The message taught is not that there exists an eternal clash between good and evil but, rather, that each individual needs to know his potential for doing evil.
In keeping with this, when the famous Tang poet, Bo Juyi (772 846) asked Chan master Niaokou (741 824) about the true meaning of Chan, Niaokou responded, "As for doing evil, avoid it; as for the good, practice sharing it".
They're not evil for having done this.
Seen through that lens, Bill becomes a force for serious evil, and honestly, I don't think we can look at him the same way again, now that he has sentenced a vampire to death for doing what he himself has done so often.
The polarizing labels of his Manichean global struggle — us-or-them, good-or evil, for-us-or-against-us — do not work for a nation of nuances, Muslim but not Islamist, religious in culture but secular in construct, of the Occident and the Orient, bordering the West's cradle in Greece and its crucible in Iraq.
"By using the banner of human rights, they try to damage the image of our institutions with the malevolent goal of obstructing their participation in the fight against them and having an open field for their evil doing," Admiral Saynez said.
Do you want a villain who's just going to go out and do evil for evil's sake (meaning just be an ordinary villain, not be born evil and do evil for no reason).? Do you want a villain who everyone is just going to hate?
Therefore, at some point people who seek major changes must refuse to vote for the Lesser Evil, even though doing so may allow the Greater Evil to win, and thus harm the USA in the short run.
Is a place like Twitter (to choose an obviously successful and public platform) blameless if someone uses it for evil, or does it have a right – and a duty – to put its foot down?
