Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: FreeReign

It's a common mistake that people make, that because some evil is done in the name of good, then everything that is done in the name of good is in fact, evil.

For example, since the islamofascists do what they do in the name of god and religion, all people who are religious and believe in god (i.e. the Christians in the U.S.) are all equivalent to the islamofascists.

The mistake these people make is thinking that evil and good are polar opposites, and look nothing alike, so if one thing bears resemblence to something that was evil, it also, must in fact be evil. When in reality, evil is far from the opposite of good, but the corruption of good. What makes evil so, for the lack of a better word, evil, is that it is often very hard to distinguish from good. Most of the evil that is done in this world, are done in the name of good.

The only thing I would agree with Ohioan is that a certain level of healthy skepticism toward those who want to "do good" and "liberate the world", is warranted. However, when skepticism turns into cynicism, and the person believes that doing good is no longer possible or even be a goal and should be pursued, that all we are left with is doing nothing, then evil would have triumphed, because as someone once said "the only thing required for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."


91 posted on 02/28/2005 3:51:33 AM PST by Truthsearcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]


To: Truthsearcher
The only thing I would agree with Ohioan is that a certain level of healthy skepticism toward those who want to "do good" and "liberate the world", is warranted. However, when skepticism turns into cynicism, and the person believes that doing good is no longer possible or even be a goal and should be pursued, that all we are left with is doing nothing, then evil would have triumphed, because as someone once said "the only thing required for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

I am not sure why you think the above is in anyway applicable to my Feature. I am not suggesting that people should not actually do good. The term "do-gooder," of course, refers to people who think they are doing good and aren't. And that perfectly describes what President Bush is suggesting in his inaugural speech. We have already seen the results of the policy, in millions of dead, and millions more with broken hopes and dreams, from Dean Rusk's efforts to promote Democracy in the Third World in the 1960s, etc..

On the other hand, George Washington's proposed even handed policy towards the rest of the World, really did do good. We helped a lot of people by our example. We helped our own people thrive by not alienating others, with whom they had to deal. That type of doing good is what is called for, now and always.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

93 posted on 02/28/2005 9:46:59 AM PST by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]

To: Truthsearcher
...a certain level of healthy skepticism toward those who want to "do good" and "liberate the world", is warranted. However, when skepticism turns into cynicism, and the person believes that doing good is no longer possible or even be a goal and should be pursued, that all we are left with is doing nothing, then evil would have triumphed, because as someone once said "the only thing required for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Well said.

108 posted on 02/28/2005 6:38:46 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson