Iluwen
Chieftain
parachute4u said:The point is: They tried to be something different than Germany. But they failed. That is the difference to any group of people promoting any kind of ideas and succeeding, thus forming a line of tradition, that is called a civilization in a cultural-historical context.
They did have an impact, however. People were forced to say no to many of their ideas. Had they only had ideas, that are implemented in today's laws and constitutions, they would not have lost (or fought) that war.
PS There is no deed that is evil. And if you choose to call it evil, how can it be pale? - How can death be pale? How can agony be pale?
Yes, your points are well made. Only the chance of history discriminates between "civilization" and cultural/politival movement.
I do think it is possible to consider "degree of evil' as a matter of scale, at least, and possibly the amount to which any action could be seen to have beneficial effects as well. Ie, killing 100 people could be called "more evil" than killing 10, assuming all other aspects of the situation equal. Or, for example, killing someone to save someone else or prevent some disaster, vs killing someone for personal gain or no reason.
But I agree 100%. Good and evil are very subjective things. If more people bore that in mind in historical discussions, and stuck to what happened, rather than making value judgements about those events, there would be a lot more productive and educational history discussions going on in the world.