Culture

Our Culture’s Liberal Use Of The Word ‘Bravery’

140 Comments

Bravery.

Let’s start with the definition. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines bravery as “the quality that allows someone to do things that are dangerous or frightening : the quality or state of being brave”.

That’s simple enough. Actions that are dangerous or frightening require bravery; going to war, defending one’s family, rescuing octogenarians from house fires, and so on. What’s the first result on Google, as of the writing of this article, for news articles featuring the word “brave”?

A soldier dying to defend his country?

A man defending his home against armed intruders?

A fireman heroically rescuing a little old lady (and all of her many cats) from a house fire?

9576280-large

No.

“Selena Gomez Posts ‘Brave’ Bikini Selfie! But Is She Trying Too Hard To Be Sexy?”

How unsurprisingly disappointing.

Head in Hands

Now, technically, if Selena Gomez happens to be utterly terrified of posting selfies, then her action could arguably be considered brave under the above definition. Even if technically accurate, however, anyone with half a mind should immediately be able to see the utter ludicrousness of labeling a selfie “brave”. The headline is a perfect example of the gratingly excessive overuse of the word “brave” in our present culture.

I believe that the liberal use of such words, brave, heroic, courageous, etc., is the inevitable result of the watering down of language to the point where its meaning has become entirely relative. What have traditionally been considered virtues have been entirely eliminated from public discourse and are now relegated to “qualities”.

Look at the definition again. Bravery is described as a quality, not a virtue, and this holds true of both formal definitions and the general use of the term today. This is an important distinction, because while a quality is merely an amoral characteristic, a virtue is a characteristic that is morally good. Qualities can be anything, but virtues are restrictive.

If bravery is nothing more than a quality, then posting a selfie, wearing garish clothing, or nattering on about various personal issues that should really be kept to oneself, can all be labeled “brave”, so long as they meet the criteria of “dangerous or frightening”. As what one finds “dangerous or frightening” is entirely relative to the individual, one can be “brave” for absolutely anything.

Mantegna-minerva-garden-virtue

However, if bravery is instead a virtue, then what is brave is restricted to actions that are morally good. Is posting a selfie morally good? No, at best it is amoral, possessing no moral value whatsoever, and therefore cannot be brave. The perspective of bravery as a virtue, rather than as a quality, would immediately eliminate most, if not all, such liberal uses of the word brave.

This brings us to the question of why have the words traditionally used to describe virtuous actions become watered down?

The answer is simple. The liberal use of words like “brave”, words that used to actually mean something, is a symptom of the lazy, decadent, and superficial culture we have had the great misfortune of being born into.

Everyone wants to be brave, but being brave is hard (mild understatement). We live in a culture of ease, people don’t like “hard”. Look around you, everyone wants the payoff without putting in the effort. They want to get rich quick, lose all their excess weight in two days, and become internationally famous, all without moving from the couch.

woman-laying-on-green-fainting-couch-images

Which is easier, risking your life to save others, or increasingly misusing words so that they become redefined, and one can be “brave” without having done anything at all?

This is the situation we find ourselves in. Being labeled “brave” still carries much of the emotional payoff that it always has, but requires next to no effort. It’s like when schools hand out medals for “participation”. Winning becomes meaningless, but at least everyone “feels good about themselves”.

Language matters. The only way to bring meaning back to words like brave, heroic, or courageous, is the same way they became meaningless to begin with, through their use. When you use these words, use them appropriately, and when others misuse them, call them out on their bullshit.

Read More: Rotten Apple (Inc.) Poisons Cultures

140 thoughts on “Our Culture’s Liberal Use Of The Word ‘Bravery’”

    1. Look at that feminist “bravery”, she might spill her latte but she’s still going for it! Woot! Go Goirls! Don’t tangle up those purse handles!
      /of course I’m being sarcastic.

      1. My favorite part is that both kissing girls are femme-looking. This usually indicates they’re “lesbian until graduation”

    3. LOL! I was looking for this. This is the worst hyperbole — and dishonest to boot.

      1. The eeriest thing about this woman is how her fat distorts her features and lends her the appearance of a child. She looks like a kid in this picture- what other sort of person would pose for a picture with candy?

        1. Child? I just posted her doppel ganger pic.
          She looks like an oversized bespectacled pig,
          Notice the similarities between her nose and the pig’s snout.

    5. Yep, 2 attention whore Lezzas kissing in Public is “brave”. Lemme tell those pesky World War Veterans that.

    3. She would be right 200 years ago when there was no nanny state and single moms were damaged good that not even beta white knights would touch. Today ? I’d say she’d be more brave NOT being a single mom.

    4. The mother of my children died young, leaving me to raise our 4 children on my own the youngest was 3. I became thoroughly sick of women telling me how brave I was. What the hell did they think any man would do in the same circumstances? Is there opinion of men so low that the assumed action would have been to throw their children into the street and go party with the local whore?
      Yes brave is way over used.

  4. Yes, media driven hyperbole.
    Brave is not coming out on Oprah, brave is marching into the twin towers, both of which are on fire in the quest to save people who you know at a glance are almost certain to die, as you likely are. By extension, that is heroism, to make a selfless effort despite knowing the risks and genuinely putting oneself in dangers way.
    It makes me insane how the MSM, left or right diminish the true meanings of brave or hero in their quest to shout louder in essence then the others on TV or in the media. It’s disrespectful to ACTUAL heros

    1. I agree with the sentiment, but Firemen being super brave and so much braver than anybody else is another bullshit media paradigm that I’ve had enough of. Guys line up to do this job because it is relatively easy 99% of the time (tons of downtime), the pay is good, the benefits and retirement are fantastic and everybody kisses your ass. In our modern age, there aren’t really that many fires (fire safety codes, building materials and technology have almost eliminated these) and when a fire is so bad that is is deemed too dangerous, Fire crews are simply told to stand down. There is risk, but every job has some risk.
      Just my take, I think its overdone.

      1. It’s grossly overdone with service members as well. None of whom are doing a single goddamn thing overseas to benefit Americans I can promise you.

        1. The servicemen part is tough. There are 2 types of guys in the military & I’ve been around a ton.
          1) Guys who are brave – they don’t talk about what they do. They don’t complain about real or perceived slights to people in uniform. They’re doing it generally to serve their country, even as it becomes more difficult for them to honestly attach the military’s overall plan directly to helping US citizens or making the world a better place. Again, you won’t hear that from them b/c they take responsibility for their own actions.
          2) People who use their uniform to garner prizes, attention and/or pity. Unfortunately this is a large portion of them, though I don’t think this attitude is by any means restricted to guys in the military. It’s more human nature, but with an easy way to tap into that bad side of ourselves.
          The guys in #2 sound very similar to feminists when they speak, which is a bit ironic b/c most would consider themselves very manly. Lots of blaming, entitlement “X owes me respect, $, whatever”. Lots of talk once you get in their inner circles about using military pay rules to gauge US taxpayers. Pretty sickening, but it is what it is & I’m not part of that machine to stop it.

        2. I would say there is a third type – the guys who think they are in group #1 but really they just got in because they had nothing else going for them and decided to get free training to become a mechanic or something.
          This third type makes up the overwhelming majority of the military.

      2. Thus my quite specific example. I do not believe that being a fireman automatically makes you a “hero”. No, marching into a 100 storey inferno with shit already raining down on you and bodies falling from the sky in the debris field because the fire is so bad people would rather jump and die on the sidewalk the endure anymore heat and smoke up there, that is hero shit.

      3. Not only that but in NYC black firefighters had to sue because none of them could pass a written test, when there are books with all the information in them.

      4. As someone who has worked as a firefighter (briefly, it was fucking boring as shit) I can say you are wrong, it is more like 99.9999999999999% of the time it is easy. These guys are the biggest waste of money ever, it should be at least 90% volunteer.
        Nothing quite like watching the firemen watching your house slowly burn down.

    2. Reckless commanders.
      I’d not have allowed by boys up those towers. I’d have happily been prosecuted for dereliction and taken the fall to keep em out of the inferno.

  5. I’d say “genius” is the most overused word out there.
    Nikolai Tesla, Newton and Einstein were geniuses. That actor or director you like? He’s just good at making movies.

        1. Well truthfully I don’t think the feminazis are overusing that word. I think they know what it is supposed to mean and simply want to alter the dictionary definition of it. Just like banning “bossy.”

      2. Yep, indeed. I’ll see your ‘epic’ and I’ll raise you an ‘amazing’.
        Turn on the TV and just listen (or nearby conversations). The word ‘amazing’ is being used so much we’ll have to retire it by 2018.
        Please, someone pass around a Thesaurus.

