Discuss libertarianism for the Nth time

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

When the meanies aren't raping and pillaging they are saving orphan puppies and helping old ladies cross the street.
No-one is 100% evil so killing anyone is bad.
It is all part of my theory: there is only evil, less evil and lack of evil. The idea of good is a mindcontrol technique used by evil people.

So your position is that Nazis weren't actually bad guys.

And Saint Francis of Assisi wasn't a good guy.

Nihilism.  Gotcha.

a lack of belief in social constructs like good and evil =/= nihilism

Oh?  Then what does?

"The Nazis" weren't "bad guys" they were just guys, many of whom acted in ways that our society considers unacceptable (justifiably so, in my opinion). Many people in the Nazi Party joined only because they had the choice of Join or Die. Some of the soldiers and officers (many by the end of the war) were conscripted into their position and had little or no choice. To say "Nazi's Are Bad" is to make a broad and generic statement about a whole host of individuals, some of whom did bad things, some of whom did not do bad things (or at least no worse than any other schmuck drafted into an army.

I dunno much about St. Francis, but Mother Theresa and Ghandi weren't always "Good" and I doubt St Francis was good all the time, he was, after all, still a monkey.

Nihilism is a rejection of any and all meaning. Regret just seems to be rejecting moral absolutes.

[Doktor Howl]

"The Nazis" weren't "bad guys" they were just guys, many of whom acted in ways that our society considers unacceptable (justifiably so, in my opinion).

They did so justifiably?  What?

Whoops.  Read that wrong.  Still, evil things are done by evil people, if they're being done consistently.

A Nazi upholds evil as a virtue.  By definition, a Nazi is an evil person. 

[Elder Iptuous]

perhaps it is a matter of the definition of evil.  Since evil only makes sense in the context of actions, then applying it to an action is a simple matter.  murder in cold blood is evil.  pretty simple.
applying it to the actor is different.  does the actor have to pass some certain amount of evil actions in order to be evil themselves?  does committing one act on a blacklist do it?
perhaps you can sidestep that entire issue by saying that only the actions are evil...
that's the way i take it....

[LMNO]

"The Nazis" weren't "bad guys" they were just guys, many of whom acted in ways that our society considers unacceptable (justifiably so, in my opinion).

They did so justifiably?  What?

It is justifiable to consider the actions of Nazis unacceptable, even if they were "just guys".


Rat, please to start posting in "LMNO DUMSPEAK®".  It's the only way I can make sense of your posts.

[Doktor Howl]

applying it to the actor is different.  does the actor have to pass some certain amount of evil actions in order to be evil themselves?  does committing one act on a blacklist do it?
perhaps you can sidestep that entire issue by saying that only the actions are evil...
that's the way i take it....

So Klaus Barbie was just some schmoe doing his job.

Likewise, Martin Bormann was just this guy, you know?

[Cramulus]

on this topic, I'd recommend the book Ordinary Men, which talks about the social conditioning used to turn regular police officers (in many cases, people who refused to serve in the army because they were against the war) into SS soldiers.

http://www.amazon.com/Ordinary-Men-Reserve-Battalion-Solution/dp/0060995068

some amazon reviews:

Shocking as it is, this book--a crucial source of original research used for the bestseller Hitler's Willing Executioners--gives evidence to suggest the opposite conclusion: that the sad-sack German draftees who perpetrated much of the Holocaust were not expressing some uniquely Germanic evil, but that they were average men comparable to the run of humanity, twisted by historical forces into inhuman shapes. Browning, a thorough historian who lets no one off the moral hook nor fails to weigh any contributing factor--cowardice, ideological indoctrination, loyalty to the battalion, and reluctance to force the others to bear more than their share of what each viewed as an excruciating duty--interviewed hundreds of the killers, who simply could not explain how they had sunken into savagery under Hitler.

The book argues that the men of Reserve Police Battalion 101, and other units like it, were comprised of ordinary men. It begs the question: How did ordinary men become the cold-blooded killers of the Holocaust?

Author Christopher R. Browning does a tremendous job of covering the ground. He also presents a strong case that these people were indeed ordinary men, who came from ordinary backgrounds, only to end up being transformed into the murderers of thousands. However, the book also stresses that some of the men, including several officers, could not be considered "ordinary," as they were trained in Hitler's Nazi organizations from youth. Browning also does something nearly impossible: He humanizes these people without excusing their horrendous actions. Their defense that "they were just following orders" just doesn't fit the bill, as some refused to take part in the actions, and asked to be relieved. If a few men could get themselves relieved from doing the killings, why did so many more not? That is the main question the book gives.

"Ordinary Men" is an extraordinary book that chronicles just one unit that took part in the murder of innocent Jews, while also presenting a good case of how ordinary men can become killers.

[Doktor Howl]

"The Nazis" weren't "bad guys" they were just guys, many of whom acted in ways that our society considers unacceptable (justifiably so, in my opinion).

They did so justifiably?  What?

It is justifiable to consider the actions of Nazis unacceptable, even if they were "just guys".


Rat, please to start posting in "LMNO DUMSPEAK®".  It's the only way I can make sense of your posts.

We need to stop punishing criminals.  They're not bad people, you know.  A child molester isn't bad, but the things he does are.  Ergo, he's a victim, just like the children he fucks and murders.

AMIDOINGITRITE?

[Doktor Howl]

on this topic, I'd recommend the book Ordinary Men, which talks about the social conditioning used to turn regular police officers (in many cases, people who refused to serve in the army because they were against the war) into SS soldiers.

While there is no doubt that ordinary people were swept along by events, what about Himmler?  Hess?  Goebbels?

[Elder Iptuous]

So Klaus Barbie was just some schmoe doing his job.

Likewise, Martin Bormann was just this guy, you know?

No.  they were just these guys, doing horrible shit.  (in the view that i stated)

We need to stop punishing criminals.  They're not bad people, you know.  A child molester isn't bad, but the things he does are.  Ergo, he's a victim, just like the children he fucks and murders.

AMIDOINGITRITE?

who said anything about not punishing people?
lets bring it down to a less sensational level.
I punish my kiddos when they do bad shit.  they are not bad kids, but sometimes the do something bad and i punish them for the act.
who said somebody is a victim if they do something evil?
nobody. that's who.

[Doktor Howl]

So Klaus Barbie was just some schmoe doing his job.

Likewise, Martin Bormann was just this guy, you know?

No.  they were just these guys, doing horrible shit.  (in the view that i stated)

Which is what I said.  Their jobs were horrible shit.  But they're just guys.

We need to stop punishing criminals.  They're not bad people, you know.  A child molester isn't bad, but the things he does are.  Ergo, he's a victim, just like the children he fucks and murders.

AMIDOINGITRITE?

who said anything about not punishing people?
lets bring it down to a less sensational level.
I punish my kiddos when they do bad shit.  they are not bad kids, but sometimes the do something bad and i punish them for the act.
who said somebody is a victim if they do something evil?
nobody. that's who.

The world is full of sensational things.

Is a child molester responsible for his acts?  If he is, and he does something that vile anyway, then he's evil.  Period.

[Cramulus]

Do you think the 4,392 Catholic priests accused child molestation have ever done anything good?

or are their charity donations and community outreach efforts meaningless because of a single act of evil?


what about the ancient greeks? it was common in that culture for adult men to take on young boys to mentor, which included sex. Were all the ancient greeks evil?

[Elder Iptuous]

No.  they were just these guys, doing horrible shit.  (in the view that i stated)

Which is what I said.  Their jobs were horrible shit.  But they're just guys.

Correct.  the actions and the actors would be separated in this view, so as to avoid the ambiguities and complications that arise from saying that the actor themselves are evil.
(btw, i'm playing the devil's advocate in this conversation. )

We need to stop punishing criminals.  They're not bad people, you know.  A child molester isn't bad, but the things he does are.  Ergo, he's a victim, just like the children he fucks and murders.

AMIDOINGITRITE?

who said anything about not punishing people?
lets bring it down to a less sensational level.
I punish my kiddos when they do bad shit.  they are not bad kids, but sometimes the do something bad and i punish them for the act.
who said somebody is a victim if they do something evil?
nobody. that's who.

The world is full of sensational things.

Is a child molester responsible for his acts?  If he is, and he does something that vile anyway, then he's evil.  Period.

you're saying that the responsibility for an act transfers the qualities of that act (including evil) to the actor.  that's perfectly understandable (and i generally happen to see things that way) but there is another way of looking at it that Regret put out there that avoids some awkwardness....

that's all...

[Doktor Howl]

Do you think the 4,392 Catholic priests accused child molestation have ever done anything good?

or are their charity donations and community outreach efforts meaningless because of a single act of evil?

If they're guilty, then yes, their good acts are irrelevant...and it's not a single act. 

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

"The Nazis" weren't "bad guys" they were just guys, many of whom acted in ways that our society considers unacceptable (justifiably so, in my opinion).

They did so justifiably?  What?

Whoops.  Read that wrong.  Still, evil things are done by evil people, if they're being done consistently.

A Nazi upholds evil as a virtue.  By definition, a Nazi is an evil person. 

Evil things are done by people. People we consider "Good" can do acts we consider "Evil".

As for punishment, that seems like a different issue than the question of objective Evil.

People should reap the consequences of their actions. If you kill someone and the society you live in thinks they should kill you back, then there ya go. If you kill someone and the society you live in thinks they should stick you in a small room and never let you out, then there ya go.

If you have sex with a child and the society you live in says you should A) Go to Jail, B) Get your nads ripped off, or C) Give you two some privacy... then you'll be punished (or not) based on that societies social rules.

If Bob does 1000 good things, but kills George in a fit of passion... he should still be punished according to the rules of the society he is in. However, I would argue that the one act did not make him Evil.
Some members of the Nazi party in Germany committed horrible, inexcusable acts against other humans. Other members of the Nazi party were just schmoes that got stuck in the gears of a fucked up machine. I see a difference between:
"Nazi's are evil" and "The Nazi philosophy of Aryan supremacy and denigration of other races led to horrific acts which should never be tolerated". Remember, the vast majority of "Nazi's" during WWII were just kids on the front line. Monsters like Barbie, Bormann, Himmler, Goebbels and Adolph were a tiny minority of the "Nazi's" even if we include the horrific acts of prison guards and the SS it's still a small fraction of all the Nazi's during the war.

Besides, from reading about guys like Hitler and Goebbels, they were evil even without the Nazi philosophy... They could have believed in the Magic Candy Mountain and still found an excuse to kill people indiscriminately.

Though, had their movement been a few thousand years earlier, it would have been considered normal, par for the course and not necessarily 'Evil'. Other powerful nations committed genocide on mass levels and got their thrills on torture and suffering of the enemy. The Nazi's biggest flaw was pulling that shit once it was no longer socially acceptable.

[Doktor Howl]

you're saying that the responsibility for an act transfers the qualities of that act (including evil) to the actor.  

Evil isn't a resource, like oil, that lays around waiting to get used, or that gets used up.

It's the behavior exhibited by evil men.