How to write headlines by twisting peoples words:
- Thread starter Big Don
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
Ya know, there's a misquote that goes around and around-it's Edmund Burke-"the only thing necessary for evil triumph is for good men to do nothing," which, of course, he never said. What he said, basically, was that (and I'm omitting the actual thing he said here, and paraphrasing) was that good men must, because evil will/
What I like to say, is that the only thing necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do evil, thinking they're doing good. I don't know that it applies to Hitler-I have my own theories about that gentleman-but I can see how one could reach the conclusion that the man didn't know the evil he was doing.....
Hey, in the end, it's no big deal-Will Smith is an actor, after all, a man who gets paid to play make believe, and dropped out of (or never went?) to college. Given that, it's not too much of a stretch to see how he might say something like that. Respect him for his work, not what he says about the way the world really is: in his world, you get richer than god before you're twenty, and get to say and do whatever you want....
From the link:
The first two sentences I understand; the last is difficult for me to grasp.
The first two sentences I understand; the last is difficult for me to grasp.
newGuy12
Master of Arts
Just another actor running his mouth about stuff he doesn't know about.
Omar B
Senior Master
Well after reading the article I'm not gonna fault the guy, I see what he was trying to say. Hitler was evil, vile, all that, but in his head he was doing the right thing, just like any other villain.
- Thread Starter
- #7
The last sentence makes more sense when you take Smith's conversion to Scientology in to account.
newGuy12
Master of Arts
I don't rely on actors to give good advice on anything. Just because they are famous does not mean that they have studied history. I rely on the History Professors who write books to get information about WWII.
Besides, Hitler tried to take over the freaking world, killing Poles and Jewish people and doing all manner of evil things. Who cares what his intentions were? The proof is in the eating of the pudding. Its peoples' ACTIONS that matter, not their intentions, if you ask me.
I have no use for these actors. I have no use for moving pictures, except for Jason Bourne movies and martial arts movies. Life is too short to sit around watching movies all the time.
Besides, Hitler tried to take over the freaking world, killing Poles and Jewish people and doing all manner of evil things. Who cares what his intentions were? The proof is in the eating of the pudding. Its peoples' ACTIONS that matter, not their intentions, if you ask me.
I have no use for these actors. I have no use for moving pictures, except for Jason Bourne movies and martial arts movies. Life is too short to sit around watching movies all the time.
It all depends upon your beliefs. In a way Smith is right. When a person starts doing something that is evil, it usually doesn't happen all at once and they're not really aware that what they're doing IS evil... because they're so caught up in what they're doing and allowing other things to influence them to the point they become blind to what is the right and wrong of things.
I believe that all of us are inherently born good. All of us have a light/spark within us that guides us to do good to others. Who here has truly ever seen an evil infant?
It is only when the innocence is taken away (and it always is with everyone some time or another) that the capacity to do evil begins. But prior to that... no, it would be impossible because evil, unlike good, HAS to be taught. One way or another one learns evil and learns to do evil things and eventually becomes evil themselves. I also (personally) believe in the devil/Satan who can influence a person to do evil. But again it's a choice to follow the influence or ignore it... be it from God or The Devil.
Is a person truly ever aware of this process? Perhaps, perhaps not. Where did Hitler learn his hatred of the Jews? Was he born with it? Did his father teach him (before his own death)? History shows that he spent jail time after the first world war. History/myth(???) tells us that one of his cell mates was Josef Stalin (another mass murderer of Jews). Perhaps during conversation it was Stalin who fed the hatred to Hitler? Does this let Hitler off the hook? Of course not. But it does help lend understanding to the why... if not completely.
It's all conjecture and theory at this point. However; History does speak and the Holocaust haunts us because it DID happen. What had happened was evil. The act itself is evil. But are the men? Are ALL the men who participated? The answer would be yes because of the choices they made were evil. Remember this though... as bad as he, Adolf Hitler, was... he was not alone.
I think Smith made a blurb that the press jumped on and ran with it. The press DOES have a history of taking things out of context to suit their stories.
Watch the news and talk shows coming up, eventually Smith will make either retractions or clarifications on what he said... or he may not do it at all. He may have meant what he said and left it to us to try and understand what he meant by it.
