[A-List] The Triumph of Evil

[Tony B.]

The import of the idea I was conveying is meant to stand for 'all time'. 
Moreover, the 'now' is not some pure, unadulterated temporal essence. The 
'now' is always conditioned by the past. Indeed, that is how we learn. In 
short, I was presenting my experience as a sort of gift to those, perhaps 
younger members of the List, who might find it of some value...some value 
both in the present..and the future.

Tony



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nadja Tesich" <nadjatesich at hotmail.com>
To: <a-list at lists.econ.utah.edu>
Sent: Saturday, September 25, 2010 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: [A-List] The Triumph of Evil



Tony,
Sorry sorry..all of you write history or details When I am interested in 
NOW.Nadja

----------------------------------------
> From: tal1 at cogeco.ca
> To: a-list at lists.econ.utah.edu
> Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2010 13:53:40 -0400
> Subject: Re: [A-List] The Triumph of Evil
>
> "In fact, no one knows what the ratio of good to bad people in society 
> is."
>
> Recognizing that 'good people' is, of course, a loose and highly
> situation-specific term, we *can*, in a very approximate sense, specify 
> the
> ratio when it comes to the question of roughly how many people are able to
> resist the pressures of arbitrary authority.
>
> Thus, in the early 1960s Stanley Milgram at Yale performed a classic 
> social
> science experiment (different versions of which have been successfully
> replicated many times) in which universty school volunteers were asked to
> punish (electrically shock) other volunteers who failed to answer a series
> of 'skill testing' questions correctly (the 'victims' were, however, mere
> confederates of the experimenter). It was established that some two-thirds
> of all volunteers would shock another human being *to death* driven only 
> by
> the censure of a verbal reprimand to conform.
>
> I remember reading of this experiment as a callow first year university
> student. It struck with me unusual force, for I realized that being a good
> 'Nazi' wasn't relegated to being a Nazi..and that I had no way of knowing
> aforehand whether *I* was one of that 'two-thirds'.
>
> I recall wandering around in a daze much of the day wrestling with the
> connudrum, though by the end I chanced upon what I thought to be a
> reasonable 'solution'. To wit, I reckoned that the only way to, in a 
> sense,
> 'defend' myself from the fate of falling into that 'two-thirds' would be 
> to
> 'inoculate' myself with regard to potential 'evil' situational
> conformities...by having first previously identified them and thought them
> thoroughly through. I thus proceeded at every chance I got (i.e. as
> 'situtations' arose through reading, watching movies, talking with people
> etc) to imaginatively confront and interrogate myself w.r.t. the values,
> choices, repercussions, dangers etc of various classic conformist 
> pressures
> (e.g. going to war, receiving immoral commands etc). Later in life,
> naturally, I was called upon to make all sorts of choices in 'conformist'
> situations that were not nearly as harrowing and dangerous as the ones I 
> had
> imagined, but which were, in their own way, no less symbolically 
> important.
> In short, my notion of 'inoculation', while no guarantee or panacea 
> against
> 'evil' choices, turned out to be a reasonably practicable and effective
> temptational prophylactic.
>
> Tony
>
> *From Wikipedia:
>
> "The Milgram experiment on obedience to authority figures was a series of
> social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologist
> Stanley Milgram, which measured the willingness of study participants to
> obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts that 
> conflicted
> with their personal conscience. Milgram first described his research in 
> 1963
> in an article published in the Journal of Abnormal and Social 
> Psychology,[1]
> and later discussed his findings in greater depth in his 1974 book,
> Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.[2]
>
> The experiments began in July 1961, three months after the start of the
> trial of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram
> devised his psychological study to answer the question: "Was it that
> Eichmann and his accomplices in the Holocaust had mutual intent, in at 
> least
> with regard to the goals of the Holocaust?" In other words, "Was there a
> mutual sense of morality among those involved?" Milgram's testing 
> suggested
> that it could have been that the millions of accomplices were merely
> following orders, despite violating their deepest moral beliefs."
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Totten"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 8:51 PM
> Subject: [A-List] The Triumph of Evil
>
>
> > by Professor John Kozy
> >
> > Global Research (September 03 2010)
> >
> >
> > Modern societies have justified their adoption of criminal activities by
> > claiming that such techniques are necessary to combat evil. But the war
> > against evil by the good cannot be won using evil tactics. Evil never
> > yields goodness, and by using these evil practices, the amount of evil 
> > in
> > the world increases both in amount and extent. Attempting to save the
> > nation by becoming what you are trying to save the nation from is
> > suicidal. Unless benign techniques such as those developed by primitive
> > societies are put to use, evil will prevail. Then, paraphrasing J Robert
> > Oppenheimer's comment after the first atomic bomb was successfully 
> > tested,
> > We will have become evil, the destroyer of goodness.
> >
> > Some decades ago, while having dinner with a newly elected Attorney
> > General of the State of North Carolina and the Chief Justice of that
> > state's Supreme Court, the jurist told me that everyone involved in the
> > legal system and enforcement had to think like criminals to catch them. 
> > He
> > believed the statement to be straight forward and evident until I 
> > pointed
> > out that the line between thinking like a criminal and acting like one 
> > is
> > very fine and is easily and frequently crossed, which results in
> > increasing the amount of evil in society rather than reducing it. Few
> > apparently notice this consequence and the criminal-like behavior of 
> > those
> > charged with enforcing and adjudicating the law has increased so
> > substantially that it has become common practice.
> >
> > YouTube is replete with videos of police brutality. Police have been
> > videoed beating subdued prisoners, tasering people (even little old
> > ladies) indiscriminately, shooting mentally challenged people they have
> > been called upon to help, and killing people caught committing 
> > non-capital
> > crimes who try to escape (sometimes by shooting them in the back).
> > Investigations to determine whether those officers should be held
> > accountable rarely result in any punishment.
> >
> > People providing forensic information in trials have been shown to have
> > falsified evidence in ways that facilitate convictions. A recent report
> > claims that "agents of the [North Carolina] State Bureau of 
> > Investigation
> > repeatedly aided prosecutors in obtaining convictions over a 16-year
> > period, mostly by misrepresenting blood evidence and keeping critical
> > notes from defense attorneys ... calling into question convictions in 
> > 230
> > criminal cases". Similar problems have been found with other forensic
> > labs.
> >
> > In Dallas, Texas, a former prosecutor, Henry Wade, now deceased, has
> > become infamous for having convicted a large number of innocent
> > defendants. Dallas has had more exonerations than any other county in
> > America; yet most requests for the retesting of DNA have been denied by
> > trial court judges on the recommendation of former District Attorney 
> > Bill
> > Hill, a protege of Wade's. Mr Hill's prosecutors routinely opposed
> > testing. In addition to almost complete reliance on eyewitness 
> > testimony,
> > a review of the Dallas County DNA cases shows that thirteen of the
> > nineteen wrongly convicted men were black, eight were misidentified by
> > victims of another race, investigators, prosecutors, and many of the
> > juries in the cases were all white, police used suggestive lineup
> > procedures and sometimes pressured victims to pick their suspect and 
> > then
> > cleared the case once an identification was made, prosecutors frequently
> > went to trial with single-witness identifications and flimsy 
> > corroboration
> > and tried to preserve shaky identifications by withholding evidence that
> > pointed to other potential suspects, and judges routinely approved even
> > tainted pretrial identifications. When Bill Hill, who said he was
> > confident his assistants verified the accuracy of all eyewitness
> > identifications was told his office prosecuted one those exonerated, Mr
> > Hill said the two prosecutors on the case were incompetent holdovers 
> > from
> > the previous administration. Terri Moore, the current DA's top assistant
> > and a former federal prosecutor, said, "It's almost like it's the whole
> > system. Everybody drops the ball somewhere, starting with the police
> > investigation. And we just take the case and adopt what the police say."
> >
> > Then there are those prosecutions that rely on the testimony of 
> > criminals
> > who have been bribed to act as informants. Bribery is a criminal 
> > activity,
> > and if a defense attorney were shown to have bribed a witness, 
> > disbarment
> > would be the likely result; yet prosecutors commonly do it.
> >
> > The preceding paragraphs limn an ugly picture, ugly indeed!
> >
> > But the evil is not limited to local law enforcement. When officials
> > realized that they can act with impunity without fear of suffering any
> > personal consequences, the maxim, one must think like criminals to catch
> > them, underwent subtle alterations. Now one must think like bankers to 
> > be
> > able to regulate them. The same thing is said of stock brokers, oil men,
> > and every other interest group. Everyone wants to be self-regulated. But
> > self-regulation is nothing but a license to engage in criminal behavior.
