Even if one chooses to believe the fairy tale that Tank Man survived the bloody assault that day[1], it is foolish to pretend that he was the only risk taker at Tiananmen Square.

It is even more shallow to think that the fact that "... [him] risking his life for his beliefs is an iconic symbol of rebellion and courage", has led to any kind of fulfillment for that man although it might be fulfilling to random people who pontificate in Medium posts.

Sure, some people find fulfillment when the risks they take play out in their favor. Other people end up mashed into the asphalt or get shot[2]. The ones who survived might talk of the fulfillment they found, but to ignore the ones who die along the way and pretend that's further proof that every risk is worth taking is dishonest.

In reality, people have different tastes for risk/reward tradeoff and face different constraints. As a result, they choose to take or not to take various risks. We spend most of our lives trying to relax constraints. Some also try to consciously shape their preferences. There is a huge chasm between "I like it when I take risks and live another day to boast about them" vs the only way to find fulfillment is to take a life-or-death risk every day.

PS: AP's caption for [2], "Raw: Turkish Soldiers Fire at Protesters" is misleading. These were not mere protesters: These were citizens who decided to stand up to a military coup against the elected government of Turkey. What they did might be noble, but I just cannot bring myself to proclaim that it brought the dead any "fulfillment".

[1]: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124407361243083255

[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCACxhlyedk