Don't mess with Ted

[cheri1122]

Ya know, when doing something just because it's the right thing to do [even fighting, and risking death] is considered "the greatest", that's a really sad comment on our society. We should expect people to do the right thing, shouldn't we?
The difference is that the founding fathers didn't have to start a fight the "smart money" would have bet they'd lose, and risk being hung for treason. Nor did they have to create a system that works so well for preventing the powerful from taking advantage of the less powerful, without the slightest tilt towards their own selfish interests.
As for fame & fortune, it's a rare bird indeed who refuses it when offered, in any generation.

 

[Turtle]

Ya know, when doing something just because it's the right thing to do [even fighting, and risking death] is considered "the greatest", that's a really sad comment on our society. We should expect people to do the right thing, shouldn't we?

The sad commentary is that you think the sole reason they're referred to as The Greatest Generation is because what they did was "the right thing to do," and that fighting and risking death is a major component of why they are referred to in that manner. The Greatest Generation hardly refers only those who served in the armed forces. It refers to an entire generation of people, including those back home during the war, and after the war to the same generation who oversaw the American economy as it expanded to become the largest in the world, the same generation who built modern America. The generation which was uncommonly united not only by a common purpose, but also by common values, that of "duty, honor, economy, courage, service, love of family and country, and, above all, responsibility for oneself."

The difference is that the founding fathers didn't have to start a fight the "smart money" would have bet they'd lose, and risk being hung for treason.

The difference is the Founding Fathers were a small group of people comprised of at least three separate generational representations, not an entire single generation.

Nor did they have to create a system that works so well for preventing the powerful from taking advantage of the less powerful, without the slightest tilt towards their own selfish interests.
As for fame & fortune, it's a rare bird indeed who refuses it when offered, in any generation.

You seem to be fixated on the whole "fighting" part of it, for both the WWII generation and the Founding Fathers of the Revolutionary War generation, when the fighting part was only a small part of the undertaking. Look at the big picture for both, and you'll see that neither was better or worse than the other, but that they simply rose to meet the enormous tasks presented to them.

 

[cheri1122]

I'm not "fixated" on the fighting, it's what I inferred Tom Brokaw meant, in the context you presented it. And what I admire about the FFs is not the fighting, but the system of government they created, that sought to keep 'fighting' on a verbal level: no bloodshed required. I like that very much.
One very important advantage the "greatest generation" had was respect for their labor -it wasn't a necessary evil, but an actual asset to an employer. Another was confidence that they could improve their lives [and their children's] just by working hard, and saving something toward the 'big' things, because they earned enough to live a modest life and save money.
We don't have those advantages so much these days.
The culture has changed from valuing the stakeholders, which includes employees and customers and the community, to shareholders, which means those who have the most money. Labor is a number on a spreadsheet, to be reduced whenever and however possible, and far too many people can't pay their bills on what they earn, much less save any. It's a whole different era.

 

[Turtle]

It's a whole different era.

Precisely. And a previous era should not be viewed through the lens of a current era.

That's how, for example, you can get people who revile Israelites for acting in the manner of Nazis, while at the same time denounce those who fought and killed real, actual Nazis.

 

[cheri1122]

I don't know much about the Israel/Palestine turf wars, because I can't even keep up with what happens in the US anymore, sigh.
What I know is that what is 'right' doesn't change with the times. What changes is the willingness to admit the wrongs. That's how we advance society. [Well, that and some killer science brains!]

 

[RLENT]

That's how, for example, you can get people who revile Israelites for acting in the manner of Nazis, while at the same time denounce those who fought and killed real, actual Nazis.

Where is this occurring pray tell, and who is doing it ?