Now Is Not the Time for Heroes

While the need for heroism never goes away, it is time for us to put away the western myth of The Hero for other images, symbols and archetypes.

102. Now Is Not the Time for Heroes

Core philosophical presuppositions matter. They matter far more than most people realize. Much of what makes philosophy both annoying and valuable is that much of its inquiries involve noticing and pointing out to people the underlying assumptions that drive their lives. Much of why you do things are driven by core societal “myths” — not as in “made up stories” but more “the core symbols of power.” These myths are often aspirational. They also define and set the framework within which certain actions are encouraged and certain ones are discouraged. These myths work for a society, they endure over time, inspiring and driving the actions of the members of the community, until they lose their efficacy. Our society is breaking down, and with it the myths that hold it together and drive its actions. It serves us well to surface these myths, examine them and then decide whether or not we are better served by leaning into them anew — get back to the basics of who we are — or actively setting them aside to chart new paths, allowing new myths to emerge and drive us.

One such myth operative in western civilization is that of “The Hero.” A recent Twitter dust up that we will get to in a bit got me thinking about this again in a new way. There is a short reference to this in Jacques Ellul’s Propaganda: the Formation of Men’s Attitudes that is not really developed fully. He mentions the foundational myths of the west, identifies them, then goes on to argue that propaganda really only works when it is in harmony with society’s core myths. He identifies the myths without really explicating them, assuming that their content is obvious to the reader. On page 39 of the paperback edition he says this:

“These common presuppositions of the bourgeois and proletarian are that man’s aim in life is happiness, that man is naturally good, that history develops in endless progress, and that everything is matter.”

Ellul follows this up by saying:

“In our society the two great fundamental myths on which all other myths rest are Science and History. And based on them are the collective myths that are [western] man’s principle orientations: the myth of Work, the myth of Happiness (which is not the presupposition of happiness), the myth of the Nation, the myth of Youth, the myth of the Hero.”

These basic, potent, mythological concepts form the substrate, the foundation for much of modern thought, much of the justification for why we do the things we do. They operate at the level of “things everyone knows.” They don’t need to be explained or justified. No one argues for them. They are just there, in our collective consciousness as part of the modern west. Ellul argues that if you want ideas to gain traction in society, they must always work in harmony with these core myths.

“Propaganda is forced to build on these presuppositions and to express these myths, for without them nobody would listen to it. And in so building it must always go in the same direction as society. A propaganda that stresses virtue over happiness and presents man’s future a one dominated by austerity and complication would have no audience at all.”

When looked at politically, the conclusion that Ellul comes to is that modern western society is essentially “liberal.” Thus, if you are a “conservative,” if you want your ideas to gain broad acceptance among the people, your purported conservatism must conform itself to liberal foundational myths in order to gain acceptance. This is why so much so-called “conservatism” today is largely made up of people trying to preserve older, purer, less corrupted, seemingly more vital forms of liberalism. If we can just purify our myths we will be able to make our society great again. Ellul makes this observation in his discussion of the role of myths and propaganda:

“The political Left is respectable; the Right has to justify itself before the ideology of the Left (in which the Rightists participate). All propaganda…must contain — and evoke — the principal elements of the ideology of the Left in order to be accepted.”

This is why much of the current political debate is not so much a real debate about the core ideas that drive our society, as it is about the best way to achieve the impulses contained in our core mythology. Thus, how best to achieve endless human progress dominates the discussion. This is why Make America Great Again is essentially a progressive message. It is largely why, “I didn’t leave the left, the left left me,” really resonates with so many people. Much of the opposition to the current way things comes from disgruntled liberals, most of whom think of themselves as conservative or right wing.

From a political perspective, all of these core myths, when activated, work for the system and not against it. Just because our society is now in a time of decay and people are increasingly asking how we got into this situation, does not necessarily make these myths “bad” or “evil.” The Hero myth helped build the west. The Explorer. The Conqueror. The Trailblazer. All of these various derivations of the hero mythology have helped drive western culture forward, allowing it to dominate the globe now for several hundred years.

But they also become denuded and diluted, such that everyone must participate in The Hero Myth. As is often the case with us as persons, our greatest strengths are often simultaneously our greatest weakness. We recently celebrated Mother’s Day. This coming Sunday will be Father’s Day. Mother’s are heroes. Fathers are Heroes. Policemen and firemen are Heroes. So too are teachers. And during Covid all “frontline workers” were now considered heroes. Nurses and doctors were, or course, the obvious heroes. But now also the lowly clerk at the grocery store, rather than being powerless, forced to go out like slaves or indentured servants to work while their betters, the managers, were locked up safely at home doing remote work, are now transformed through propaganda into society’s heroes. But if everyone is a hero, is heroism even a real thing anymore? Or is it just a form of social control?

Speaking of that, The Hero Myth, is now being employed to keep multiple generations of young men, and now adults, transfixed and distracted. It is not just the prevalence of the action hero movie or the superhero movie that allow us to immerse ourselves in the story of the hero, living vicariously through the characters portrayed on the screen. Today, you can simulate becoming a hero by immersing yourself in video game experiences. As computers have grown more powerful, the visual experience becomes more real and life-like. More and more emphasis is placed on the storytelling aspect of the games. Not only are they addictive, but they tap into and make you feel as if you are participating in the great cultural myths of your society. Doing nothing more than sitting in the chair of a darkened room, staring at a screen, operating a control pad, you are now the hero. In case you doubt me, here is an advertising campaign for the PlayStation gaming console from a few years back:

It’s all there in the language of the ad. “Who are you to deny yourself greatness. You who have the imagination of a brilliant child and the powers of an ancient God?” But you are playing a video game. You are doing nothing heroic. It is a form of containment, of social control. Video games like this work for the system, keeping you trapped and entertained, feeding your cultural “Hero Myth” impulses.

There are those in the so-called “dissident online right” who try to re-invigorate The Hero Myth. In contrast to the bland, uniform ugliness of today’s urban and suburban life, in contrast to the hordes of compliant corporate drones, the so called “non-player characters” — in contrast to the “enlightened” video game players — we need to reinvigorate the great heroic myths within ourselves. We need to become the heroes of the great stories of Homer and Beowulf. We need more Alexanders who are willing to be first over the wall. Eat well and lift weights. Get out there and make conquests of women. If women want to “longhouse” you while being sexually promiscuous, take advantage of them and be the conquering “hero.” Stand up and fight. Say whatever comes to mind. If the system forbids you certain words, say them over and over until they stop you. Rush into battle and make a great name for yourself. With this comes a love of Greek literature and literary figures. As a one time classics student, it is a delight to see people renewing a love for ancient writings.

In observing this phenomenon, this is not a critique of heroism per se or the need for heroes at certain crucial times, rather, we need to understand that the Hero Myth, in the way that it works itself through our culture and in the kind of cultural influence it has, the whole set of symbols, ideas and sentiments that are attached to it work for the system, they work for its dominant power structures, not against them. The call to inspire people to the heroic again is more or less a renewal movement. It is a call to “get back to the basics.” If we just go back to a time when the Hero Myth was driving our culture forward and upward to greatness, we can once again restore our ailing culture to its once former glory. But we need to understand that it is this same set of mythic symbols that are used induce young men to sign up for things like the Global War on Terror, what has now decomposed into the Ever War. But it also is used to keep young men playing video games. And it fuels what is known as the “Manosphere,” allowing people like Andrew Tate to become prominent, influential voices today.

What got me thinking about all of this is a recent tweet by a long time mutual and friend,

The Black Horse

, who has been writing about how leadership involves character, a willingness to take responsibility for one’s opinions — Sharing in the consequences for the advice you give to others. If you send them over the wall like an impetuous Alexander, you had better be going over the wall with them, and more. — and a track record of having built and accomplished real things, like having a family or being a leader in your church or community, that sort of thing.

It was more the unhinged reactions to the tweet, the pushback he got, especially those who wanted to contrast this idea of “the patriarch” with that of “the hero” that got me thinking. To many, this was seen as yet another effort to crush their spirit and “longhouse” them, making them subservient to their wives and little more than dutiful corporate drones. And yet, Black Horse is correct. Far too often conservative thought leaders have encouraged those whom they are influencing to take actions which brought real punishment by the state all while the thought leader sits fat, well fed and unscathed. I think it is worthwhile to unpack this contrast to the Hero Myth, for this is what I think is going on, and dwell on this role that he calls “the patriarch.” I am not sure this is the label that I want to use, but rather than rushing to find a better one, I thought we might be better served by fleshing out, in today’s context, an alternative to the Hero Myth. In this, we need to take care, because there are several other myths that play into what is happening here, including the Myth of Youth and the Myth of Work.

My first observation is that one cannot be a patriarch as a young man. I am also of the mind that being a patriarch is not something you can set out to become. It is like happiness. If you pursue it directly, it becomes ever more elusive. You become a patriarch as a byproduct of pursuing other ends. It comes down to three main big items: building, duty and stewardship. Even if you are doing the simple work of building a legacy in one’s children and grandchildren, you are establishing something, that, in your later years, in your small way, you are now sitting atop a legacy that is the result of your efforts. It is a thing of age and wisdom as opposed to that which is produced with youth and cleverness. It is hard to think of identifying someone as a patriarch before they into their 50’s. Even that might be too young. There is period where one is at the peak of their capacity, their ability to lead, to offer counsel, to have earned respect, to have a visible track record before age does finally catch up with them. Even then, even when they are in decline, they will be deserving of the respect of those who are younger. Why? Because they embody a quality that seems in harmony with the label “patriarch.”

It doesn’t necessitate being a family man. You can point back to the monks at the end of the Roman period who established monasteries. Are you building something that is enduring? A family legacy. An institution. This is not to be confused with the Myth of Work, this spirit and mythos that encompasses, but is larger than the Protestant Work Ethic. As Spengler observed, the martial virtues of the medieval knight, the desire for conquest and battle, were transmuted by the rising merchant classes into the “rise and grind” mentality. In this sense, the “hero” is now the guy who cold calls his way 10 hours a day, six days a week to beating his sales targets month after month. This is not a call to become a corporate drone, dutifully working hard at your job, the perfect member of the professional managerial class, striving for that next promotion or making partner by age 40. This is why the “Fight Club” mentality of breaking free from the system through fisticuffs resonates with young men. This is not a call to become a non player character drone pushing paper in the office, wearing the mask and getting the shot. This is a recognition that not everyone is entrepreneurial. But you do need to pay the bills. But there are other ways to build and contribute and leave a legacy. I especially think of your church, a place where you can make a direct impact on what gets built for the future.

The kind of men who built monasteries and established monastic rules were not just trying to respond to a crumbling and decaying Roman empire. They were also responding to “heroic spirituality.” The “pole sitters” might be the most extreme example. While there is a place for hermits and martyrs, there was strong move to curb the excesses of heroic spirituality. It was thought that in the end, they put too much emphasis on the monk, elevating him as a person, bringing him glory, than there was on a purposeful cultivation of devotion towards the glorification of God through community and submission to both a rule and to the spiritual guidance of a father figure monk, the abbot, himself a kind of patriarch. These men, though mostly anonymous, by their tireless work and prayer, preserved through chaotic and turbulent times the legacy of learning and knowledge from a previously great era.

I think it is useful here to remind ourselves of the “modern characters” or archetypes that Alasdair MacIntyre observed as operative in our modern era: the rich aesthete, the manager and the therapist. The rich aesthetes are persons who live for their own ends, their own enjoyment and advancement. The image here is the Boomer taking one of his multiple cruises each and every year, who would rather spend or donate his wealth than hand it on to his children. For the manager, the ends are of no concern. All that matters is the effectiveness of his management. He could work for any company or organization just as easily as any other. All that matters is taking raw materials and turning them into a finished product, unskilled labour in to skilled, investment into profits. The therapist does not worry about ends either. They are only interested in turning maladjusted, neurotic patients into well-adjusted individuals. There is no end other that of psychological effectiveness, of returning people to “normal.”

In contrast to these modern archetypal figures, the potential patriarch is very much concerned about the ends, the telos of his actions. He is a steward. He strives to leave the land in better condition as an inheritance for his children. He is concerned about the long term. He is willing to sacrifice his own enjoyment and wellbeing if it means a more secure and prosperous future for his children and grandchildren. He is not just making the soil better, even if the soil is a metaphor for the whole world in which he lives. He sees his business as part of a web of inter-related relationships and obligations. He is not merely trying to maximize returns, extracting value from his employees or the community in which he is located. He is looking to improve “the soil” of his employees and the community. The Steward also understands that everything he is given is given to him in trust by God. It does not belong to him, but to God. His business is there not to make him great, but to bring greatness to God. And even when he embraces technological means of production, his concern is not to lower wage costs, but is made as part of a web of criteria focused on the overarching value of stewarding this business into the future. Everything is done to the glory of God, for real. This is just one example.

There will always be a time and a place for heroes and martyrs. But most of you will not be heroes and hopefully martyrdom is not demanded of you. But you can build and invest in the people and place around you. You can act as a steward of the abilities and resources God has entrusted to you. If you do this faithfully over time and with a successful track record, when you enter into the mature phase of your life, perhaps you will be able to look back and see what you have built and accomplished. It may be something as simple as a solid marriage and good children who grow up to love the Lord. This is, in this day, a major achievement. Perhaps those around you will name you a patriarch, someone worthy of the mantle of leadership, a father figure in the community.