In the most technical sense a thug must generally meet one of two criteria- they must be violent and aggressive, and/or they must break the law. Samurai and knights and such often were legally empowered to the deeds we would view as historically unfavorable and could often murder or harm a person of “lesser standing” without breaking any laws. Were they violent and aggressive? Some surely were. That said- to generalize that all cowboys or are knights etc. were thugs is akin to saying that all police or all soldier are thugs- these are professions that inherently involve violence and the real possibility of killing. Furthermore it is statistically common for police for example to break the law, and police are empowered to perform actions that would be illegal for a civilian. One may or may not believe all police are thugs but statistically speaking Not ALL are things by this definition per se….
Unless of course we take a broader view and based on especially recent focus in pop culture on historical or notable figures as well as recent social and political events and sentiments we take a view that basically everyone is a thug, or more to the meme- all humans are thugs viewed through some lens of nobility. For starters, it is unlikely there is a single law abiding human amongst us- from crossing the street unlawfully to improper disposal of waste like batteries or chemicals or medications, to all the various laws one can break- most everyone transgresses the law somewhat regularly. Most people aren’t considered criminals simply because either they haven’t been caught and/or convicted or because among their general peer group most others are guilty of the same crimes. We tend to forgive others of crimes we are guilty of if we aren’t the ones being transgressed against as most of us do not see ourselves as criminals or seek to be punished for our misconducts.
But violence, and certainly aggression are common enough in the world. What’s more is to consider that violence doesn’t have to be limited to fists and threats. We forget that there are many types of violence including economic violence. The word violence is so often associated with assault that we tend to overlook that violence can be restriction of freedom or agency, artificial control of processes, or that which is intense in relative contrast to a standard norm. In other words one can give a speech violently or play a musical instrument violently- and that doesn’t mean hitting someone over the head with a guitar or acting threateningly. You generally don’t make it into the history books without doing something notable or holding a position of status or aspiration, and in tend thousand odd years of history those things usually involve being violent, being a thug, or just generally causing some harm. “What about the Gandhis and Mother Theresas and such!” Ha ha! You got me! Oh wait...
More recent investigations and sentiments looking past the popular image into details of facts have painted a picture where even such vaunted names often used synonymously to describe a “pure and good” human have come to be seen as deeply flawed and guilty of numerous transgressions include those that could be allied violent or thuggish- or at least in good company with. Of course there is more to the picture isn’t there? Most of our countries were formed by violence as a tool and most continue to exist today and the lives we have exist because of violence. Of course if we look hard enough we can find flaws in almost anyone, and the more well known and the more powerful and the more change they have impacted in the world- the higher the odds that you will find dirtier deeds. In the end it comes down to a human tendency to place idols upon an alter. To ignore or reject reality in order to create a fantasy that suits us and then find a totem to project our delusions onto to.
In a U.S. presidential election you know your candidate is a crook. You don’t get to a position to be seriously in the running for US president by being meek and following the rules and not causing people harm. That’s not how this works. That’s not what we as a society value. Hardly anyone cares if Samurai or Knights or cowboys were crooks. They had some degree of power and privilege in a world where relatively few did. Some degree of freedom more than the average norm. What society and most people really care about are results. Getting things done, getting what you want. Regardless of historical realities these groups represent these ideas. They are generally totems. In a feudal society most people want to be knights, or their idea of (knight is a broad term that has different meanings in different times and places asides the traditional image of a minor position of nobility and a suit of armor and such), not peasants. Coy boys have much of their appeal from the concepts..
.. of personal freedom and image of self sufficiency. Part of that stemming from the lawlessness perceived of their age and place. A cowboy represents “getting it done,” un hampered by rules and red tape, using their own will and strength and ingenuity, a self determination. To most of these there is an element of power fantasy not so different than modern super hero interest. Most “super heroes” ARE thugs- breaking or skirting rules and law, using violence and getting results. A major plot point built up over the last 77 marvel films has been exactly that- with heroes being called to task (in a weak limp narrative that doges any real consequences or philosophical investigation) for their thuggery. Basically every popular iteration of Batman for the last 40-50 years has seen Batman as an outlaw or on unofficial legal status with the police at large- a far cry from the worlds greatest detective working closely with the police. Except where it is narratively convenient such as…
.. justice league type stories where it is hard to explain how Batman is working with governments and such as a wanted criminal or why Superman or a similarly legally favored hero wouldn’t arrest this massive criminal and why no one would be making a stink that 5 “law enforcement” heroes could team up freely and amicably with a wanted criminal and not bring them to justice- at least when things were done.
So it’s all fantasy. A good deal of the average persons world view is fantasy. Why do you think those that control the narrative on history rarely paint “their group” as the “bad guys”? One of the few times in modern history this has ever occurred has been the treatment of Nazis within Germany as an example- something that has had a profound impact on the ario Al psyche and which as a group, post war Germans distanced and distinguished themselves from Nazis. Germany has some of the most extreme laws concerning display or even discussion of Nazis- they are very strict to a point…
many similar nations would consider such laws as infringements upon freedoms such as speech. The US for example doesn’t criminalize many things like nazi expression. That said- this reaction can be said to be prudent towards mitigating repeats of past horrors, but also as a psychological defense mechanism. A way to self reassure. To create a stance of those “good” Germans who passionately reject the Nazi ideals and party and the Nazis. It can be simultaneously viewed as effort to set right and confront an unpleasant past but also in a way as a tool to avoid said past or distance the individual from self identify with that past. So I mean… just don’t put people or organizations or whatever else on pedestals. We can enjoy fantasy, but we shouldn’t confuse it with reality. Many of the misconceptions we carry into adulthood come from our childhood understandings- as you grow and mature, be flexible to learn and change your views.
So it’s all fantasy. A good deal of the average persons world view is fantasy. Why do you think those that control the narrative on history rarely paint “their group” as the “bad guys”? One of the few times in modern history this has ever occurred has been the treatment of Nazis within Germany as an example- something that has had a profound impact on the ario Al psyche and which as a group, post war Germans distanced and distinguished themselves from Nazis. Germany has some of the most extreme laws concerning display or even discussion of Nazis- they are very strict to a point…