Historical examples of heroes for NOT doing something

Society seems to prefer it when people take action. It is easier to sell “look what I did for you” than “look what I avoided for you”, particularly where there are performance bonuses. In medicine or dentistry, operating might sometimes be more lucrative than necessary.

So what historical examples are there of praise for doing nothing? I can think of the Russian soldier who did not fire the nukes when the computer malfunctioned, generals like Fabius Maximus who frustrated a better armed Hannibal by repeatedly delaying engagement, or (worse) people like Chamberlain who thought they would avoid conflict. What other good examples are there?

George Washington’s greatest accomplishment was refusing to become King George I of America.

Well, my great-great-grandfather worked at a law office with this fellow named Bartleby…

Yesterday was Orwell, today is Melville…
The literary allusions are flying fast and furious around here these days…

Couple of aviation examples:

In 1999, in Connecticut, there was a US Airways crew that was praised for twice refusing to take off despite being ordered by an air traffic controller to do so - the reason being that they suspected the runway was obstructed by another aircraft. (It was a foggy night and nobody could see the runway in its entirety.) As it turned out, they were absolutely correct; the runway was indeed blocked at the time and the crew’s wise restraint saved many lives.

During the Gulf War, an American F-15 Eagle pilot was ordered to shoot down a bogey over Iraq, but refused, insisting on doing a close visual verification first. And it turned out to be an allied Saudi Tornado jet, not an Iraqi plane as originally believed. In another similar incident at night time (not sure if 1991 war or 2003), also involving an F-15, a helicopter carrying American troops was ordered to be shot down but this other F-15 pilot also insisted on doing a visual inspection first rather than opening fire, and saw that it was in fact an American helo, not an enemy aircraft.

At the Tucson shooting that disabled Gabby Giffords, a “good guy with a gun” decided not to shoot a man that he saw holding a rifle. And he was indeed a hero for NOT doing that, because the man holding the rifle was one of several who had wrestled the shooter to the ground, and taken his gun.

Because he was not 100-plus percent certain that the rifle holder was the shooter, he did not fire his gun, and rightfully so.

Likewise his ancient roman predecessor, who he was often compared to Cincinnatus:

Similarly for Nelson Mandela, his greatest accomplishment was not seeking retribution for innumerable crimes committed during Apartheid (and then stepping down as president after one term)

Rosa Parks was a hero for refusing to move to the segregated section of the bus.

The OP speaks to a fundamental question about the writing of history. It is often, perhaps always, as Dionysius of Halicarnassus put it, “moral philosophy with examples.” Even historians who insist they only want to tell a good story have some reason for picking the stories they do, and those stories reflect their upbringing, society, experience and that includes some ideas of good, bad, right and wrong.

Given that much of the history that is taught, from Dionysius on, is authorized by people in power who wish to maintain the system, it is not surprising that it celebrates the “men of action” who defend and expand the system, rather than those women and men who are exploited by the system. Those “men of action” are cast as heroes to inspire loyalty and admiration to and for the system

There’s also the somewhat irritating British singer-songwriter James Blunt, who had a career as a tank commander during the Kosovo Crisis prior to the music industry and (if popular culture renditions of the story are to be believed) prevented WW3 by refusing an order to contest the Russian occupation of Kosovo airport. The actual story predictably is slightly less dramatic and it was his commanding officer General Jackson who refused the order from Gen. Wesley Clark (and James Blunt only said he would have refused it had it been received.) As with any story of not doing something, it is of course debatable what would have happened if British forces had contested the airport with Russian forces:

This guy probably wins the thread.

I’m not following a random link with no context. Care to give us a clue?

Ya’ know - if you hover over a “random” link, your browser will show you where it points to…

Stanislav Petrov.

That being said, @beowulff , the OP already mentioned Petrov in the OP post to begin with.

There is also Mohammed V of Morocco, who refused to enact Vichy laws orders to deport Morocco’s jewish population to death camps in Europe, the only ruler of an occupied country to do so:

Sir John Cowperthwaite, the post-war governor of Hong Kong. He ‘governed’ by explicitly declaring a policy of ‘laissez-faire’, allowing Hong Kong citizens to largely organize themselves and build an economy free of most regulation.

When he arrived, Hong Kong’s per-capita GDP was 1/3 of Britain’s. By 1997 when it was turned over to China it had one of the highest per-capita GDPs in the world - higher than Britain’s.

Elliot Richardson and William Ruckelshaus

Not for me using Firefox on a Mac.

German general Dietrich Hugo Hermann von Choltitz ignored Hitler’s order to destroy Paris at the end of WW2.

Neerja Bhanot - the chief flight attendant on a hijacked Indian plane who did not give American passenger passports to the hijackers, and she did not save herself first once she got the door open. She saved the lives of at least 42 American passengers, but did not survive the hijacking herself.

I guess those are things she DID but hers is a great story and I like to see it shared.