> > The whole system of governing becomes an oligarchy of old boys 
> > scratching
> > each other's backs. Everyone knows just how well that works out.
> >
> > Federal agencies, including the Supreme Court, are complicit, too. The
> > Court violates the Constitution routinely. Remember the decision
> > validating the incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War Two?
> > Other decisions, perhaps not quite so obvious, can easily be cited. The
> > FBI and Homeland Security routinely violate the privacy provisions of 
> > both
> > the Constitution and the law, and the courts have failed to intervene. 
> > The
> > CIA has become an official version of Murder, Inc, now even advocating 
> > the
> > assassination of Americans living abroad who have been labeled
> > "terrorists". The agency has become the dispenser of vigilante justice,
> > while Americans are told to never take the law into their own hands.
> >
> > No one seems to realize that the war against evil by the good cannot be
> > won using evil tactics. Evil never yields goodness, and by using these
> > evil practices on the pretext of fighting evil, the amount of evil in 
> > the
> > world increases both in amount and extent. Attempting to save a nation 
> > by
> > becoming what you are trying to save the nation from is an act of 
> > national
> > self-destruction; it is suicidal.
> >
> > So how can the good be expected to fight evil?
> >
> > Edmund Burke's claim, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is
> > that good men do nothing", is often cited. Sounds good, doesn't it? But
> > the claim falls into the category of notions that Michael Faraday 
> > labeled
> > "favorite ideas", and he warned us to be leery of them. Think about it 
> > for
> > just a minute. Are people who do nothing really good?
> >
> > Anyone who has watched network television over the past decade has seen
> > stories about people who have seen crimes taking place without ever
> > intervening and people collapsing in the street without ever stopping to
> > render aid. ABC News currently has a series, titled What Would You Do?,
> > that stages illegal acts in public places to see how unaware bystanders
> > respond. Many do nothing. The implication of these stories is that 
> > there's
> > something wrong with such people.
> >
> > In fact, no one knows what the ratio of good to bad people in society 
> > is.
> > Perhaps there simply are not enough good people to make a difference no
> > matter what they do. But even supposing, as most people do, that the 
> > good
> > outnumber the bad, few realize how hard it is for the good to fight 
> > evil.
> >
> > Good people are repelled by it; they can never employ it even with the
> > best of intentions; they know multiple wrongs never make right. So what
> > are they to do?
> >
> > They can, of course, rail against the evil. Some like the ACLU, the
> > Innocence Project, and others file lawsuits, others expose evil by
> > requesting documents through the Freedom of Information act and by
> > becoming whistleblowers. Although all of these actions are worthwhile 
> > and
> > often result in combating specific wrongful acts, they have little 
> > effect
> > on the systemic evil that has been incorporated into institutional
> > behavior. Good people seem to be limited by their very goodness. Is 
> > there
> > then no hope? Can nothing be done to prevent the triumph of evil?
> >
> > Some societies have developed benign and civil ways of dealing with it.
> > Gandhi was able to use passive resistance to expel the evil British RAJ
> > from India, but, unfortunately, the Indians were unable to use it to 
> > keep
> > an evil local RAJ from acquiring control. Nevertheless, Gandhi
> > demonstrated that passive resistance can work.
> >
> > The Norwegians during World War Two redefined the surname Quisling to 
> > mean
> > traitor and thereby vilified Vidkun Quisling who assisted Nazi Germany
> > after it conquered Norway so that he himself could rule. The term was
> > later used to vilify fascist political parties, military and 
> > paramilitary
> > forces and other collaborators in occupied Allied countries. If, as some
> > claim, America is becoming a fascist state, "Quisling" can still be used
> > today. Recently, Stephanie Madoff, daughter-in-law of Bernard Madoff,
> > filed court papers asking to change her and her children's last name to
> > Morgan to avoid additional humiliation and harassment. Vilification by
> > associating a person's name with his acts and applying it to others who
> > act likewise is an effective, benign way of attacking evil. In an 
> > earlier
> > piece, I suggested that those who advocate war but deliberately avoid
> > serving themselves be called Cheyneys.
> >
> > The French Resistance, during and after World War Two, shaved the heads 
> > of
> > women caught consorting with German occupiers. These "shaved-heads"
> > exposed their shame until their hair re-grew, and even later, others
> > rarely forgot who they were. (Some would consider forcefully shaving a
> > person's head a battery which is illegal, but even so, it is a rather
> > harmless battery.)