Just like here on MT... not everything everyone says here is always crystal clear and concise. Some of us click too soon :wink2: and others write quickly and post only later then realize what they've said. :wink1:
I believe that all of us are inherently born good. All of us have a light/spark within us that guides us to do good to others. Who here has truly ever seen an evil infant?
It is only when the innocence is taken away (and it always is with everyone some time or another) that the capacity to do evil begins. But prior to that... no, it would be impossible because evil, unlike good, HAS to be taught. One way or another one learns evil and learns to do evil things and eventually becomes evil themselves. I also (personally) believe in the devil/Satan who can influence a person to do evil. But again it's a choice to follow the influence or ignore it... be it from God or The Devil.
Is a person truly ever aware of this process? Perhaps, perhaps not. Where did Hitler learn his hatred of the Jews? Was he born with it? Did his father teach him (before his own death)? History shows that he spent jail time after the first world war. History/myth(???) tells us that one of his cell mates was Josef Stalin (another mass murderer of Jews). Perhaps during conversation it was Stalin who fed the hatred to Hitler? Does this let Hitler off the hook? Of course not. But it does help lend understanding to the why... if not completely.
It's all conjecture and theory at this point. However; History does speak and the Holocaust haunts us because it DID happen. What had happened was evil. The act itself is evil. But are the men? Are ALL the men who participated? The answer would be yes because of the choices they made were evil. Remember this though... as bad as he, Adolf Hitler, was... he was not alone.
I think Smith made a blurb that the press jumped on and ran with it. The press DOES have a history of taking things out of context to suit their stories.
Watch the news and talk shows coming up, eventually Smith will make either retractions or clarifications on what he said... or he may not do it at all. He may have meant what he said and left it to us to try and understand what he meant by it.
Just like here on MT... not everything everyone says here is always crystal clear and concise. Some of us click too soon :wink2: and others write quickly and post only later then realize what they've said. :wink1:
Let me see if I got this right... actors and movies are bad. Unless they are ones that you like.
newGuy12
Master of Arts
Read the bolded part again, slowly.
I don't read that as Smith saying Hitler was good, but that Hitler thought he was doing good.
There's a difference. And, let's be blunt. If the Nazi's had won, it would have been defined as "good".
Look at the Dark Ages and Crusades....Good, God Fearing Christians raped, robbed and murdered tens of thousands of Jews, Muslims and other "heathen"'s, because God's agent on earth, the Pope said it was ok. Numerous orders of Christian Knights went out and slaughtered (and many of them enjoyed it quite a bit) as "God" was on their side.
And they all thought it was "Good".
The Islamic Extremist that is chopping heads off people while video taping it, they think they are doing good too.
Osama thinks he is doing good, and did good orchestrating 9/11.
George Bush thinks he is doing good in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that attacking Iran would be a good thing too.
Whomever shot Lincoln and Kennedy, also thought they were doing good.
Good and Evil are temporary constructs, defined and redefined over time as the definers viewpoint in time and space changes.
Hitler -was- good.
He gave Germany back it's pride, brought them out of depression and made them a superpower in a few short years after suffering a crushing, humiliating and devastating defeat during WW 1.
Hitler -was- evil.
His wars of conquest, and ruthless racial policies left Europe in shambles, 6 million Jews and 6 million others dead in his death camps, and and almost 50 Million dead all in all. His bigotry survives today in a legacy of death and brutality and imaginary history of skeptics.
"How can you defend Hitler Bob? You're an ***".
Before someone fires that at me, no, I'm not defending him. I find him and all he stood for to be vile. However, I can understand where Good and Evil are defined.
Remember folks, in some English schools, the US founding fathers are seen as treasonous dogs, who betrayed their rightful King and who should have been hunted down and hung like hams for their acts, and not the brave leaders who stood up to a mad tyrant that us Americans know is "true and good".
Somewhere, even the French think a tank with 5 gears in reverse and only 1 in forward (never used) is good too.
So, I don't think Smith was defending AH, as much as saying he understood how he (AH) could think he was doing good. Faulty programming...easily fixed with a couple hundred thousand bucks, or a crowbar upside his head.
There's a difference. And, let's be blunt. If the Nazi's had won, it would have been defined as "good".