      4. Lots of ridiculously overused hyperbole in America, but the top 2 in my mind would be “hero” and “awesome”.

        1. awesome has to be it.
          But the negatives are even worse. “Vile” is the most laughable thing I’ve heard in recent years.
          Go to South Africa and watch the vibrants engage in infant rape if you wnat to see “vile”. Calling a woman who punched you for no reason a “savage” isn’t vile anymore than calling a snow leopard a “predator” is.

    2. Indeed. A college student who manages to parrot his/her professors and regurgitate their information flawlessly is branded a ‘genius’ these days. That’s right, the man or woman who parrots his masters without error is somehow to be placed on the same foot as the likes of Tesla, Newton, and Einstein. Until after graduation and you -quite predictably- never hear from these alleged “geniuses” again.

    3. Einstein was a fucking plagiarist, dude. Putting that slimy motherfucker up there with Tesla in and Newton is grossly insulting to Tesla and Newton.

      2. I feell like your comments definitely add to the discussion topic as a whole

      3. I’m sure that you have tangible, verifiable facts with which to back that claim and not just leave that statement as is.

        1. Sometimes we just gotta ignore things…and focus on acquiring the MOOLA. Who cares about little opinions about Einstein, whether they’re right or wrong? I’d rather be finding out how to gain some money. Because money = free time = pleasure.

      4. Yep – plagiarist. The entire scientific community (people capable of actually reading and understanding his work) is simply wrong, and “some dude on the internet” is right.
        After all, those clueless motherfuckers who though Einstein knew what he was talking about are the same hopeless, credulous fools who think that global warming is a real thing, and that it’s being caused by burning fossil fuels. What douches!

        2. You do realize Einstein invented (and implemented) gravity, don’t you? Before he came along everything just flew off into space as the earth spun on its axis. Now that’s brave!

        3. Sure – but you can point out their idiocy to people who might be sitting on the fence.

        4. Quit sucking the man’s circumcised cock and do a simple google search (“Einstein plagiarist”) and then spend an entire weekend reading and digesting. I’m certain you’ll come away w/ a different outlook. He was, in point of fact, a plagiarist, a scientific phoney, a sexual deviant (pedophile), a philanderer, a zionist, an anti-American agent, and a warmonger due to his involvement w/ the development of atomic weapons.
          His primary role, in his earliest days as a Swiss patent officer, was to block and steal the ideas of his contemporary, Nicola Tesla, who was the biggest threat to the status quo (military-industrial complex) that the world has ever seen. As such, they robbed us of “ether physics” and then shoved “relativism” down our throats and we’ve never been able to get back on track. Yes, little Albert turned out to be a real mensch. Oh, and all those little cute / inspirational quotes attributed to Albert??? Yes, he had a variety of ghost writers assigned to him — no surprise there.

        6. “As such, they robbed us of “ether physics” and then shoved “relativism” down our throats and we’ve never been able to get back on track.”
          Sure, and the Earth is nothing more than a flat disk covered by a glass dome riding on the back of a giant space turtle.

        7. How many fence sitters would you say there are? My guess is close to 0. Don’t feed the trolls.

      6. Excellent point Timmy, and you illustrate why it’s always risky trying to dredge up some “epic hero genius” from a cursory knowledge of science texts and watching a few shows on the History Channel. On the other hand, the mainstream has tried to bury and subjugate Tesla for decades, which is what happens to real geniuses and heroes in our society.

        1. I like how you responded to your own post under a different name in an attempt (a rather pathetic one, admittedly) to add credence to your thinly-veiled antisemitism.

        2. Ahhh…. no. I’ve never heard of Timmy or remember seeing any of his comments in other articles. We simply are of similar opinion on this particular topic. What is your proof of such a conspiratorial accusation, Conrad?

        3. Furthermore Conrad, of the 3 “geniuses” you picked out of your hat, I agree w/ one (Tesla), disagree strongly w/ one (Einstein) and am somewhat on the fence about the actual contributions and real scientific merits of one (Newton) — despite the enormous propaganda.
          In the case of Einstein, I’m not calling him a garden-variety idiot (as some do when they cite the fact he was passed over for selection into a technical institute in Zurich as a young man), but he was certainly not who has been portrayed to us so fervently over the last 100+ years.
          A good example is that he was not a very talented mathematician (relatively speaking), but rather used his first wife’s prodigious math skills w/out any recognition or citation whatsoever. In fact, as a “thanks”, he left his first wife to co-habit and eventually marry his cousin, who had 2 cute little girls from a prior marriage — he REALLY liked little girls apparently, which is not so unusual in the Jew*sh community.
          As an aside, his only son from his first marriage disappeared off the face of the earth without a trace, despite much speculation, although some Rabbis REALLY like little boys…

        5. I am also absolutely agreeing with Timmy McBain. And no, I am not a sock puppet of these other two, they are RIGHT.

  6. A well-written first article that makes an important point about the perversion of words in today’s society. I look forward to seeing more of your work on this site.

  7. Bravest thing you can do nowadays is unprotected anal sex with multiple gay partners. If you pull the brass ring and wind up with AIDS, you’re the bravest person EVER.

    1. Many gays get HIV on purpose so they can get social security disability and leech off the taxpayer for the rest of their lives. That’s why they seem so loud they have nothing productive to do.

      1. Yes, gays choose to cut their lifespan down to ten years just so they can leech an amount of cash from the government that puts them below the poverty line. What an intelligent, red-pilled man you are, you’ve sure figured out the reality of this twisted, unfair world.

        2. Ah yes. Those bareback parties they attend should be considered a federal crime. Catch the bug on purpose, and you ought to be considered no better than a guinea pig for big pharma to then experiment on. Wait, isn’t that exactly what is happening right now?

      2. The rub here is that some fags know that HIV is a scam and that’s it’s actually the nitrate poppers, recreational drugs (cocaine, ecstasy), booze, AZT, various STDs, and the general party lifestyle of homosexuals that destroys the immune system and develops into “AIDS”. Some know this and take advantage of the nanny-state “benefits” of being HIV positive, but are able to avoid the so-called progression towards AIDS because they avoid the real triggers. As such, they don’t sacrifice years of their life for the financial / political benefits — instead, they are essentially gaming the system.

        1. And I said “some” fags do this, not most, and not likely even a significant percentage of them, but it is an actual phenomenon within the gay community.

  8. Women can not be brave because they have a passive or emotion-focused approach towards stress. One needs to adopt an active coping style which stimulates the release of DHEA that mutes the negative aspects of stress.
    Bravery is another quality only found in free people. This is because bravery is the willingness to give up one’s money, one’s reputation and even one’s life, at times, for a good cause. Bravery cannot be forced on people, in other words. Slaves may fight hard and long, but they cannot be said to be brave. They are simply strong and able.
    Bravery is only possible when one can do as one chooses. So whether the bravery is championing a new idea, opening a new business venture that may not succeed, starting a new relationship that may not succeed, or something else, bravery is mainly found in people who have a measure of freedom. To the extent that freedom is extinguished by too much structure and too much control by government, bravery tends to disappear proportionately.

    1. mmm… that’s pretty over-generalized. Ever heard of moms jumping through windows fending off car-jackers trying to take their kids? Lots of other examples & quite a few I’ve seen w/ my own eyes.
      The passive/emotion stuff disappears when it comes to their progeny. I don’t have much respect for women these days beyond their own human dignity, but I’ll at least give them this.

      1. I saw a mom run a way to save herself before remembering her kid was still in the car and going back to save them – after the police had control of the situation.
        I’ve met many moms suffering from the emotional fallout of abandoning their kids.
        I’ve heard/read/met a few hardened mothers who’ve killed their children in various ways – sometimes openly, sometimes covertly – and show not a shred of remorse (one mother killed 7 kids of 12, and never spent a day in prison).
        I’ve met thousands of mothers who compensate for the hostility they feel towards their kids by spoiling them (though unfortunately for the kids they never hide their true feelings completely) or by projecting their hostility onto the children and punishing them either emotionally (guilt) or physically (varying degrees of abuse).
        One of the biggest (though necessary) lies society tells is the lie of a mother’s love. Most children, especially those of the lower classes, have never known unconditional love.

        1. Also, because of this lie, children who are being abused today feel like they have no one to talk to or no one that would believe them. Sometimes the lie is so internalized that the children no something is wrong, will confess that they feel broken and want to kill themselves; but they’ll have no idea why.

        2. Sure – bad apples everywhere. My response was to “can not be brave.” His points would land harder w/o the hyperbole.

  9. This remains me of single mothers being referred to as “heroes”. Yeah, how heroic and brave…

  10. This is just another example of the hijacking and redefining of language by feminism and its eunuchs.

  11. How would you categorize the difference between the words “brave” and “courageous”? I mean in the real, virtuous sense, not the single mom sense.