> >
> > Primitive societies developed a whole range of benign ways of 
> > confronting
> > evil, some of which are still in use today in isolated places. 
> > Ostracism,
> > shunning, anathema, and social rejection have been used successfully. 
> > Then
> > there are the more modern practices of boycotting and picketing.
> >
> > But modern technological advances have made even other practices
> > available. Imaginative uses of these tried and proven methods can be 
> > very
> > effective.
> >
> > For instance, most computer literate people are familiar with denial of
> > service attacks used by hackers. A denial of service attack is an 
> > attempt
> > to make a computer resource unavailable to its intended users. These
> > attacks are a great nuisance, but often cause no real damage. No good
> > person would recommend using such attacks, but consider the following
> > situation:
> >
> > People are routinely asked to write their congressmen to influence their
> > voting on specific issues. These letters are usually delivered to 
> > Capitol
> > Hill, perhaps causing congressmen some annoyance, but rarely enough to
> > induce much real change. But what if the letters, written in civil
> > language without threats, were sent to the residences of a congressman's
> > parents, siblings, spouse, and children? What if the letters merely 
> > asked
> > the recipient's to urge their relatives to consider changing his/her 
> > mind?
> > What if thousands of letters were sent to these people? The annoyance
> > would be enormous. If this were done to enough congressmen often enough,
> > perhaps they would consider acting in more responsible ways or perhaps
> > leaving office altogether. Denying miscreants of the convenient use of 
> > the
> > proceeds of their actions could be a powerful tool.
> >
> > This technique can be used against corporate officers and their 
> > governing
> > boards, judges who routinely reduce the amounts jurors award plaintiffs,
> > the police who are shown to have acted brutally, Justices of the Supreme
> > Court who issue rulings that cannot be justified by normal readings of 
> > the
> > Constitution, in short, anyone acting in an official capacity who has 
> > done
> > a great wrong. Furthermore, the US Postal Service needs the money. The
> > establishment does not expect people to act in such ways; it expects 
> > them
> > to use the normal established channels to express their disapproval. But
> > those established channels have long ago been shown to be ineffective.
> >
> > All that is required to win the battle against evil is to find ways to
> > make the lives of the miscreants miserable. No laws, not violence, not
> > even punishment is needed. Annoy them, shame them, shun them, ostracize
> > them, turn them into social outcasts, personae non gratae. Even if the
> > good in society constitute only a minority, if the minority is large
> > enough, it can succeed using such benign but annoying techniques.
> >
> > The situation described above is only one of many possibilities.
> > Imaginative people can conceive of others which can be equally 
> > effective.
> > Think of ways of using the telephone, twitter, posters, and anything 
> > else
> > in similar ways. The governing maxim needed is just make the miscreant's
> > life miserable.
> >
> > Unless such techniques are put to use, evil will prevail. Then,
> > paraphrasing J Robert Oppenheimer's comment after the first atomic bomb
> > was successfully tested, We will have become evil, the destroyer of
> > goodness.
> >
> > _____
> >
> > John Kozy is a retired professor of philosophy and logic who writes on
> > social, political, and economic issues. After serving in the US Army
> > during the Korean War, he spent twenty years as a university professor 
> > and
> > another twenty years working as a writer. He has published a textbook in
> > formal logic commercially, in academic journals and a small number of
> > commercial magazines, and has written a number of guest editorials for
> > newspapers. His on-line pieces can be found on http://www.jkozy.com/ and
> > he can be emailed from that site's homepage.
> >
> > Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole
> > responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the
> > Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are 
> > of
> > sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on
> > Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or
> > incorrect statements contained in this article.
> >
> > To become a Member of Global Research
> > http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=section§ionName=membership
> >
> > The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research 
> > articles
> > on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not 
> > modified.
> > The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication
> > of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial
> > internet sites, contact: crgeditor at yahoo.com
> >
> > www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has
> > not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are
> > making such material available to our readers under the provisions of
> > "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political,
> > economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed
> > without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
> > it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted
> > material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission
> > from the copyright owner.
> >
> > For media inquiries: crgeditor at yahoo.com
> >
> > (c) Copyright John Kozy, Global Research, 2010
> >
> > (c) Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
> >
> > http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20876
> >
> >
> > http://www.billtotten.blogspot.com
> > http://www.ashisuto.co.jp
> >
> >
>
>
>