“Read up on Leonidas. He was keely aware he couldn’t win a battle against 100,000 Persians with his 300, and he also knew their bravery would inspire the Greeks to action.”
Leonidas was a king of Spartan while he was not able to raise all of Sparta to battle he was able to raise 300 Spartia’s. (Strictly speaking the Texan’s at the Alamo did better)
“Good men are going to give all to inspire the sheeple in this struggle.”
I agree with and salute theses men for their bravery and most of all pure patriotism.
But I find myself asking you were the Authors of the Federalist papers any less effective? Our Founders knew anonymity brings with it a truth of heart that can seldom be found anywhere else in speech.
This is why the Notes on the Constitutional convention were sealed for so long, and this is why they used Pseudonyms to such effect. Men will hold back their tong and with it the truth of their hearts for fear retribution. But theses Truths must be said and heard.
Those who say we hide behind our keyboards as if to fear theses consequences may be right about that fear but they are as wrong to dismiss the truth’s spoken when free of such fear as the British were to dismiss the concerns of American patriots who also spoke of their ideas in such forms and for such reasons.
You have excellent points certainly. Perhaps there are at least two types of men in instances such as these; the type that prefers to battle directly, helping the overall cause greatly at his own expense (and demise), or the other that can rouse great sentiment through more subtle means.
Both can have the same effect I think, but the first type is more apt to create an explosion of fierce support, while the other ends up being just as hot, but over a much longer time.
I believe in both actually, but I think in today’s sound bite world the first type will be more effective communicating with the less-informed (low information) sheeple.