    1. That’s a good question. It’s a bit tricky because the words are so often used interchangeably. It would really depend on which definitions one is working with. With some definitions, there is no difference between the meaning of the two words, but with others there is a difference, which hinges on the presence or absence of fear. In such cases, bravery could be described as performing a dangerous or ordinarily frightening action without experiencing fear, or at the very least, without exhibiting any fear. Whereas courage could be described as performing a dangerous or ordinarily frightening action despite the presence of fear; one is frightened, but continues onward anyway.

      1. Interesting. Makes me think of the old John Wayne line (possibly apocryphal): “Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway.”

  12. I just want to say I think it was very brave of Caustic to write an article like this.

  14. So true. Leftists always attack language, whether by trying to limit what words people can use or by attempting to change their meanings.

    2. George Orwell understood this very well, as demonstrated by Newspeak in 1984.

    3. The meanings of words change, that’s the nature of language. In fact, the article’s position that bravery should be involved with morality because it’s always been that way is intellectual imperialism and it’s idiotic.

    4. I don’t know if it’s so much Leftists to blame as it is lawyers (politicians).
      These people are the worst at trying to redefine something (once their caught in the act – left or right). (lol)

    5. Don’t forget the intentional degradation and impoverishment of vocabulary as well, so that the indentured pions cannot even become clearly cognizant of the full extent of their sorry lot in life. Instead of forbidding words (which only draws attention to them), better to simply prevent the sheeple from being able to understand what they mean in the first place – a task nicely accomplished by your public “edumacation” system. A thinking slave is a dangerous thing indeed.

  15. Even better than calling people out on their bullshit is to be brave, and keep putting oneself in those positions where that can be exercised to at least a degree.
    It’s like the old story about how the Secret Service works against counterfeiting. They could look at all the types of funny money to identify. But instead, they study the real thing – to an excruciating degree. Then it doesn’t matter what the new methods are to counterfeit – they’ll recognize it.
    Those people watering down the word may still try to bullshit themselves so they can be considered brave, but it’s far less likely to occur if they are smack in the face of people who are actually brave.

    1. That’s an excellent point, it’s far more difficult to maintain counterfeit bravery when faced with the genuine article.

  16. In the early days of the Iraq war, Jessica Lynch was called brave and a hero for getting captured and later rescued. Although in fairness to her, I don’t think she ever made such claims about herself but was more a propaganda tool for the Pentagon. Would the media have gushed about bravery and heroism if the same thing had happened to a man?

    1. I was at Nas. Apparently her rifle jammed? Which means she forgot tap rap bang. Nothing brave she was too week and scared to resist.

    2. She went along with the story, “wrote” a book, and had a couple of Lifetime (or course) movies made that towed the pentagon line THEN she told the truth.

    3. I believe the MSM goes along with whatever sells at the time. Remember, it’s all about ratings (money) so it could be a woman or man as long as it sells.
      Honestly, I think the Pentagon propaganda tool (or idea) was to constantly distract us from asking questions (why are we fighting in Iraq?).
      Keep your eye on the shiney thing! (lol)

  17. Brave in the times we live is a basketball player coming out of the closet, a celebrity opening up about her seventh divorce, a woman leaving a man because they emotionally have lost their connection (got some new cock to ride), a woman making it to the top of her company and defying the boys club, a celebrity staying sober for a year and the President of The United States giving out free contraception to women. This is the new brave and when China really gets going the west has not a hope in hell. Enjoy the decline!!

  19. Adjectives that have a positive connotation are being thrown around too liberally these days. “Amazing”, “incredible”, “beautiful” and “bravery” are being connected to mundane occurrences and people.
    As the saying goes, if everyone is special then nobody is special.

    1. Very true, once one has used such words to describe the mundane, one has no vocabulary left for that which is truly amazing.

  20. Good article and the distinction between “virtues” and “qualities” is something we all need to hear over and over.

  21. I struck out tonight. No pussy.
    But I am bravely determined not to masturbate.
    Do that work?

    2. Sir, you were brave just attempting to “go for it” (lol).
      But, yes by today’s standards.

  22. “To Kill a Mockingbird” was published in 1960, and many schoolchildren are required to read it. In a side plot, a six-year-old girl reads to an old lady in severe pain from cancer. Her father praises the old lady’s “courage”, because she’s determined to quit using morphine before she dies.
    So it’s “courage” to make yourself suffer with no chance of victory, and no possible benefit to anyone else?

