The Way I Figure It

[Undertoad]

Okay Mar... and similarly, while some people think of you as "brain damaged", I prefer to think of you as "having an increased capacity for evil".

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Okay Mar... and similarly, while some people think of you as "brain damaged", I prefer to think of you as "having an increased capacity for evil".

That's funny, UT! And probably more true than I would like to think. Everything that I have been through combined with my odd little brain "blanks" have conspired to make me far more fearful and distrusting than I once was. It is out of fear that I think people do the most harm.

[tw]

Originally Posted by marichiko

I must say that Brianna is right when she states that nowhere did she say one is either good or evil. She said evil must be confronted. You take issue with this statement, TW, because of the atrocities which have occurred in the name of confronting a supposed "evil." Am I correct in this understanding?

Brianna's post says evil exists - from the perspective of a god or from history - long after the fact. Therefore, she says evil must be confronted. But that is a completely different perspective. It assumes that evil can quickly be identified today and now. Not possible. Please tell me that an early 1930s Hitler was obviously evil in the early 1930s? You cannot. In fact, an early 1930s Hitler did good things for Germany - making him wildly popular among most all Germans and only suspected by his future victims. Even his victims did not see an "evil" Hitler. How does Brianna expect to see 'evil' during a time when Germans - people who lived with it - did not even see the evil?

We have a same example today. No one ever thought the US would attack another sovereign nation for no good reason. That would be 'evil'. That literally violates everythng the US stands for. And yet now we have a president who does just that. IOW according to Brianna's reasoning, we should have confronted evil - George Jr - even before the FL fiasco. Please show me anywhere that George Jr meets the critieria of evil in 1999? Or George Jr was right to confront evil in Iraq. Today we have a president that now meets the critieria of evil - having killed 200 iraqis per week - only because George Jr wanted to liberate a people who did not want to be liberated. He rationalized the axis of evil - which is sufficient to justify an invasion? By viewing everything in 'black and white', then George Jr became evil. He literally invaded Iraq for same reasons why Tojo attacked Pearl Harbor. Why is George Jr not evil and Tojo is evil?

We don't declare George Jr or Tojo as evil. Misguided. Ill informed. Stupid. Power crazed. All these can explain those gross mistakes. But that is not sufficient to define 'evil'.

Did Hitler liberate the Germans trapped in a racist Checkoslovakia? Did he annex Austria? Tell me in 1938, we should have been confronting evil when so many locally did not even regard the annexation of Austria as evil. How do we confront evil when it is not possible to identify pure evil?

Perspective. To confront evil, first Brianna must first say "one is either good or evil". Unfortunately many things that appear evil - Saddam's weapons of mass destruction - do not even exist. Show me all the evil held in Abu Ghraid? The greater evil appears to be the guards (actually their bosses) - not the prisioners. Having arbitrarily declared them as evil, then instead America became evil.

That is the problem with confronting evil as if everything is clearly 'black and white'. To confront evil means evil must first be identified - now and without question. Not possible. Again we have this problem with perspective. By the time evil is properly identified, evil has long since gone. How do you confront something that no longer exists?

When we made knee-jerk reactions to perceived evil, then we had the Spanish Inquisition. Nobody expected the Spanish Inquistion because nobody thought we would murder and torture innocent people. That happened because we arbitrarily defined everythng now - this minute - in 'good and evil' terms.

Perspective. To confront evil, Brianna must first decide immediately that "one is either good or evil". There are people with many different perspectives and opinions. In the south, blacks were evil because their skin was the color of evil - black.

Only after those perspectives and opinions so violate the norms (ie massacres), do we then confront the offenders. We call them wrong, or misguided, or illegal. But we don't call them 'evil'. The concept of 'evil' is something decided long after everything becomes historical. Far too late to *confront* the 'evil'. How do you confront evil if you cannot immediately see it? Again, a question of perspective.

Much too often, the innocent are murdered only because we then thought they were 'evil' - and immediately confronted them. It is the danger that religion can bring onto the world. This kneejerk reaction to evil is but another reason why religion does not belong in due process, the rule of law, and international relations. Nobody wants another Spanish Inquition - created because decisions were based upon 'good verses evil'. Confronting 'pure evil' results more often with intolerance - a greater evil.

[Trilby]

I have read your posts for about two days...most of them, quite frankly, bore me with their Unibomber Manifesto-type going on and on and on...ad nauseam. You bore me, tw. You can't sum up. I'm a child of Mtv--grab my attention or get lost. If you find this offensive go fight for a candidate within your realm. Like Bush. Oh, do I offend you? Did I break your concentration? Get over yourself. I have defined evil for myself. You seem to think I endorse another Inquisition--it's people like you who are truly alarming. I stand by my post---Hitler's Germany was evil... you obviously think it was all a matter of perspective. For you it was a cakewalk.

[Trilby]

PS---when someone posts ten paragraphs, I tend to skim.

That's how much you bore me

[Undertoad]

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

[warch]

There are important differences between the two candidates that I see.

Bush is resolute, isolated, aggressive and non reflective. He goes on instinct. Bush is feeling and praying. He exudes confidence and power. He believes with all his heart he is doing right, doing god's will. He's the big gesture. He is also a radial rightwing conservative with plans that will impact domestic affairs for years to come.

Kerry is an analytical, diplomat who is also resolute and at the same time looking to build consensus. Kerry is thinking and debating. He's the detail. He believes with all his heart that the best tactic for national security is not to be isolated. He seeks out information. He sees that there is more to the solution that just bringing the hammer. He is also a liberal with plans that will impact domestic affairs for years to come.

Originally Posted by tw

Brianna's post says evil exists - from the perspective of a god or from history - long after the fact. Therefore, she says evil must be confronted. But that is a completely different perspective. It assumes that evil can quickly be identified today and now. Not possible. Please tell me that an early 1930s Hitler was obviously evil in the early 1930s? You cannot. In fact, an early 1930s Hitler did good things for Germany - making him wildly popular among most all Germans and only suspected by his future victims. Even his victims did not see an "evil" Hitler. How does Brianna expect to see 'evil' during a time when Germans - people who lived with it - did not even see the evil?

Many people at the time saw the evil in Hitler, yet were powerless to do much about it. A brief review of the events of 1932/1933:

In 1932 Hitler was extremely concerned that he might not be able to consolidate his power via popular vote. One week before the election was due to take place, the Reichstag building burned down. Hitler played on the fear of Communism to gain emergency powers for himself and his Nazi party by claiming that the act of arson was an attempt by the communists to take over Germany by force.

A known communist - Marianus van der Lubbe - was caught near the Reichstag building immediately after the fire had started. Those that arrested him - Nazi officials - claimed that Lubbe confessed to them that the fire was a signal to other communists to start the revolution to overthrow democracy in the country. Matches were allegedly found on van der Lubbe and those who arrested him claimed that he smelt of gasoline.

Hitler asked the President of Germany to grant him emergency powers in view of the 'communist takeover'. Using the constitution, Germany's president agreed to pass the Law for the Protection of the People and the State.

This law gave Hitler what he wanted - a ban on the Communists and Socialists taking part in an election campaign. The leaders from both parties were arrested and their newspapers were shut down. To 'keep the peace' and maintain law and order, the SA (the Brown Shirts) roamed the streets beating up those who openly opposed Hitler.

The election took place in March. Hitler did not get the number of votes he wanted but he did get enough to get over a 50% majority in the Reichstag.

Still, 12 million people had voted for what were effectively two outlawed parties (communist and socialist). This is remarkable when the intimidation of voters is taken into account. All in all, a total of 22 million Germans voted AGAINST Hitler. The Nazi party got a minority vote of 17.5 million.

On March 23rd, elected officials were due to meet to discuss and vote on Hitler's Enabling Law. As politicians neared the building where they were to meet, they found it surrounded by SS and SA thugs who tried to ensure that only Nazi or Nationalist politicians got in. The vote for this law was crucial as it gave Hitler a vast amount of power. The law basically stated that any bill only needed Hitler's signature and within 24 hours that bill would become law in Germany. With only Nazis and other right wing politicians able to vote, the bill was quickly passed into law.

On 7th April 1933, Nazi officials were put in charge of all local government in the provinces.

On May 2nd 1933, trades unions were abolished, their funds taken and their leaders put in prison. The workers were given a May Day holiday in return.

On July 14th 1933, a law was passed making it illegal to form a new political party. It also made the Nazi Party the only legal political party in Germany.

People were employed in each street, in each building complex etc. with the sole purpose of keeping an eye on others in their 'area' and reporting them to the authorities if they believed that something was amiss. The reputation of the Nazi police and the secret police lead by Himmler was such that no-one wished to cause offence. People kept their thoughts to themselves unless they wished to invite trouble.

Many Germans realized at the time that Hitler was very bad news. They didn't need the perspective of history to tell them this. Unfortunately, they were co-erced into silence. The rest of the world just hoped the whole thing would go away. It didn't.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Brianna

You bore me, tw. You can't sum up. I'm a child of Mtv--grab my attention or get lost.

Sorry that I question things so extensively as to discover boring underlying concepts. There are very good summaries in that post that will never be comprehended by skimming. Reality was never that simple - except in bad fiction.

