Who is a hero and how do we know?

No problem in knowing who the hero/predator is on this cover to the DVD for Troy. In life, particularly the political realm, it's not so easy. Masks often disguise someone's identity. Playing roles is popular in politics. Life doesn't divide up so tidily as there are many dimension to humans. Then add to the difficulty, some would see all predators as being bad guys; so predators might feel they had to hide their nature in a world where the ruler isn't chosen through physical combat but by reasons that sometimes defy logic-- like fun at a barbecue or just like you.

So, considering predators where it comes to our political parties, Republicans probably see themselves as predator/meat eaters (once you define this as not good guy/bad guy) as they would identify Democrats as prey. Over and over in comments other places, I see Republicans referring to Obama as being a wuss, who Putin would roll right over (when they aren't scared Obama is a bad man).

Those Republicans seem to believe that's true of all Democrats (well maybe not Hillary). Their fear is Democrats won't protect us nor will they stand up for the country. Their logic ignores the fact that our biggest terrorist attack came under a Republican watch, and that our full-scale entries into WWII, The Korean and Vietnam Wars were under Democrats. Still the belief is real that Republicans will defend the country, and Democrats will bend over, cringing and beg please don't hurt me too much.

The Republican says, Grab the world around the throat and demand what you want from it, you wuss!

The Democrat says, We must make the world a better place; so that all are happier and live better lives. Who do you think you are, Caligula?

Republican (thinking it's likely an insult but unsure) sneers, ELITIST!

The last person who the right wing decided was tough enough to stand up to Putin saw, when he looked into the Russian leader's eyes, a soul mate. How sweet, how tender, but were they? Might Bush being a predator explain some of what he did where it came to torture and establishing gulags? Come on, is he really of the same material as Putin (who is as feral as they come)?

This will offend the right, but I see Bush as manipulated and used by those with much keener minds and wills than his own. Even with the power of the presidency behind him, the Secret Service to protect him, Dick Cheney to run the country, a father who had been a predator, Bush is what he has always been-- prey. Because he denied his nature, he was ineffective prey.

Despite my assessment of Bush, I would not expect predators or prey to be all in one or the other political party (whether good or bad). Would they naturally gravitate to one or the other? I don't know but kind of doubt it as many things determine whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, issues that wouldn't give away the person's nature. It usually takes some thought to figure out if a leader is predator or prey and then are they good or bad-- effective or ineffective--unless like Putin, it's out in the open and obvious to anyone.

As a Democrat my whole life, when I am evaluating candidates, I will always look for a strong, wily, good, and determined predator to be able to deal with the world as it is. If he has to play a little rough, as long as he stays honorable, I don't mind at all.

Obama has the social sensitivity, the goodness, and yes, effective predator skills to make my voting for him an easy call. He doesn't have to posture or pose. He just is. You see it in his eyes, his organization, his confidence, his focus, how he carries himself, the ideas he's thought through. He knows his territory and sees the problems ahead of time. I think some undecided voters do see his predator nature (without naming it), but it scares them because he's different from them. If he was of the prey species, they'd be more comfortable.

I understand some of you will not be comfortable with this idea of labeling humans as predator or prey, but think about it a bit. Next time you watch a political debate, watch a rally, listen to a speech, ask yourself-- predator or prey? Then add effective, ineffective, good or bad. The combination of effective predator and bad is the last thing we want in a leader (Putin).

Before George bush, I'd have thought that if we have to choose a 'bad' leader, if it is chosen for us, then hope it's prey; but after him, I am not so sure. What we want is someone who knows who they are and is good at it. There are times in history where choosing a leader who is effective, good prey might be the right choice. The worst is someone who wants to be one thing, hasn't developed the skills for what they actually are and then postures, poses and is fooled by those who know exactly what they are.

What about the hero as a leader? Is that for whom we should be looking? Heroes are defined by being courageous, people of brave deeds, noble qualities, who perform heroic acts. To be a hero takes doing either something phenomenal or a lifetime of heroic actions. One deed doesn't tell you anything because one of the ironies of life is the same person can do something heroic beyond imagining and turn right around and do something equally evil.

We have been told to vote for John McCain because he is a hero. Is he? Was he? To help you fully decide, read this from Rolling Stone on the Make-believe Maverick. (the link to this informative and fascinating article came from GYMA). Whatever else John McCain is, he's not boring.

In terms of literary metaphors, the problem with McCain as hero is, even by his own telling, he was shot down on his first mission or thereabouts. What he did was not fight but rather resist and refuse to be released when he could have been (something I now wonder about given his now revealed propensity for lying). In terms of archetypes, McCain is the noble martyr, not the hero. If we take his own story, he suffered for his friends, for his country. This is like the Christ or say Prometheus.

What about predator or prey? He's certainly been aggressive enough for how his temper overflows. Does coming across as rude and nasty, running a sleazy campaign, no ability to stay focused, no concrete plan, make him possibly a lousy predator? Or is he prey who was thrust into the role of hero by his family and his own experiences but he was never able to truly live up to it? That alone could make someone into the nasty person he clearly has been recently as he heads into Gollum territory.

Voting for someone, who is supposed to be a hero, can be dicey and most especially if he turns out to be prey where you then have to look around for who is the predator running the actual show.

Well, what can I say, this is the writer's mind free-associating and looking at these characters. It does relate to the obstacles voters face in assessing who will make for a strong leader in our particularly turbulent time.

Whether you do think in terms of predator and prey, hero or villain, don't count on the media to help figure it out. The media won't or can't tell. It is driven by a need for constant excitement, for stirring things up. It's up to us to watch as they debate, interact with others, speak out, write, live their lives, and run their campaigns. Right now, running their campaigns is our best clue before they end up in office, and we all figure out what they are but it's too late.

I think, like the Spartan king, Leonidas, Obama has developed the skill set that he needs to do this job. He stays focused, he is directed by good purposes. Some fear his power because they aren't used to an effective predator in a power position.

We haven't had such a fully developed person running for the presidency in my lifetime. Barack Obama is the total package (which doesn't mean he is perfect or has not made mistakes.He's no Messiah despite how some want to milk that to add to the fear of others). He's a person who is highly skilled for these times. I hope this country doesn't lose its opportunity as it's now as much about us as about him.

Just had to add this piece from another article which I thought interesting as an evaluation by David Brooks, not a liberal, as to how he saw Obama:

"Obama has the great intellect. I was interviewing Obama a couple years ago, and I'm getting nowhere with the interview, it's late in the night, he's on the phone, walking off the Senate floor, he's cranky. Out of the blue I say, 'Ever read a guy named Reinhold Niebuhr?' And he says, 'Yeah.' So I say, 'What did Niebuhr mean to you?' For the next 20 minutes, he gave me a perfect description of Reinhold Niebuhr's thought, which is a very subtle thought process based on the idea that you have to use power while it corrupts you. And I was dazzled, I felt the tingle up my knee as Chris Matthews would say.

"And the other thing that does separate Obama from just a pure intellectual: he has tremendous powers of social perception. And this is why he's a politician, not an academic. A couple of years ago, I was writing columns attacking the Republican congress for spending too much money. And I throw in a few sentences attacking the Democrats to make myself feel better. And one morning I get an email from Obama saying, 'David, if you wanna attack us, fine, but you're only throwing in those sentences to make yourself feel better.' And it was a perfect description of what was going through my mind. And everybody who knows Obama all have these stories to tell about his capacity for social perception." David Brooks

After reading comments in the last blog, I wanted to add one more thought. Darlene wrote that people might go in and out of being predator or prey in a lifetime. That could well be.

What I feel most concerned about is that we not find ourselves with a culture turned into ineffective prey by those who want to feed on those weaker than themselves. I think this would worry people in both parties. This can be avoided by strong education systems, by an economy that is fairly run where all have a chance to rise up based on their abilities.

Ideally such a culture would be teaching how to be the best at what someone is; so that whether it's by nature prey or predator, they operate in their effective zone (maybe switching into another operating mode, if they can, when it's required) and thereby make the most of their true nature.

There is nothing wrong or weak about prey when it's effective, but trying to be something someone is not by nature leads to failure. It's a pretty advanced way of thinking though and could schools do such in a culture such as ours that often mistakes aggression for being effective.