good enough?

  As I saw an article about Abrham Lincoln, a supposed telling of unknown facts by his son, I couldn't help but think, why can't they just leave things alone? Now I admit I didn't click on that article as I recognized it as click bait and have enough spam already. But from reading just the headlines it was clear there was some dark secrets to be exposed. That's the bait anyway. As I said I didn't open the article and so don't know exactly what was being written. But the thing is this, why disparage a memory of a great man? Even their headline called him Honest Abe in an obviously sarcastic way. This seems to be the trend lately though, exposing historical figures as ordinary people with faults just like you and me. Yes, I know that they were. I don't harbor any illusions about them as being perfect human beings.   They are like you and I in that they are products of their environments. A product of the times. 

It's human nature to want to find fault in others. I have no explanation for that but believe it to be true. We all want to be right and prove others wrong at almost every opportunity. Post anything on social media that is wrong, and you will quickly be corrected. I've had that happen on more than one occasion. I know, I'm as surprised as you are, but I'm wrong sometimes. Sometimes I'm wrong even when Google says otherwise. But seriously we do look for faults in others. Maybe it is because we want to hide faults we know to exist in ourselves. I'll leave that analysis to the philosophers and head doctors to figure out. Still, I'm left to wonder why we feel the need to attack historical figures these days. Those historical figures serve as examples, as models to emulate. You may call them heroes; a term being sorely abused these days. I don't think of them as heroes, more like just plain good people. All their faults notwithstanding, they were great individuals that made some kind of contribution to humanity. Whatever faults they had were negated by their contribution. 

 I find it confusing when we are attacking history and historical figures while humanizing cartoon characters! The examples of that are many. The latest one I heard about being the M&M's characters. Apparently, some folks were upset by what the characters were wearing and there supposed sexual orientation. They're cartoon characters for god's sake. And then we have this whole genre of superheroes! There are discussions about these fictional characters and their politics. Again, they are fictional characters! These fictional characters are being held up as an example to emulate, being all inclusive and empathetic to all of humanity! Meanwhile actual people from history are being exposed as frauds! Honest Abe wasn't so honest after all, and the founding fathers were terrible human beings. The white race is solely responsible for every injustice that has been committed since we came out of Africa! Surely none of those folks could be an example to anyone! No heroes there. History needs to be rewritten.

 The thing about all of this is that I believe we all need heroes. We all need someone to look up to, to hold above reproach. That is the function of our Gods and the function of our heroes. Today many are busy dismissing god, a supreme being or creator. There is a scientific explanation for everything. As long as you can show the faults in others, you are equal to them. It's that simple really. Expose them as human and they lose their power. Superheroes are the same way, even Superman has Kryptonite. That's the reason we have those big discussions about fictional characters. They have to be shown as human too, although they aren't in any way real. At least we haven't seen any. But maybe there are aliens among us. If they are, they aren't human. 

 I've heard it said often, it's no worse than. Take smoking pot as an example, it's no worse than drinking alcohol. That's the reasoning some apply for legalizing that. I've always countered with, shouldn't the goal be to be better than? That's the idea behind our childhood heroes. Those people were always better than most, not just no worse than. The star player on the team is better. Those that got a hundred on the test were better than those that didn't. Going home to tell mom and dad I was no worse than wasn't acceptable. No, the goal was always to better than. Now it seems the objective isn't to be better than, but to make the others worse than. Worse than yourself? Yeah, that's the idea behind that. If everyone is doing it, it can't be wrong. If others have always done that, it can't be wrong. If I compare your choices to mine, that is wrong. We call that being judgmental. We shouldn't judge. Everybody is doing it. 

 The removal of heroes and gods. That's what I see happening. Man deciding, he has risen above myth and superstition. The concept of God and a final reckoning something to be avoided. Belief in a higher power than yourself can be limiting and inconvenient. Gods and heroes are better than. Man is settling for, no worse than. Makes it a little easier in this world, no doubt about that. No need to strive for excellence, just don't be worse than. It all speaks to humility. It takes humility to recognize when others are better than. You should be humble before your God and your heroes. The absence of either, or both, leads to that state we call, good enough. Is that what we are going to settle for? It's good enough.