What makes someone a hero?
It seems like it's a simple question, but MSNBC host Chris Hayes caused a firestorm when he said on Memorial Day weekend that he was uncomfortable calling people heroes just because they served in the military.
"Why do I feel so uncomfortable about the word 'hero'? I feel uncomfortable about the word hero because it seems to me that it is so rhetorically proximate to justifications for more war," Hayes said Sunday on MSNBC. "I don’t want to obviously desecrate or disrespect the memory of anyone that’s fallen, and obviously there are individual circumstances in which there is genuine, tremendous heroism, you know, hail of gunfire, rescuing fellow soldiers and things like that. But it seems to me that we marshal this word in a way that is problematic. But maybe I’m wrong about that."
Hayes' remarks immediately sparked a backlash, with some saying it was inappropriate to say such things about those putting their lives on the line to fight for their country.
Hayes issued an apology Monday, saying he understood why people were angry that someone who had never served or dealt with the cost of wars would make such a statement. His apology reads:
"On Sunday, in discussing the uses of the word 'hero' to describe those members of the armed forces who have given their lives, I don't think I lived up to the standards of rigor, respect and empathy for those affected by the issues we discuss that I've set for myself. I am deeply sorry for that.
"As many have rightly pointed out, it's very easy for me, a TV host, to opine about the people who fight our wars, having never dodged a bullet or guarded a post or walked a mile in their boots. Of course, that is true of the overwhelming majority of our nation's citizens as a whole. One of the points made during Sunday's show was just how removed most Americans are from the wars we fight, how small a percentage of our population is asked to shoulder the entire burden and how easy it becomes to never read the names of those who are wounded and fight and die, to not ask questions about the direction of our strategy in Afghanistan, and to assuage our own collective guilt about this disconnect with a pro-forma ritual that we observe briefly before returning to our barbecues.
"But in seeking to discuss the civilian-military divide and the social distance between those who fight and those who don't, I ended up reinforcing it, conforming to a stereotype of a removed pundit whose views are not anchored in the very real and very wrenching experience of this long decade of war. And for that I am truly sorry."
Hayes' remarks beg the question: Who exactly is a hero? We'd like to hear from you. We'd like you to sound off in the comments below or hit the button below to send a video comment to iReport. Do you think Hayes was out of line in his comments? Do you understand what he was saying?
Must you have served in combat to be a hero? Does enlisting alone make you one? Should that word be reserved for the military? Or does it apply to people who put themselves above others?
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
I spent a very, very long career in the Military and feel I did a good job. I was not a hero.
I'm with you on that Larry, the term "hero" is used mostly for every act committed, getting a cat of a tree, going into a burning building as a firefighter, that's their chosen job.
The real hero is the guy that has to clean the latrines.
And that is not bad. I wonder if it is bad to never have had a "HERO", I loved my parents, but they were not heros. I have through my individual effort saved 5 peoples lives, but never considered myself a hero.
I enlisted in the Army shortly after high school, mostly because I had no idea of my next step in life. there was no war at the time (1975 ). I do not consider myself a hero nor do I consider other military personel heros. when their duty put them in extreem danger and their actions endanger their life to help others in need, that is a hero
I thought Heroes got canceled
Soldiers are not heroes.
Imagine there is a murderer on the loose, a mass murderer. Say he has killed dozens, or even hundreds of people, and it is certain that this murderer will kill again. The police learn that the killer is hiding in a house belonging to a family of innocent bystanders.
Question: Is it ok for the police to blow up this house, slaughtering the family along with the murderer?
No? Then what about this is fundamentally different from our drone attacks in Yemen or Pakistan?
How, specifically, is this story inconsistent with our military's tactics in the war on terror?
Now to stretch the analogy a little further,
Say this murderer has never directly murdered anyone. He's only responsible for masterminding and then ordering the attacks that kill innocent civilians. And say instead of hundreds of innocents, this individual has killed tens of thousands with his plots.
Now, say this individual is a US military official.
Question: What would our reaction to Al-Qaeda slaughtering this man and his family, and the families of all those unlucky enough to be near him when the bombs go off?
Again, how, explicitly, is this any different from what our military does, has done, and will continue to do in the war on terror?
Terrorist is a word often used by tyrants to describe revolutionaries.
Question: Who are the real terrorists?
That was quite powerful; I do agree with you; simply following orders does not equate a hero!
Glad to see from these comments that I'm not the only one who did not take offense to what Chris Hayes said. I am a conservative, but lean left on matters related to the use of our military in the world. I'm tired of hearing folks glorify warriors. We need more men of peace in this world.
There is a military base near where I reside. Every time I see a person in uniform, I say, "Thanks for what you do." About 9 times out of 10 the response is the same, "Not a problem, sir!" They will always be heroes to me.
He is correct, hero is greatly overused in our society. Most who serve are not heroes, in the same way that most people are not heroes – they are just doing their jobs! Doing your job, no matter how difficult or dangerous, does NOT make you a hero. As defined by Webster: a : a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or ability b : an illustrious warrior c : a man admired for his achievements and noble qualities d : one who shows great courage. Maybe some in the military fall under b, c or d, but on average being in the military is not heroic.
Hayes was right and he should not have issued the apology. Anyone who blindly calls all service men and women heros doesn't know what they are talking about. War has become an industry just like everything else in this country. Sadly, it has defaced the role of our military and soldiers.
I respectfully disagree. It's those heroes that protect your right to tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about.
The article said: "Or does it apply to people who put themselves above others?"
I think you meant "Or does it apply to people who put others above themselves?"
Fallen soldiers are not necessarily heroes any more than those killed in the WTC are heroes. Death does not bestow heroism. Firemen are firemen, accountants are accountants, soldiers are soldiers, and few of any are heroes.
Firefighters and soldiers put their own lives in danger to protect other's lives. That alone makes them heroes. It's not about how many actual lives saved. It's about displaying a willingness to put other's lives ahead of their own.
I agree with Chris Hayes. Many join the military for the benifts and pensions etc. Not all are true heroes. Many have desk- type jobs and never see any combat. I am so sick of the negative comments from right wingers who don't even know the meaning of patriot or hero. They don't even respect their President who is after all Commander and Chief.
Your assertion that military people doing desk jobs don't play a role in our successes on the battlefield is flat out wrong.
I agree with Chris. I'm saddened that he can'speak his mind without having to apologize. When he said it, he fell all over himself trying to explain why he felt that way and even asked his panel if he was wrong. He was opening a discussion, not bad mouthing our military men and women. The firestorm has led us to discuss what is a hero.
If you signed up to defend us, putting yourself at risk for the greater good, you are a hero, by my definition.
Being a hero requires an individual effort. I don't call all military personnel heros nor do I think of Police or Firemen as heros. The problem is that the personalities that are attracted to these types of jobs demand "Hero Status" as a egotistical benefit. You will find that many people in these types of jobs have low self esteem and only gain it from putting on a uniform that makes them part of the "Hero Clan", and taking off the uniform is the hardest thing of all, this is probably why so many turn to alcohol.
Memorial day is about remembering those who have fallen while serving this country.No matter their motive, a person sacrifices a lot just joining the armed services. To give your life in the services of others does make you a hero. Regular solders are generally to modest to ever see what they do as heroic. Chris Hayes is a perfect example of the over privileged, educated white male who has done nothing but live a comfortable life and serves no one but himself casting judgement on others who answer to a higher calling. Such people can say what ever they want because of people who are willing to die to defend that freedom. All solders especially the fallen one are heroes, while Chris Hayes will always be a zero.
Nothing he said was offensive. Get off your high horse.
I didn't find it offensive. Asinine, but not offensive.
You're only a hero if you send a bunch of other brave guys in to do the hard, risky work and then you claim all the credit – that makes YOU a Hero! Sound like anyone we know?
I know what you're referring to, the George Bush and the Mission Accomplished media blitz. While I know Bush was looking for a victory, especially after what happedned to his dad, I don't think he knew what a cluster*$^& the whole thing would turn out to be and how many people would die because of his decision.
Maybe "hero" is a word that is overused but the simple common factor is ANYBODY who walks in Harm's Way is a hero. It takes great courage to wake up every day and do your job knowing that job may cost you great injury or your life. Those people who do face that prospect every day are heroes to me. I have other definitions for other situations but if were to boil down heroism it's facing up to the responsibilities AND the possibilities of doing a difficult and dangerous job. I don't know Chris Hayes work but I can say his timing was poor being it was Memorial Day weekend. I can also say there has to be a separation from those who serve and those who create the situations in which the military serves. I think the measure of courage it takes to do a dangerous job you may not agree with because of duty, honor and accountability is as noble as it gets.
Alright, I walk in harm's way every day I go to work. Am I a cop? No. Firefighter? No. I make radio-active pharmaceuticals for the nuclear medicine industry. I am exposed to not insignificant amounts of radiation that can certainly do me harm and also harm my co-workers. Does that make me a hero? No. I say no, it does not. That puts me on a par, I'd say, with those soldiers fixing humvees. can they get hurt in doing their job – certainly. That doesn't make them heros. We do not have a draft in this country. That means the humvee fixers, and others like them are there because they want to be there. I'm sorry, that does not automatically make them heroes.