for evil to triumph, good men should do nothing Options

[Comptine]

the topic title is a version of a famous quote by Edmund Burke.

in a show i watched, one character was about to be sent back to rwanda to be executed. he was a doctor in rwanda who was asked by military men to set up a shelter for tutsis. when his clinic was packed full of tutsis, the military men came back with even more men and proceeded to slaughter everyone there except the doctor. the doctor had let it happen and didn't do anything (tried to reason with the military men, get help, etc.)

do you think just because one individual did nothing against evil, he should have to face the consequences as if he did an act of evil himself?

[zepfel]

errrm, i meant that...

it would be fair to make the statement that hitler proably never killed a jew personally, and then i used the analogy that the king wouldn't kill those he ordered to die himself, as hitler wouldn't. they would both have people to kill on their behalf.

[Spirited Away]

it would be fair to make the statement that hitler proably never killed a jew personally, and then i used the analogy that the king wouldn't kill those he ordered to die himself, as hitler wouldn't. they would both have people to kill on their behalf.

If the King of England order the execution and the one he condemned is guilty, then good had done something to stop the bad, proving that had he not ordered the execution, the guilty--evil--roam free.  If the English King order the execution of an innocent, then he is spreading evil. Evil multiplies.

In context (in my discussion with Mr. Acid), I asked the question because it seems Mr. Acid didn't believe that Hitler would be capable of spreading Evil had no one followed his leadership. Of course, that is not the case, but since we are talking about a hypothetical situation (notice the many "would have's"), I thought it would be appropriate to point out that even without underlings, Hitler would still be able to spread evil by killing innocents.

Maybe the question "Are you saying that Hitler never killed a Jew on his own" should have another 'would have' added to it. "Are you saying that Hitler would have never killed a Jew on his own?" I figured, within context, 'would have' wasn't neccessary.