Responsibility to End Evil
Evil is everyone's responsibility to end. No one has more rights of enacting justice than others, i.e. the government or police don't have more of a right than you do. Either everyone has the the right, or not one has the right, otherwise it's not a right.
You can't abdicate your responsibility to stop evil, expecting someone else to do it for you. We must always have eternal vigilance in order to create and maintain freedom. By giving away this responsibility to others who magically get rights to end evil while the rest of us are not allowed, we only ensure they have more power over our lives than we do, and more ability to deal with the issues in the world than we do.
The demented system we have created has the delusional gall to say anyone who gets in the way of central authorities and their attempt to enforce justice, is obstructing justice. No one is allowed to pursue justice and stop evil on their own, except the central authority with their special rights and privileges that others aren't allowed. Maybe in the U.S. and other countries you can defend yourself with a fire arm, but in Canada and in other countries, you can get charged as a criminal if you don't beg the authorities to save you while you become a victim waiting for them to show up.
You become a slave to authority, not being allowed to end evil on your own, and must beg others to administer justice in life. If you try to end evil, you are the criminal who obstructed the central authorities mechanisms of enforcing justice.
This is how they view righteous people, whom they term vigilantes, because no one but the central authority is supposed to be allowed to end evil and enforce justice. Only this group of centralized authorities have the special right to end evil, everyone else must allow it to continue or beg the group to help them solve the problem for them. We are controlled and prevented from standing up for justice ourselves.
Vigilantes are employing their eternal vigilance to stop wrong-doings, yet they get characterized as being the ones doing wrong because no one as the right to "take the long into their own hands" it is said. It's sad and pathetic that we are conditioned and made to support a cowardly existence of abdicating our own personal responsibility to end evil in the world.
Source
Humanity creates evil. It's up to all of us to end evil, or beg a few to do it for us. Can we change the system to allow us all to be responsible and vigilant in ending evil? Or will we always be forced and coerced to be dependent and abdicate our responsibility to beg a central authority to deal with the mess around us? We let them have power, and they create wars on other peoples and imprison our fellow citizens for victimless crimes. It's already a sad joke of a mess, and most people buy into it's "greatness".
Thank you for your time and attention. Peace.
If you appreciate and value the content, please consider: Upvoting, Sharing or Reblogging below.
me for more content to come!
My goal is to share knowledge, truth and moral understanding in order to help change the world for the better. If you appreciate and value what I do, please consider supporting me as a Steem Witness by voting for me at the bottom of the Witness page; or just click on the upvote button if I am in the top 50.
There is a strange state of mind spreading through the world. We have turned our power and rights over to the state, or government without even realizing it. We follow it what ever it dictates, mindless consumption, on the cost of others well being.
We get voting options and humanitarian projects to live in the illusion of being a good force for the world. We say that there is law and order, but why is the system here ? Who is it controlling ? It only halts anyone trying to go their own way, it censors free speech and information. Law and order punishes the weakest, the outsiders that turned to drugs, or those who those who is forced to steal food for their families. But Wall street guys, managing hedge funds or pensions, steals 100´s of millions but never see a day in jail.
This system, It is instigated to scare us into surrendering all power to it. To believe in the system as the only salvation and savior against violence and disease. To worship science as our god, and big bang as our creator, nothing did this they say. We are simple animals they say, so we act accordingly.
But remember the vote on the alternative party, is still a vote for the system, and the money we send to the other side of the world, to buy someone food, is just a slap in the face, we build the entire system by abusing those who could not defend them self's . We idly sit by, and watch the system we build and bought with our blood sweat and tears becomes our own prison, a prison that slowly eats away on our planet and souls.
We got so much that we can send it over to someone else, still we want more ? Are we only here to spare the change ?
You are right sir, if we protest or target those who oppress, we are called out as the problem. This is the main distraction used by those who follow the system blindly, which is everyone by now. It comforts us, makes us feel accepted while we shut down rational opinions with rubbish.
I wounder how soldiers can kill for a salary, but opposing war and killing, makes us hippie pacifists, and what not. We can take being ridiculed, moral demands that of us!
If more humans faced the fact that there is right and wrong, good and evil, and started acting accordingly everything would change, and the system we build would fall.
I think admitting that we are not simple animals, and that we carry deep knowledge of right and wrong within, is the first step! After admitting, the struggle starts, replacing the illusions society forced us to believe with moral. Acting for what is right, even thou it might hurt our social well fare, status etc, this is the sick thing holding us back, the fear of not fitting in to the profoundly sick society.
Did´t someone say: It is no measure of sanity to fit in to this profoundly sick society.
I agree 100% we are not meant to feel good in this state, and we are not doing that either. Disease murders suicides all rising, but it is not uss that is insane, it is the world turning sick, the society becoming more mindless and corrupt everyday.
Thanks for your nice posts, they are always inspiring :)
Peace
Yhea, it's a mad world, the rich get away with huge robbery, and the poor do small time crimes but get sent away to jail. When you're "too big to fail" you can get away with murder almost :/
Fear is the mind killer indeed, control is easier when fear is introduced to force compliance.
We are animals, of a different order and degree of consciousness compared to others. That's why we have the power to create the human world. We can abstract more and invent more. We can abstract concepts lie morality to help rule our lives better.
It is pretty interesting that you used Rorschach from Watchmen as the image of your posts in the quotes utilized.
He believed in absolute good and evil with no middle ground and if he saw evil he would go after it and punish it without and question or hesitation on whoever it is. This one track mind led him to conflict with the others at all times but he remained strong on his moral code.
We know that people have a universal understanding of what is right right or wrong in the likes that to take a life is bad, stealing is bad and to help your fellow man is good yet we have caged ourselves to the rules imposed by governments which often times they are the first ones to disregard as they place their own selfish desires first before the people.
When they outlawed the possession of gold from people they confiscated it and yet it was stealing hidden behind a law.
in the same way when we see someone doing evil and we try to stop them and end up in trouble either because of strong backers or because of a loophole in the law then you know there is something wrong.
We are indoctrinated that vigilantism is bad even if we are stopping evil. We are taught not to place the law in our own hands even if might mean a life lost or even our own.
Stealing life, stealing bodily integrity, stealing property, all done by the cover and veil of "legality" and false law indeed. Conditioned and coerced into being cowards is the "progressive" "civilized" way a of modernity apparently :/
don't forget that Rorschach from Watchmen was based on Mr A character created by the genius Steve Ditko. His graphic manifesto "Avenging World" is a masterpiece.
Some time ago, I can't put a finger on the exact moment, I went from believing I have a right to resist evil, to believing I have an obligation to do so. It took me a long time to get there though. There's a whole post in that story, but it came down to realizing that if I didn't stand up and at least try to do something, how could I expect anyone else to?
This post comes at an opportune moment. The next section(s) of Towards Voluntaryism deal with the right, present in the USA, to perform a citizen's arrest. I will resteem this to my feed as a primer, thank you for writing it.
And who can do something about evil? We all can. The belief that "anyone who gets in the way of central authorities and their attempt to enforce justice, is obstructing justice," is definitely a problem. An additional problem at this point is that enforcing the law is not the same as enforcing justice, and many can't tell the difference. But that too is a post unto itself.
This post by @dwinblood is a great companion to this post: When you hear someone say "Don't be evil" did they define evil?.
Exactly! Caring for others also involved caring for ourselves through the golden rule and reciprocal cooperation. It's automatically developed as we experience life and see how things work. This is how being "selfish" in Randian terms is accurate. Self-concern is coupled with other-concern in reasonable rationalization throughout life.
Yeah "legal law" is not the same as justice in moral law, as I see it, not sure if that's what you were getting at ;)
I put up the next installment of Towards Voluntaryism I mentioned above. May interest you.
This is related to my favorite quote. "He who does not punish evil commands it to be done." We definitely have a duty to stand up and act when we are able.
@krnel since you talk about badness A short time ago there was a case of 2 delinquents who stole a family residence and tied up the whole family except a young girl who was raped, the girl's father, since she was able to escape from the moorings of the rope and capable of killing one criminal and the other left him seriously injured, justice does not serve the man who was given 20 years in prison for having murdered 1 delinquent who had sexually abused his daughter.
This case gives the example that you have to let yourself be killed or robbed because if you take justice into your own hand you will be imprisoned
Maybe it's better to kill the rapist and do the jail time in this fucked up twilight zone inverted unreal world we live in, that let him get away with it... I might do the same. Terminate evil of that kind/degree in the world, get rid of it from the world and make it a better place.
I agree in general, in principle, but not everyone is a fighter, and evil could be small or very large.
Taking down a big evil (crime?) organization takes time and preparation, it's a job. So it can't be done by volunteers.
Maybe it could be done in a more decentralized way, or with private security, instead of statal / federal, but it would always be a delegation of power.
Yup, it takes numbers, and time to understand and coordinate an effort. It can be outsources better to something that is more accountable, as long as people hold it accountable, otherwise it's the same mess of abdication and power concentrated. The real solution is everyone being involved to hold each other accountable and deal with the issue as a real community.
Sometimes all we need is just not to play along
Say no, stop the participation.
We have to find the positive deviation, that is, those places in the system where the change is already taking place, or experiment with alternatives and evaluate the result as soon as possible, to clone the success model wherever we can. Without downplaying what has been done so far, which is above all to make many people aware of the problems, we also have to try solutions. For this, first it will be necessary to identify which can be the best bets, to concentrate the efforts there. During the next year or the next years I think that it is there where all the effort should be devoted, and present some concrete proposal, because it will always be better to act than not to do anything.
Yes, we can try things and make mistakes, but as soon as negative consequences of harm to other are resulted from actions, then we must recognize not to do that again, and not everyone needs to make the mistake. We can learn from each other better than having to make all mistakes ourselves ;)
Governments can't be so naive to think they will handle this. They won't. It is better to have armed citizens all over the country, who can take justice in their own hands if necessary. Of course, there must be correct legislative to avoid emotionally unstable people getting weapons as we see in the US.
This being said, evil itself can not be completely eliminated. Wihout evil, we will not value the good. I am glad I met or witnessed some evil, it set me some moral standards. In a limited amount, evil benefits us.
Governments= People who work for "the people", or took an oath to serve the public, but they are people.
Nobody can "take justice" into their own hands, justice is imparted by 12 people, unanimously. People can justify what they did in front of their peers later who will recognize the act as being necessary or not, but it's not any one's right to conclude that by themselves and regardless of how many agree, it's 12 peers that decide so unanimously.
I am not sure how did you make the number of 12, but this what you wrote... Let's see the scenerio, which would work according to my thoughts right.
How this would play correctly according to your words
The hunter killed the man. It later turned out that it was a drunk member of one minority famous for avoiding the work, rudeness and agressivity. Before he shot, the man did destroy many cars. There was no guarantee, he wouldn't cause any more damage if he was not shoot. And a police would not be there sooner than in 10 minutes, which is enough for exploding a bomb. Nobody could know if the cargo is safe or just a huge amount of TNT. I deem it correct behaviour. I am not sure how better you want to solve, when you are directly threatened at the present moment and waiting for men of law could be a risk for your life or that of your friend's, neighbours or other citizens of the country.
You missed my point:
The hunter can justify killing the man. I didn't say anywhere that only police can respond to crime.
Which is what I mean by taking justice in one's own hands at a time. Of course, he will have to proof he did good. We are agreed on this if I understand.
That's not what it means though, taking "justice" or "law" into one's hands:
For that situation, it'd be better to say self-defence or defence of others, because it's not about justice or law but about responding with appropriate force.
Alright then. We are likely not agreed. I am not lawyer, so I didn't know the exact definition. It will likely be different in various English countries, I bet;
Self-defence includes defence of others in my country's law. Going away from that example, which was, by the way, investigated as murder, not self-defence.
If a regime forbids you to spread the truth people should be aware of (from your perspection), is it bad to spread the truth? According to your definition, Edward Snowden did bad. According to common sense, well, depends on the person. But I quite admire him and consider it good what he has done.
Another good example. Just re-reading your definition and seeing this "One day, after years of violent abuse from her husband, she took the law into her own hands." If she was regularly abused both physicaly and psychically, I think it is correct she finally stood up for herself. It is against the law, but imagine how long it would take if she announced it to cops. If she was not refused, it would probably take months to get rid of the man. And he would add on his insults --- Of course, the state is probably able to help her in like 3 days, but there is no certainity in that for her. And if she had to face years of humiliation from this man, it is far and justified murder from my standpoint.
Also, a jury of 12 peers (people from the assailant's community) should get to judge, and only within complete accord/agreement/unanimously as no one person should have the power to judge over another by themselves, but also if the assailant's family claim to be the victims of needless violence as well when their son/brother/nephew/uncle/father- aka the assailant with the lory was killed by the hunter, 12 people from the hunter's community should be gathered to judge if the hunter indeed made victims of the assailant's family or not, granted they didn't know the hunter.
You know you can learn from fiction and second hand stories, what something is, and you don't need to do it yourself, or experience it yourself, or have it continue to exist int he world in order to understand it? Evil is not required to be present in order for good to be present. That's a fallacy. As you say, meeting evil personally acts a as a strong motivator in personal life to care about good vs. evil, but not that evil is requires to be experienced in order to learn and know it.
You have a point. Philosophy books should include your statement under good & evil thoughts. Unfortunately, eradicating evil completely is utopia anyway.
"Those who are evil prevail when those who are good do nothing."
Evil prevails when it's not stopped indeed.
IMO it is wise for steemit to not attempt to stop "abuse". I think that users should impose bottom up order upon steemit by forming a consensus as to what behavior is to be allowed, and what behavior is to be punished. With this approach, the community would ask steemit to focus on developing the platform using simple principles, and it would be the community's job to establish, by consensus, a "moral system" that would enable users to fully exploit the platform as "normal cells" but would establish a bright line boundary between behavior that is deemed acceptable and "cancer cell" behavior that is not acceptable and that is punished.
you've established you want to eradicate evil, however the question which arises is "who is evil and good" and "who decides it". Good and evil are black and white, how do we decide that in a greyish world like ours. Some government officials may seem evil, but if you look deeper they could be good.
Definitions. Describing reality and the actions in reality and the harm those actions do, is what defines good and evil. It principled thinking, non-contradiction and vision to see what is happening. There are degrees and grades of good and evil, not absolutes like black or white. No One is 'Pure' Evil
I do agree with you, but I believe evil is not something that will be eradicated due to the reason there exists balance. Sometimes there is too much evil, other times there is too much good. This universe is all about balance of these two poles.