    1. It’s courageous for a soldier to stand his ground and fight even if there is no chance of victory, the same principle applies. And I believe there is a benefit to someone else. The very example to others of doing what one believes to be right despite significant physical suffering is itself a benefit.

  24. Long long ago when I was a child around 9 or so, I read on a bathroom wall a piece that went ” Anyone can piss on the floor – Be a hero and SHIT ON THE CEILING”. I’ve never since applied this literally nor do I remember the exact location of the restroom but the words, albeit humorous have remained etched well, and have even reverberated often, but quietly in the back of my mind when I’m pursuing and achieving POSITIVE goals. After doing many a thorough fire-hydrant colon-cleanse of putrid beta thought from my mind, these cynical ”words of wisdom” oddly remain. I believe they pass the test of not being beta.

  25. The list of the truly brave and heroic IMO:
    1) Lt Michael P Murphy
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_P._Murphy
    2) Retired Gurkha soldier Bishnu Shrestha
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishnu_Shrestha
    3) Audie Murphu
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audie_Murphy
    4) Sgt Dakota Meyer
    http://gizmodo.com/5841107/how-sgt-dakota-meyer-rescued-36-soldiers-under-heavy-fire
    5) Sakamoto Ryoma
    http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2010/04/27/reference/sakamoto-the-man-and-the-myth/#.U8DpQbHNkQg
    There are a hell of a lot more truly brave individuals out there today and from the pages of history but obviously I can’t write all of them down. I spit on the MSM however, for devaluing the use of the word “brave”. Yeah, I’m sure Selena Gomez went through hell and back just to get the courage to put up a selfie….fuck the mainstream media for poisoning everything meaningful and truly courageous.

    1. I think its truly sad in this world that when people think “brave” they immediately jump to soldiers and politicians first.

      1. well those men are brave heroes they arent like the fucking politicians we see now

        1. OR they just lived in a world where information was hard to get and traveled VERY slowly, so the politicians were able to control their own narratives

  26. Freud did an interesting experiment.
    He put a female chimpanzee with her little baby in an empty room and started heating the floor gradually. As the temperature started rising the mother picked up the baby and held it in her arms. The temperature continued to rise, the mother started hopping up and down with the baby in her arms. Then the floor started to get really hot, the mother was still jumping high but still holding the baby.
    When the temperature rose so high that it was unbearable and her feet started to burn, the mother chimpanzee put the baby on the floor and …. stepped on it.

      1. I’ve read about this experiment long time ago in a library. There are no references online (or I could not find any). I have a vague memory it was Freud but I might be wrong. The experiment though is as described.

  27. With the hero there is always a suspicion that a Cad (Gen Sir Harry Paget Flashman KBE) or a Psycho (Achilles) lurks just below the surface. Truly brave men like Hector finish second.

  28. One example of bravery is Chard and Bromhead at Roarkes Drift. The two could have had their men run off.
    However in the broad scheme of things in ww1 millions of officers and men did things on a daily basis that would have been awarded Victoria Crosses if performed on the Velt in Natal a few decades earlier. Yet they go unremarked and more or less unknown. No awards.
    We are doomed gentlemen.

  30. The only way to experience true bravery is first-hand (with your own eyes) and w/ full knowledge of the circumstances. As such, witnessing a person do something truly brave hits you deep in the chest and triggers a strange mix of admiration, fear, guilt and inadequacy.
    On the other hand, if you’ve seen it on TV or read about in the papers, there’s a 99.99% chance it wasn’t bravery at all, but rather social / political spin and manipulation. Citing bravery on 9/11 is an excellent example of such BS, as is automatically assuming all cops and soldiers are brave heroes to greater or lesser extents. In other words, if you weren’t there, it didn’t happen. Bravery is largely a work of fiction at this time in history.

  31. A soldier dies for the Plutocrats in power. There is nothing brave in settling your differences with violence. That is truly the cowards way out.

