Most evil is the result of misguided attempts at doing good (unemployment, ethical)

[Trimac20]

Would you agree or disagree?

When you think about some of the greatest atrocities in human history (at least in a quantitative scale), it's quite easy to say that, the perpetrator truly believed he or she was doing 'good' or making some positive contribution.

Hitler believed in Aryan supremacy and the villainy and inferiority of Jews: to him, his tirade and attempted genocide was a righteous cause. Of course, it's quite possible he duped a lot of people and did it for some selfish, maniacal, sadistic or blind hatred, but let's just assume he did as he said he believed.

Pol Pot was apparently so anti-capitalist that he murdered millions of his fellow countrymen in his quest. Another case. Another Communism, Che Guevara, had a similar lack of sympathy for the capitalists, although since he didn't kill as many it's more acceptable to lionize him.

Patriotism has been another cause. Elizabeth I killed many 'for her country', as did countless others...Many are still celebrated for it today, George Washington for instance.

Now add countless people, both high and humble, who've killed in the name of religion because God told them to. Whether they be King David, Muhammad, Pope Pius, King Richard, Osama bin Laden or even George W. Bush...

And we don't only refer to INDIVIDUALS, but nations, empires...Few would agree that America's involvement in Vietnam was justified, let alone the atrocities like My Lai. At least what we're TOLD is it was done to prevent Communism expansion and protect American freedom and democracy in the US and worldwide. Was there a more sinister motive? Who knows, but let's take it at face value.

But then, I think there are exceptions, too, of course.

Stalin, I believe, was just greedy, ego-maniacal, and wicked. He cared mostly for his own personal glory, the Soviet people came second. Henry the Eighth, Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Ivan the Terrible, Vlad the Impaler - a lot of these mean seemed to plain enjoy killing.

Then there are those who are bat-**** insane or have some sort of huge delusion. Elizabeth Bathory, who bathed in the blood of virgins (she might've killed thousands) is one of them. Some believe that chlamydia made Al Capone mad.

But I guess my question is. Is the predominant trend that most evil is a misguided attempt at doing good, commited by people who think they are on the side of right?

I mean people sometimes blame religion for most of the world's wars and violence...I think while some wars are the result of people think they're doing God's wars there are many times as many that stem out of both human greed and a misguided belief in something. Whether that be theism, atheism, socialism or capitalism. Would you agree this is the main cause of Evil in the world?

I personally think that Pride truly is the greatest sin. A lot of this 'righteous anger' or 'righteous violence' stems from a feeling of superiority. Whether that's being God's 'chosen people', or having the best way or best answer, it's this belief that one is above one's fellow man (or animal) that is the result of most of the evil in the world. I've only spoken about killings, but slavery is another example of this. The belief that another person's life is worth less than another's. That the purpose of an African slave's life is to make that of his Master better. When we think of 3rd world sweatshops, we must wonder whether we've truly lost this attitude today.

And what is behind a lot of pride is the ego. Pride is the manifestation of the ego's resistance of death - it is fear. Fear of the thread to the self, the ego, the artificially created boundary isolating each psyche from the web of life that encompasses all. Until we realize this beautiful truth we can never be set free.

[Big George]

It isn't mis-guided attempts at doing good. That assumes that people are inherently good and, if left to our own devices, always do good.

Two words, more than any other, lead to most evil: Greed & Pride.

[Trimac20]

Originally Posted by Big George

It isn't mis-guided attempts at doing good. That assumes that people are inherently good and, if left to our own devices, always do good.

Two words, more than any other, lead to most evil: Greed & Pride.

Yes, I do think fear, the ego's ignorant attempt to preserve itself not realising the reality of it's interconnectedness with all and the unity of all life - what we know as the self-preservation instinct might actually be a way of the species 'self-pruning' itself, but it keeps us on this basal level.

When I say attempts to do good I mean attempts at what people believe to be good. Ultimately, deep down, we all want the same things, it's just it expresses itself as different values etc and motivations and thus actions.

[springfieldva]

No. I think that greed is the root of all evil.

People will put a pretty face on their evil intentions. They rationalize and do everything they can to make their intentions appear noble, innocent, loving. The reality is they are doing what they are doing for personal gain and they wouldn't be doing it if it didn't profit them in some way. They deny culpability when innocent people are put in jeopardy. They cheat, lie and mislead people who trust them the most. They truly are wolves in sheep's clothing.

[Fear&Whiskey]

Originally Posted by springfieldva

No. I think that greed is at the root of all evil.

People will put a pretty face on their evil intentions. They rationalize and do everything they can to make their intentions appear noble, innocent, loving. The reality is they are doing what they are doing for personal gain and they wouldn't be doing it if it didn't profit them in some way. They deny culpability when innocent people are put in jeopardy. They cheat, lie and mislead people who trust them the most. They truly are wolves in sheep's clothing.

True. It is preservation of power and hate that divides people, nothing to do whatsoever wth good. If all the energies and resources we have ever had were focused towards making this world a better place instead of funding senseless warfare in the name of Empire, nationalism and segregation then we would be a far better world today.

You can argue whether greed is inherently human or you can argue that power invariably corrupts but then there are many exceptions to this rule to prove that needn't be the case to disprove that formality. It may be true that 'perfection in humanity' may be a naively utopian aspiration to aspire to given humanity's flaws but then that doesn't mean that we shouldn't strive to progress with compassion at the core of our principles and not something that can be simply dismissed as humanity's shortcomings in the inevitability of evil.

I don't believe that Hitler's rise to power was inevitable. For one it was the harsh, unecessarily brutal and stringent economic sanctions imposed by the Allied powers at the end of the First World War which had no disregard for the lives of German civilians (that Keynes warned against) that enabled Hitler's rise to power to happen and that created the fertile ground for a repugnant specimen such as Hitler to rise to power and the march of fascism was one aligned be hostility and hate and nothing to do with good in any shape or form. The fact that we are repeating the same mistakes in Greece and Spain today is deeply worrying.

I don't think there can be any good whatsoever in a man who believed in slaughtering an ethnic race on the vitriol of venom and the smokescreen of 'national interest'. One of the main reasons Hitler wanted to "extinguish" the Jews was because he wanted to steal their money to fund his relentless march across Europe.

It's a bit like someone strying to pursuade the world that if they get ten men together, whip up hate for a human who may have a disability, different ethnicity or nationality and then chase him down and beat him to death then although the act was 'bad' the intention to instil comaraderie and a sense of togetherness in the act of beating was 'good'. It's a push me pull you contradiction that is pulled back by its revlsion and tenuous at best at clasping to any definition of 'good' or humanity. In other words nationalistic or patriotic tendencies, in fact just about any ideology can be used to legitimate the most repugnant of ideals.

That doesn't (always) make the ideal bad but when that idea is used to deliberately inflict misery on human beings it most certainly does. For instance communism is often contrasted or even entwined with fascism but whilst 'Mein Kampf' is unrelentingly evil 'The Communist Manifesto' is a very illuminating and visionary read which depicted the flaws of capitalism with unsurpassed foresight whatever totalitarian dictators like Stalin or Chairman Mao went on to inflict on their nations in the name of. The NHS is a far more universal concept of shared ownership than the rigidly planned to suppress economies of totalitarian Russia.

As for equating communism with Nazism I think many historians and commentators have taken the reflective works of Orwell and used them as a metaphor for all that is evil in 'socialism'. George Orwell remained a socialist and he was even saddened by what he saw as a meek and mild Labour Government that delivered the NHS and the Government building program that renewed Britain in the aftermath of war and that remains so emblematic as a "radical socialist time of mass Government spending today".

It was the Communist Party of Russia that he came to despise however and it was his experiences at the hand of Russian influence during the Spanish Civil War that made him such an ardent campaigner against communism in the latter years of his life.

What is crucial to maintain however is that Orwell distinguished the aspirations of democratic socialism with that of the totalitarian brand as inflicted by Russia during the Spanish Civil War. Although Orwell was a very incisive critic of this regime he always remained a socialist and was never a conservative despite what some revisionists may now claim.

You only have to look at the second half of the 20th Century up until this very day to see what happens when the powerful beleve they have nullified the people enough to exploit them again. The 'greed is good' Economic dogma that radicalised the world in the 80's haad economists of the era with jaws dropped to the floor at the implications of what was being proposed.

How convenient. Hayek and Milton Friedman espoused the virtues of an economic system where taxing the billionaires less and laying the foundation of market virility on a bluepront of greed was the perfect way to devise a thriving econonomy. The argument rages on and the "market still isn't pure enough" hysteria rants away yet the evidence is overwhelming. We gave the rich more and are increasingly getting less and less in return. Today a machine can do the job of 6-10 men yet has this made the global economy more stable or more inherently instable. And have these innovations led to a less labour intensive society or a more labour intensive society?

Despite all the evolutions made we are now working more for less and not only that unemployment is less stable and we are moving back towards the way things were before the Great Depression and the kinds of labour laws we saw before the sacrafice of World War 2 led to concessions we wouldn't see today. Alot of those concessions weren't given out of compassion, but out of preservation.

In West Germany America decided that it did not want to bankrupt a nation and give rise to calls of communism and so in seeking to outcompete communism offered the germans the equilibrium and stabilisers that make it Europe's economic powerhouse today.

Greed or the legacy of greed are at the heart of most global conflicts today.

[purehuman]

I disagree Trimac 20, I don't think that evil is the result of "misguided attempts at doing good" at all.That sounds more like an excuse that would be used to justify the evil....I believe when evil is done, it is done purposely and knowingly, and almost always for personal gain for the evil doer.

[Maryjane55us]

I know I'll get major "pooh-poohed" over my beliefs, but I truly believe in the biblical explanation, that evil was brought into the world by Satan (and followers) who deceived Adam/Eve and set his goal at turning all mankind against our Creator... and has since been in control of the world to prove to that he can turn mankind against Jehovah, our Creator.

Evil's grown expontentially over time, most times in devious, unsuspecting ways. Religion has been totally corrupted.. misquided attempts at doing good by changing God's rules to adapt to modern times; attracting more people to "donate" to pay the preacher, priest, rabbi.. Religion has been torn into so many sects, leaving it commercialized and competitive; and as a result, "modern" people are left distasteful and untrusting. Who could blame them?


I think we're so far gone at this point, we wouldn't recognize evil for all the cover-ups and excuses that's been created over thousands of years.. all in the name of doing "good works".

[ovcatto]

It's easy to pick out the historical events that you've sighted and while the alleged good/evil that you've mentioned were horrendous in scale they don't take into account the run of the mill everyday evil that is perpetrated everyday, every week and every year throughout human history. So, no most evil isn't committed in an attempt to "do good" most evil is perpetrated by what one human or group of humans do to others for no other reason than to commit evil.

[Trimac20]

All good points. Like I said, I think both fear, pride and avarice are probably the unholy trinity behind the 'evil' acts we humans commit. In the case of religion, this 'righteousness' is often a veiled contempt for others, a way of saying 'I'm better than you.' It's sad that on one hand many can profess to call Jesus Lord and Saviour and claim to be a follower of Christ, yet on the other basically spit on the poor and espouse doctrines he would had abhorred.

Good point about Hitler's rise not being inevitable, Fear and Whiskey. I think people too often put the blame on one person - that Hitler was solely responsible for the evil Nazi regime. Well, obviously it takes many to carry out a regime on the scale the Nazi's did, Hitler was merely commander on chief, the rudder that gave their plan some vision and direction. Those one rung down like Goebbels were no less culpable. I've never really considered the Allies the 'good guys': maybe the 'less evil', but especially during WWI, it was simply a grab for power. WWII phrased more in terms of a fight between good and evil, since the Nazi's are easy to vilify, but WWII is truly the sequel to WWI in every sense of the world.

But yes, I suppose most of these ideas of doing 'good' or 'noble' things are pretty twisted by the standards of the majority of people, but I still contend that at times, we all have the ability to do evil things or watch on as our countrymen and family members commit evil acts. That's actually the thing I find most deplorable about say Vietnam. A totally futile war, but young men were plucked out of their safe lives to go 'kill the yellow man' as Bruce Springsteen puts it in 'Born in the USA'...I'm sure many of these men were very much against killing in principle, yet their government basically forced them to kill. That just seems so unethical if you ask me. It's no surprised many abandoned their posts or deserted. And the idea that they'd be court-martialled is doubly appalling. I'm sure their family members - their mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters - even if they were proud of them doing their patriotic duty felt, deep down, that mass-bombing Vietnamese villagers with innocent civilians or stripping millions of acres of virgin rainforest was deeply wrong and basically like humankind stabbing itself in the heart.

[springfieldva]

I don't consider defending oneself or one's country to be an act of evil. We have a right to defend what is rightfully ours and a duty to preserve what is good and right for our children. Laying down and allowing yourself to be robbed does not make you noble, it only makes you a sitting duck. Nobody enjoys going to war, but sometimes it is necessary to preserve, protect, defend.

People like Hitler have ulterior (greedy) motives for what they do. Killing Jewish people to steal their money is one of them.