Historical enemies or heroes.

I am not sure where to place this, as usual for ATS, but in a way I think the forum fits.

I recently watched a documentary called Fact or Fiction about BRAVEHEART.

In this the history and discussion was William Wallace's life - how he is a legend and a hero to many.

Yet in truth, he was a very violent and sadistic person. He was loyal to his king, and spared no one who stood against him. He was not a person history would have known had it not been for his ability to command and to control.

Indeed he stood up for his people, but he did it ruthlessly.

Lets go back 500 years, take the media and yourselves to that time. Would you accept his actions? As people of the time?

Fast forward 500 years back to now, how many so called leaders are we witness to who are considered barbaric and savage?

Will time forgive their sins and give them hero status?

I think it's a good question to ask ourselves - it is always the people in the moment who have the most to lose, what about future generations?

How many of our - past and present - current evil leaders will one day be considered, at least by some, as heroes and have tales told of them for their actions in their time, that gave way to this - for us unknown - future?

He is a hero for the concept of "freedom" regardless of how he went about it. Bear in mind, most were barbaric in warfare back then (and still are). I'm sure if you dig deep enough you will find that the people you hold dear or hero-worship have done some "horrible" things in the past.

Originally posted by Somehumanbeing
He is a hero for the concept of "freedom" regardless of how he went about it. Bear in mind, most were barbaric in warfare back then (and still are). I'm sure if you dig deep enough you will find that the people you hold dear or hero-worship have done some "horrible" things in the past.

No, Thats my point - Im asking about people we think today are evil and need killing to stop, etc.

You make my point entirely. He was a hero "DESPITE" his actions.

What about bastards today, who in 500 years time... how do we know, how do we tell??

I mean, a bad man today is a bad man, we cant just assume he's ok eventually...

???

reply to post by badw0lf


Ah I see, we are on the same page now then. I read your post but I could not clearly understand whether you were for or against the notion of a hero being "harsh".

As for your reply, I see "bad" as merely dependant on a person's perspective. Some people still love Hitler, some people still love Stalin, regardless of the things they know about them. So it would depend on the future's circumstance.

If in the future, the whole world becomes communist, then Stalin will be seen as a hero and typical western "hero's" will be seen as comparable to Hitler.

reply to post by badw0lf


Dear Badw0lf,

William Wallace was barbaric yes, but in contrast to the english occupation of Scotland, he was a carebear. You have to look at the bigger picture and broaden your research. Additionally, at the time, things weren't so clean cut whereby planes drop precision bombs, it was all cut throat barbarism.

As to your question, history is written by the victors. In the end, if things continue as they are we will all be reading either Arabic or Jewish and the views will be so skewed noone will truly know or remember what happened.

Our historical knowledge is atrocious, let alone factual. So much is destroyed by the people who rule because they only want their point of view to come across. Simple humanity really.

Regards,
T

History is written by the winners, but more importantly access to that history is controlled by TPTB. That is how they maintain control and dominance over the rest of us.

Look at the history of war between England and Scotland. Personally speaking I have no axe to grind against any Scot, in fact some of my ancestors where Scottish. However, war between England and Scotland was a matter of grudges, personal sleights, etc between the rich and powerful. They caused the problems, they caused the friction, they got men, women, and children killed, maimed, and left lives devastated, and not the average person.

The history books always tend to skip the true meaning of war and the violence it entails, the smell of fear, the smell of rotting flesh, the blood and gore, the horror and the cruel aftermath for those who survive. War is always promoted by TPTB as glorious and justified. It isn't, it never was, and never will be. War is always about keeping the poor downtrodden, frightened, and under control, bending to the whims of capricious and cruel individuals who have seized power and are never going to yield to common decency or a sense of altruism. It was true in the time of Wallace, it was true before then as it is true today and into the future.

My enemy is not the average Iraqi, Afghan, or other person I am meant to fear, my enemy is TPTB that keep us frightened, worried, and under the boot of their abusive control.

Originally posted by Somehumanbeing
reply to post by badw0lf

 

Ah I see, we are on the same page now then. I read your post but I could not clearly understand whether you were for or against the notion of a hero being "harsh".

As for your reply, I see "bad" as merely dependant on a person's perspective. Some people still love Hitler, some people still love Stalin, regardless of the things they know about them. So it would depend on the future's circumstance.

If in the future, the whole world becomes communist, then Stalin will be seen as a hero and typical western "hero's" will be seen as comparable to Hitler.

yeah but still today these people are the 'bad' people of history and that wont change.. Neo Nazis etc who favor hitler are the outcasts... It's not the same.

hitler will never be seen by history a a good guy - it's already written. I'm referring to people we dont know about, people we only hear blurbs about, or snippets of in the media. There is a wealth of them in the ME.

And by todays standards we today see them as in the wrong - we dont live there, so we accept it as truth.

God I'm gunna bring oozy in if I keep this up lol..



Im not referring to people we have already written off - nutcases will always revere them. Sadly..

I do see your point however, and in a way that is exactly what Im talking about, but people when referring to say wallace, KNOW he was (If they are factual) he was a very violent man. The name braveheart was not even his to take, it was someone else's, but folklore and history neglect these facts.

reply to post by torqpoc


TRUTH!

Indeed, I agree, hmm, then I see the question I asked is far more than a question of one answer, but also asks how will fate see what we do today.

Good point.

Hopped up on double internets I seem to have double vision.. Oo

reply to post by Rob37n


I accept this as a very very valid answer. But for today. the future is not as simple - but perhaps we are far beyond the days of legend, and now in the time of recorded documented action.

I think that may be the thing. 500 years ago, it was word of mouth, success by proxy, win by tall tales. Buyt today we are bound by the very same standards that let us acheive such 'victories'.

I still wonder however, if there are those who will fight back, underhanded, devious, but avoiding the annals of the digital historical age, that may win favour in the future.

Good answers all of you - Thanks! Very much food for thought.