Look at the Dark Ages and Crusades....Good, God Fearing Christians raped, robbed and murdered tens of thousands of Jews, Muslims and other "heathen"'s, because God's agent on earth, the Pope said it was ok. Numerous orders of Christian Knights went out and slaughtered (and many of them enjoyed it quite a bit) as "God" was on their side.
And they all thought it was "Good".
The Islamic Extremist that is chopping heads off people while video taping it, they think they are doing good too.
Osama thinks he is doing good, and did good orchestrating 9/11.
George Bush thinks he is doing good in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that attacking Iran would be a good thing too.
Whomever shot Lincoln and Kennedy, also thought they were doing good.
Good and Evil are temporary constructs, defined and redefined over time as the definers viewpoint in time and space changes.
Hitler -was- good.
He gave Germany back it's pride, brought them out of depression and made them a superpower in a few short years after suffering a crushing, humiliating and devastating defeat during WW 1.
Hitler -was- evil.
His wars of conquest, and ruthless racial policies left Europe in shambles, 6 million Jews and 6 million others dead in his death camps, and and almost 50 Million dead all in all. His bigotry survives today in a legacy of death and brutality and imaginary history of skeptics.
"How can you defend Hitler Bob? You're an ***".
Before someone fires that at me, no, I'm not defending him. I find him and all he stood for to be vile. However, I can understand where Good and Evil are defined.
Remember folks, in some English schools, the US founding fathers are seen as treasonous dogs, who betrayed their rightful King and who should have been hunted down and hung like hams for their acts, and not the brave leaders who stood up to a mad tyrant that us Americans know is "true and good".
Somewhere, even the French think a tank with 5 gears in reverse and only 1 in forward (never used) is good too.
So, I don't think Smith was defending AH, as much as saying he understood how he (AH) could think he was doing good. Faulty programming...easily fixed with a couple hundred thousand bucks, or a crowbar upside his head.
- Thread Starter
- #13
What ever his intent, this will (pun intended) cost Will.Faulty programming...easily fixed with a couple hundred thousand bucks, or a crowbar upside his head.
I vote for the crowbar!
I've got slightly less affection for Dolf Schickelgruber than I do for gangrene and hookworm. Race-mixing queer-friendly union-loving Jew. 'Nuff said. And I've got even less patience for Nazi sympathizers.
But before you get yourself too hot and bothered, Don, take a look at what Mr. Smith said:
He's right. Nobody is evil all the time. It would be too exhausting. And very few people think of themselves as evil. Even Dick Cheney (Yemach Shemo Uzichro)is a father whose love for his daughter transcends his vile politics. Southern slave owners believed they were good Masters who cared for their property. Hitler's values were terrible and distorted. But they had a logic by which he could look at himself in the mirror and say "I am a good man. I am doing what is right for Germany and the Volk." Lenin believed that what he did was vital to move Russia from a brutal, backwards, tyrannical kingdom ruled by malign neglect (which it was) to a beacon for Humanity.
It's just too easy to see the world as divided clearly into Good and Evil. Good is people who are exactly like you. And the more people are like you the more Good they are. Anything else is Evil. If someone honestly holds a different opinion or looks to different or otherwise doesn't conform to your ideal he must be Evil. And since you know that you are Good he must know that he is Evil. It is a remarkably convenient way of seeing the world. There is no ambiguity. There can not be inconvenient facts. Nothing can possibly interfere. But it is ultimately a fantasy. It denies reality on every single level from the physical to the psychological.
To quote a good Protestant "I beseech you in the bowels of Christ. Consider it possible that you are mistaken."
Will Smith is right. Hitler was a human being and therefore believed that what he did was right or justified.
I'll leave you with one more quote by someone you probably admire
But before you get yourself too hot and bothered, Don, take a look at what Mr. Smith said:
He's right. Nobody is evil all the time. It would be too exhausting. And very few people think of themselves as evil. Even Dick Cheney (Yemach Shemo Uzichro)is a father whose love for his daughter transcends his vile politics. Southern slave owners believed they were good Masters who cared for their property. Hitler's values were terrible and distorted. But they had a logic by which he could look at himself in the mirror and say "I am a good man. I am doing what is right for Germany and the Volk." Lenin believed that what he did was vital to move Russia from a brutal, backwards, tyrannical kingdom ruled by malign neglect (which it was) to a beacon for Humanity.