    1. Soldiers die for many different reasons, some out of patriotism, others for personal profit, it is fallacious to lump them all together. One could make the argument that there is nothing moral in settling ones differences with violence, but moral or not, violent situations remain dangerous and or frightening and require some measure of bravery.
      Stefan Molyneux is very good when it comes to convincing rhetoric, such as in the example you posted, but as far as arguments go it’s really not a very good one. The apparel he mentions may be concomitant with how the killing is treated, but it is obviously not causal. Killings by tourists or by soldiers are treated differently because the reasoning behind the killings is different. If a tourist kills someone it is likely due to rage or drunkeness or something of that sort, but if a soldier kills someone it is because he is following orders. If a soldier kills someone against his orders he is punished by the military courts, or at least should be. Soldiers following orders are treated differently from tourists because we as a society have entrusted the various military officers or governmental officials who give the orders with the responsibility to defend us. I’m not saying that every military order is justified and necessary to defend us, they often aren’t, and those responsible should then be punished. But that remains the rationale between the different treatment nonetheless.

      1. You mean, sort of like, when a soldier kills someone he gets a pension, when a tourist does so he gets jail?

        1. Yes that’s a good example of Molyneux’s misleading rhetoric. On the surface it often appears very convincing, and results in a sort of false epithany, “wow, I hadn’t thought about it that way, he’s right!”. But when one sets that first response aside and actually digs deeper into what he is saying, one often finds that his arguments simply don’t hold up to logical analysis.

    2. i believe in imperialism so thus i have to say fuck that noise lets kill some fuckers if we have to live with feminism so must the camel humpers

    3. There is an important distinction between these scenarios “the declaration of war”. Soldiers can be tried for misconduct if they really are killing non-combatants intentionally for kicks .
      The Soldier essentially is wearing a neon target that says shoot here (if you dare). The man in the hawaiian shirt makes no attempt to identify his purpose and combat abilities.

  33. When it comes to misuse of words to the point where they become irrelevant feel-good BS, don’t forget the opposite of bravery, i.e. cowardice. Guilt for abusing “bravery” rests mainly on the American Left for feel-good reasons, but just the same, guilt for abusing “cowardice” rests mainly on the American Right. It seems to be the knee-jerk reaction to any act of murder of civilians, whether it be by politically motivated terrorists, school shooters or anyone else.
    If bravery is doing something despite the danger, then cowardice is to not do something because of the danger involved. It is absurd to call terrorists or school shooters cowards. They might not be in much danger from their immediate victims, but they certainly set themselves up for retaliation and thus expose themselves to a whole world of danger. They may be evil, despicable people, but cowards they objectively are not. If they were cowards, they would not attack their victims unless they had good reason to believe there would be no retaliation, which is certainly not the case for, well, pretty much anyone whom the American Right loudly and publicly denounced as a coward.
    Thus, I’ve concluded that these kinds of spurious declarations of bravery and cowardice serve the same kind of feel-good purpose. The former in letting the one making the proclamation feel good about whatever cause the “brave” individual advances. The latter in letting the one doing the proclamation feel superior to the “coward” despite just ranting from an armchair.

  34. This is yet another example of the rapid decline of western civilization under Cultural Marxism post WWII. Anything that was deemed to be conservative, reactionary etc. after WWII was dangerous and fascist. It needed to be erased from humanity. That’s how we ended up with this consumerist culture that we live in nowadays. Nothing could be better for the state. Nation no longer mans anything. The flag is “just a piece of cloth” instead of a symbol of everything that the nation stands for. Maybe that’s because once upon a time you could be proud of what your nation stood for.
    Bravery used to be a masculine virtue. Bravery on the battlefield has been a celebrated virtue in European culture of thousands of years. How many of our national heroes are warriors? A good deal of them.
    Personally I’ve given up. I hate what western civilization has become. I hate the fast food, black Friday, hot dog eating contest society that we’ve become. I just sit back and watch the carnage. I play the game but in my mind I’m disgusted by it.

    1. It really is too bad, given modern satellite (surveillance) and military technology, that it would be very difficult to pull a Romulus and Remus (build a fort in the middle of nowhere, invite all the men dissatisfied with society, kidnap some women, and build a new society from there.

      1. Indeed. I’ve sometimes had similar thoughts. I’ve honesty considered converting to Mormonism – not because I believe in any of it but because I find their ability to protect their social circle from our modern plastic culture admirable. Mormon women don’t get on the cock carousel nearly as often as these so-called Christians do. Of course that comes with it’s own issues too. Just saying, I have considered it.

  35. You know the worlds gone to complete shit when being gay/lesbian makes you a hero or a single mom makes you a hero or brave. Enjoy the decline fellas. Its been real.

Comments are closed.