their regular duty. It's what they signed up to do. It doesn't automatically qualify them as a heroic figure.
quote:Or are you saying that the only heroes in the armed forces are those who perform their duty in an exceptional way?
Such is the nature of heroism.
Well then we have reached a point of understanding.
Many people believe that by signing up and joining tthe armed forces, you have automatically become a hero, because this act itself is heroic.
I haven't formed an opinion on this, but I have seen it expressed many many times, especially here on hatrack around 2002-2004.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think I read a series of books that had a main character that dealt with this dilemma. I can't remember the name though... 'something Game' I think?
posted
I think the act itself is often heroic, and the character of service of the vast majority of people in the military is also heroic, but merely putting on a particular set of clothes does not eradicate people's faults or make them paragons.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pel, while it is true that young people are not often given the same respect and standing as those older (even when you turn 18, then 21, then 25, you will still see this same trend), that does not mean that all young people are relegated to such a fate.
You have it in you to do great things, even at 17, if you just apply your will to the task. I taught a girl who was 13 and already owned her own party planning company for elementary school students. At 14, she expanded to hire a secretary who was several years her elder. While her goals were small - to run the company through high school to make money to pay for an Ivy League school should she not receive a scholarship - she could easily turn that entrepreneurial spirit to some other task.
Her clients didn't mind that she was young - many of them embraced it - instead focusing on her competence and success.
There are other stories of students I have taught (and those I have read about) using their brains and savvy to carve a place for themselves in an adult world. There are countless more stories of adults who live in obscurity without ever having even the voice you have enjoyed her on hatrack - only those stories never get told.
Find an avenue of pursuit, and pursue it with a will. You will find that being 17 is not the impenetrable obstacle it seems.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"This just doesn't make sense." Yes, it does, if we assume that life is more than just a precursor to death, then few, if any, youths know that they will truely live, many people don’t, you know.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Yes, it does, if we assume that life is more than just a precursor to death, then few, if any, youths know that they will truely live, many people don’t, you know.
No one , old, young, or middle-age, knows how long they will live. It's youthful arrogance on your part to assume that it's only important to the young.
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:You know, Pel, I'm not intending to be patronizing about this, but you really ought to print out your post and threads here, and save them. I bet it would be really interesting for you when you are older to be able to look back and revisit the passions and opinions that you held dear at age 17.
The way our society treats its young people is schizophrenic and hypocritical to a large degree. I don't think that Pel's arguments are any less valid because he is one himself. If I wasn't about to go out for lunch, I would post more.
Did I say, or even imply, that his arguments are less than valid? If that implication was taken, it certainly wasn't intended.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"No one , old, young, or middle-age, knows how long they will live." Not how long, but how well. It is easier, says Socrates, to live a long life than a good one.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure I agree with him on that. A good life is totally in your control, but a long one isn't.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is easier to live a long mediocre life than a long good one, perhaps? I think the emphasis is that continuing day to day is not as difficult as making an effort to live well.
That said, living a good life or a mediocre life or a bad life is all up to your motivation. One could, say, spend their entire lives bandering about with words on internet fora (hehe... sorry, still can't say that with a straight face), or one could spend their lives taking action and sculpting a place in the world - or a mixture of both.
The young worry about what their lives will be like, often at the expense of giving up wonderful years worth of potential with the excuse of "I'm too young and no one will take me seriously". The old know what their lives were like, and hope to make the best of the years they have left, often wishing they hadn't squandered their youthful years. Those in between can look back at what they have done, and look forward to what they will do - with mixtures of the fears of both young and old.
Pel is simply consumed by the angst of a life not yet started. He worries about what it will be like instead of actually getting things moving. It's like standing at the side of a pool wondering if the water's cold, refusing the opinions of those already in the water because they've become accustomed to it already - you don't get a lot of swimming done that way.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
I think you are over-generalizing immensly to make a statement like this.
quote:although great distance separates us as we wander in our lonely spheres.
This gives me images of those big balls that (in my mind) New Zealanders love to roll around in when they're not bunji jumping.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
so is it just me or is anyone else really at a loss for what Pel is trying to say in this thread?
you keep bringing up issues that are more or less insensitive to age, but then bringing up age somehow in all of them even though it has no bearing.
1)Military service versus opposition (keep in mind that I also attended a Benedictine Military High School, though in Illinois instead of texas) 2)not knowing how long one has to live 3)the difference between leading a good and/or a long life.
please do one of the following: 1) clarify yourself in the case that I'm just being unfortunately obtuse and unable to see your point(s) 2) make a point rather than just randomly rambling from unrelated topic to unrelated topic
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, I sort of see what you were saying. It's just that it was hidden under a lot of poorly worded philosophical rambling.
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Opposing a war is risk-free, for the most part. Participating in one is not. You don't see the disparity there?
Posts: 1156 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hope that you are not diminishing the sacrifices that people make when they devote their lives to opposing war? Including some very real physical risks.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am mostly refering to spending significant amounts of time in prison, as well as financial and personal sacrifices. But to answer you question, there have been peace activists in the region that have been killed. And enough that have been under fire that even I know several personally.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
TheGrimace, the only significant point I made was #3, and the inability to fortell whether one will live such a life. I regret now having mentioned military service.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally, I'm enjoying being a teenager. In four years, I won't be one anymore, so I figure, enjoy it while I can. You're only young once, then you can be an adult for the rest of your life.
Posts: 464 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