'Good verses evil' is nice for simplicities of biblical parables and for children's stories. But where is 'good and evil' in Rod Serling stories (ie The Twilight Zone). Do you remember the Twilight Zone? Everytime the obvious decision was based upon 'good vs evil', then the decision was wrong. Why? In the real world, there is no black and white. The real world is complicated by many perspectives - the many shades of gray. 'Good verses evil' is how we simplify the world for children and for the under- educated. 'Good verses evil' resulted in the Spanish Inquistion, empowered Hitler's Nazi party, and caused the unjustified invasion of Iraq. Ironically if we really believed in 'good verses evil', then American divisions would be in Afghanistan looking for Osama bin Laden. IOW the 'good verses evil' mentality even has us decieved into invading the wrong country.

Only the simple minded - ie. those who became Hitler's Brown Shirts - view the world in terms of 'good and evil'. Hitler's Brown Shirts rooted out and intimidated what to them was obviously 'evil'. Reality: 'good' people are centrists - far more tolerant - view the world in its many complex perspectives. Thank your god that both Kennedy and Krushchev did not view the world in 'good verses evil'. We still exist because Kennedy instead saw the world in perspectives - and therefore avoided WWIII. 'Good verses evil' thinking makes extremists so dangerous. Those who view everything in such black and white are ideal recruits for extremists. That is the MTV bottom line. 'Good verses evil' thinking unfortunately results in evil.

[tw]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Many Germans realized at the time that Hitler was very bad news. They didn't need the perspective of history to tell them this. Unfortunately, they were co-erced into silence. The rest of the world just hoped the whole thing would go away. It didn't.

It was not many who opposed Hitler. Posted is history. Back in 1932/33, those events and laws were considered good for Germany - by most Germans. Crowds were robust and enthusiastic in parades for Hitler even in Austria. Those events we view from an historical perspective - that undermined democracy in Germany - were considered by most Germans then as good for Germany. Nazi party got more votes than all other poltical parties combined.

Hilter's book Mein Kampf really demonstrates why he could do these things and become popular. His supporters were easily bored by things too complex. Hitler attacks and undermines the bourgeois and intellectuals using simplistic reasoning and intimidation. His book was written so that those who need everything in an MTV format would never see his fallicies and errors. Having neutralized those who read and understand long posts, he then could recruit on sound byte reasoning. IOW he recruits those who think in 'good verses evil' terms. He undermines the bourgeois and intellectuals who view the world from reality - by blaming them for all Germany's problems. No wonder Hitler was so popular. Those who should have seen the danger never bothered to read Mein Kampf. It was too difficult for them to read even though most every German who got married was required to buy the book.

Most interesting is how Hitler writes. Long, sometimes confusing sentences so that those who are easily bored will zone out. Readers instead will believe what they are told in MTV sound bytes because they skimmed or only thought they had read Hitler's book. Having not read the details, the lesser intelligent people were empowered to become Hitler's Brown Shirts.

Those who cannot follow long, complex details of reality are easily recruited to the 'dark side' of extremism. This provided Hitler with so much power that even Kaiser Wilheim supported Hitler. The devil is indeed in the details. In Hitler's case, the details were (probably) intentionally made unreadable so that his power base would only hear an MTV type of summary. We call it propaganda. It uses simplistic concepts such as 'good verses evil'. Hilter in early 1930 Germany could gain over 50% of the votes - more votes than all other political parties combined. He was that popular that he could even eliminate democracy - and the poeple wanted it. Back then, those events were considered good by most Germans. Today we view the same events as evil. It is called perspective. What was once considered good is now called evil.

Which should we confront - what was considered good then or what is considered evil today?

[Griff]

U.S.: Soldiers Failed to Report for Duty

ROBERT BURNS

Associated Press


WASHINGTON - More than 800 former soldiers have failed to comply with Army orders to get back in uniform and report for duty in Iraq or Afghanistan, the Army said Friday. That is more than one-third of the total who were told to report to a mobilization station by Oct. 17.

This does not surprise me. I had a conversation with a senior NCO freshly returned from Iraq. He was extremely angry about the entire thing and said he would never go back there.

By the way, TW, Hitler did NOT win a majority of the vote. 22 million Germans voted for other parties, 17.5 million voted for the Nazi's. The Nazi party got more votes than any other single party, but not more than all combined. One must also take into account that Hitler managed to have two of the parties against him outlawed just before the election was to take place.

It is certainly true that Hitler managed to get a great deal of popular support, especially among the younger crowd, but there was a sizable number of Germans who did NOT support him, but were cowed into silence.