It's just too easy to see the world as divided clearly into Good and Evil. Good is people who are exactly like you. And the more people are like you the more Good they are. Anything else is Evil. If someone honestly holds a different opinion or looks to different or otherwise doesn't conform to your ideal he must be Evil. And since you know that you are Good he must know that he is Evil. It is a remarkably convenient way of seeing the world. There is no ambiguity. There can not be inconvenient facts. Nothing can possibly interfere. But it is ultimately a fantasy. It denies reality on every single level from the physical to the psychological.
To quote a good Protestant "I beseech you in the bowels of Christ. Consider it possible that you are mistaken."
Will Smith is right. Hitler was a human being and therefore believed that what he did was right or justified.
I'll leave you with one more quote by someone you probably admire
I don't read that as Smith saying Hitler was good, but that Hitler thought he was doing good.
There's a difference. And, let's be blunt. If the Nazi's had won, it would have been defined as "good".
Look at the Dark Ages and Crusades....Good, God Fearing Christians raped, robbed and murdered tens of thousands of Jews, Muslims and other "heathen"'s, because God's agent on earth, the Pope said it was ok. Numerous orders of Christian Knights went out and slaughtered (and many of them enjoyed it quite a bit) as "God" was on their side.
And they all thought it was "Good".
The Islamic Extremist that is chopping heads off people while video taping it, they think they are doing good too.
Osama thinks he is doing good, and did good orchestrating 9/11.
George Bush thinks he is doing good in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that attacking Iran would be a good thing too.
Whomever shot Lincoln and Kennedy, also thought they were doing good.
Good and Evil are temporary constructs, defined and redefined over time as the definers viewpoint in time and space changes.
Hitler -was- good.
He gave Germany back it's pride, brought them out of depression and made them a superpower in a few short years after suffering a crushing, humiliating and devastating defeat during WW 1.
Hitler -was- evil.
His wars of conquest, and ruthless racial policies left Europe in shambles, 6 million Jews and 6 million others dead in his death camps, and and almost 50 Million dead all in all. His bigotry survives today in a legacy of death and brutality and imaginary history of skeptics.
"How can you defend Hitler Bob? You're an ***".
Before someone fires that at me, no, I'm not defending him. I find him and all he stood for to be vile. However, I can understand where Good and Evil are defined.
Remember folks, in some English schools, the US founding fathers are seen as treasonous dogs, who betrayed their rightful King and who should have been hunted down and hung like hams for their acts, and not the brave leaders who stood up to a mad tyrant that us Americans know is "true and good".
Somewhere, even the French think a tank with 5 gears in reverse and only 1 in forward (never used) is good too.
So, I don't think Smith was defending AH, as much as saying he understood how he (AH) could think he was doing good. Faulty programming...easily fixed with a couple hundred thousand bucks, or a crowbar upside his head.
No they don't teach that...in fact they don't teach anything! Our children now have a lamentably poor grasp of history even our own. I doubt many know that America was ever a British colony and why it's not now. In schools they do projects, and jump from era to era so they could be making dinosaurs one week, bonfires for Guy Fawkes the next and with very little in between. They don't even know who Winston churchill is and I doubt whether many actually know who Adolf Hitler was. Which is where the danger lies,the level of ignorance is appalling. I don't suppose it matters if you don't know what order the kings and queens go in but you must know how our country was made, what defines it from it's past. History is so important, I know that history can be skewed but we need to know basically what has happened... to hopefully know how to prevent the bad things happening again.
Will Smith was quoted here last week as saying he wants to be president, don't know whether that cheers you up or not!
Evil very rarely comes with devil horns on it's head to warn us.
All there is to know about Adolph Eichman
Eyes: Medium
Hair: Medium
Weight: Medium
Height: Medium
Distunguishing features: None
Number of toes: Ten
Number of fingers: Ten
Intelligence: medium
What did you expect?
Talons?
Oversize incisors?
Green saliva?
Madness?
Leonard Cohen
Almost anything can be turned into good or in the same sence turned into evil by deconstructing the past! It truly is a danger and important that one rationally looks at the past and comes to the conclusion of what was!
Oh and do not look to actors for history lessons!
I have to agree with Bob and tellner - Hitler did what he did out because he thought he was doing good; in fact, he thought he was saving the human race from itself. He was wrong - horribly, vilely, incredibly wrong - that's why so many nations rose up together to defeat him. And notice that his "Aryan ideal" was the exact opposite of his own appearance, which, to me at least, indicates a pretty deep self-loathing, which could easily have fed his twisted ideals... in some sense, he was saving the world from himself.
History is written by the victors - only recently has the perspective of the loser in any dispute been of interest. Luckily for the planet and the race, Hitler did not win - if he had, the world would be a different place, probably much darker, at least for a time.
Hitler was a vile, evil man - but few, if any, people think of themselves that way, even when others think that of them. History (which, don't forget, starts the second after an incident occurs) applies the labels of evil and good. History has, rightfully, IMHO, applied the label of "evil" to Hitler and others like him - Pol Pot, Mussolini, Castro, to name a few - but I doubt than any of them started out with the intent of gaining that label for themselves. With the goal of domination of a significant portion of the world, certainly - but that goal can be met in a wide variety of ways, both good and evil. We should be thankful that so few truly merit the label "evil", when compared to the number of people who produce those few.
History is written by the victors - only recently has the perspective of the loser in any dispute been of interest. Luckily for the planet and the race, Hitler did not win - if he had, the world would be a different place, probably much darker, at least for a time.
Hitler was a vile, evil man - but few, if any, people think of themselves that way, even when others think that of them. History (which, don't forget, starts the second after an incident occurs) applies the labels of evil and good. History has, rightfully, IMHO, applied the label of "evil" to Hitler and others like him - Pol Pot, Mussolini, Castro, to name a few - but I doubt than any of them started out with the intent of gaining that label for themselves. With the goal of domination of a significant portion of the world, certainly - but that goal can be met in a wide variety of ways, both good and evil. We should be thankful that so few truly merit the label "evil", when compared to the number of people who produce those few.
Sounds like British schools have been cribbing from schools here in the USA... Do they also ensure that every aspect of history is taught "neutrally", so that nobody feels bad to find out that their German great-grandparents really did participate in the Holocaust, which really did happen?
I hesitate to brand Will Smith as an idiot based solely on one quote, taken without much context. If it was a single quote in a discussion on "what is evil?" or "why did Hitler do this?", it becomes a very different answer, doesn't it?
Something else to consider... Hitler didn't do everything, and doesn't carry sole resoonsibility for what happened during the Nazi regime. He certainly created the environment that allowed it, and knowingly permitted much of the atrocity... but he didn't do it all himself. And many people, knowing the actions of the government were wrong, knowing that the conditions and treatment of people in the concentration camps were at best inhumane, stood by and let it happen. I hope and pray that if anything like that every tries to come to pass here in the USA, I'll have the courage and morality to stand up and say NO.
Omar B
Senior Master
The last person you should be looking to for lessons on ANYTHING is an actor. Actor's can't even decide who the hell they are. Through the lens of hhistory and on what side you stand your history will paint different ppeople as good or evil. For me, I usually use the nnumber of people who die and the number of people's rights are violated as a measuring stick.
When men reduce their virtues to the approximate, then evil acquires the force of an absolute, when loyalty to an unyielding purpose is dropped by the virtuous, it's picked up by scoundrels—and you get the indecent spectacle of a cringing, bargaining, traitorous good and a self-righteously uncompromising evil. - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
The standard of value of the Objectivist ethics—the standard by which one judges what is good or evil—is man's life, or: that which is required for man's survival qua man. Since reason is man's basic means of survival, that which is proper to the life of a rational being is the good; that which negates, opposes or destroys it is the evil. Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness
When men reduce their virtues to the approximate, then evil acquires the force of an absolute, when loyalty to an unyielding purpose is dropped by the virtuous, it's picked up by scoundrels—and you get the indecent spectacle of a cringing, bargaining, traitorous good and a self-righteously uncompromising evil. - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
The standard of value of the Objectivist ethics—the standard by which one judges what is good or evil—is man's life, or: that which is required for man's survival qua man. Since reason is man's basic means of survival, that which is proper to the life of a rational being is the good; that which negates, opposes or destroys it is the evil. Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness
