The Scales of Good and Evil: Part II

Cliff Pickover

Copyright 2000, 2001, 2002 by Cliff Pickover
If you liked this page, visit Cliff Pickover's main home page for more lists.
"The Scales of Good and Evil" is a trademarked term.

On the main web page on Good and Evil I presented a list of the Top Ten evil and good people of all time. The debate started on this page and continues below.

Please add your votes. Who would you like to see added to the list? What alterations would you make to the list or the ordering? Do the scales of good and evil balance?

my personal top five good people is
1. Siddhartha Gautauma
2. Karl Marx
3. Michael Collins
4. the current incarnation of the Dalai Lama
5. Mohandas Gandhi

Abraham Lincoln, born in 1809 and assassinated in 1865, was sincere in his desire to free the slaves. His debates with Judge Steven Douglas are legendary. To this day Lincoln is a symbol of integrity and honesty in our country. He was also a racist and believed only in the white race. On September 18, 1858 in Charleston in a debate against Douglas, Lincoln was asked how he felt about "negro citizenship" he replied, "I am not in favor of negro citizenship."[1] Lincoln was for freeing slaves and disbanding that evil institution of slavery, but he did not want "Negroes" in the country. During the mid-1800s, African-Americans were not wanted in the United States. Abolitionist wanted to free them, make them Christians and send them back to Africa. African-Americans were not considered to be on the same level as white Americans. Nevertheless, the fact that Lincoln freed the slaves, yet did not want them in the country does not mesh well with his being considered a great humanitarian. In addition to the Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln wrote a truly remarkable proclamation. The Emancipation Proclamation was written to free the slaves. However, he mentioned freeing the slaves in "states or designated parts of a state that people whereof shall be in rebellion against the United States shall be then, thenceforward and forever free."[2] The proclamation was truly a derogatory statement against the Southern states only. The Northern states were to free their slaves also. Some did and some did not. Earlier, in May 1862, Lincoln received a letter from the Headquarters of the Southern Army, which basically said Georgia, Florida and South Carolina slaves were set free.[3] However, Lincoln sent word back in a proclamation revoking that letter from the Southern Army. His reason was "not any other commander or person, has been authorized by the government of the United States to make a proclamation declaring the slaves of any state free...is altogether void"[4] Thus, Lincoln thought he could set slaves free when they were not part of his country, but the South could not set them free when the slaves were part of the Confederate States. Lincoln, Spokesman for White Supremacy Abraham Lincoln's legend is truly exaggerated. No other president has had so much written about himself. One might believe that Lincoln was a greater President than Thomas Jefferson or even George Washington. Although Lincoln was against slavery he was also against "Negroes". In the South, having "Negroes" in the country was never an issue. Unfortunately, much of what Lincoln stood for was opposed to Southern culture, and he personally was against the South. In another debate with Judge Steven Douglas, Lincoln himself shows one more reason why he should not be immortalized. On September 18, 1858 he had this to say:
I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black racesthat I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.[5]
So there stands Mr. Abraham Lincoln, a spokesman for White Supremacy! To be fair it must be pointed out that a many of Southerners and Northerners felt the same as Lincoln. But to immortalize the man who freed the slaves, and claim he was righteous or just, is wrong. By contrast, there were many in the South who did not own slaves and worked comfortably alongside African-Americans.
Any winning side in a war will usually be considered the moral and just side. The winners are marked as heroes for saving their side and even for saving (as well as conquering) the opposing side. The North was thought to have saved the American union. "They fought to save the American government. They fought to free the slaves." What this myth hides is the real reason the North went to war with the South. The North was trying to protect the Union, but the South was not part of this union during the war and shortly before the war.

---

From: mb

Dear Sir,

I find your list fascinating beyond belief. The diverseness of the recipients of the most evil and most good men and women to ever live show a broad knowledge of history and if not a great degree at least some degree of study. Although I think that a larger description of some people on the page would make it a better resource for students. Maybe birth and death dates and a larger description for Jesus and Adolph Hitler. I must admit I do find one fault with the page, Carl Djerassi on the same page with Jesus? I think not and Abraham Lincoln was a good man but his influence was nowhere near the scope of any one else on the list. I think you should reconsider his place. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely

Dr. mb

---

From: Alfred Lehmberg

Happened on your list regarding the top ten good and evil. Have a look at Chrispher Hitchens' book, "The missionary position, mother teresa in theory and practice" for citations on why she should be jerked right off your top ten good list... she's not bad enough to be added to your bad list (not quite) but she should certainly come off the good one.

One of the more minor points? Think about the kind of medical care she received when she got ill (and it was the finest) compared to what she provided to the sick and dying of Calcutta as a matter of institutional doctrine... the woman was just another evil religious fundamentalist, baptising Hindus and Moslems without their knowledge and against their will.

---

From: Rittergould

H.H., his real last name was Mudgett, was indeed an extremely evil person. He was certainly more enterprising and creative than the average serial killer. However, I suspect that he was included on your list due to the mistaken belief that he killed about 200 people. That figure is probably grossly inflated. Nobody really knows how many people he killed. Before he was executed he confessed to having killed 28 people.

I nominate King Leopold II of Belgium whose empire building schemes in the Congo resulted in the deaths of millions of Africans, an international scandal which has been largely forgotten, but not entirely so thanks to Adam Hochschild's excellent book, King Leopold's Ghost

---

From: "tenbear123"
Josef Mangela (Doctor Death)
WWII under Hitler. Experimented with twins. Tortured them to see how much pain they could take before they died.
Katy

---

From: "J.D."
Here are some thoughts I had in response to your web page.

> Why is it easier to think of evil examples than good ones?
The forces and influences of evil are currently thriving.
> Developing this list was not an easy task due to the complexity of human personalities and the fact that goodness and evilness depend on the perspective of the time.
I suggest that what is good and evil does not vary over time, just as light and dark. What may change over time is the influence of evil, and the human perception of what is evil. Some humans may even become at peace with forms of evil, thus opening the door for all kinds of atrocities. Evil may also draw strength from confusion over what is good or evil.

Evil may offer much truth. It is the last few percentage points of deception that is the key for evil to achieve its means. Evil can be successful, and can offer good solutions to real problems. Offered amidst the true solutions is the dark poison, masquerading as yet another solution.

For example, the tolerance that allows benevolence towards fellow humans despite their flaws is good. Evil would again preach tolerance, but with the hidden agenda of legitimizing that which advances the cause of evil. Ironically, evil could falsely represent good and condemn intolerance against something that harbors concealed evil, and thus breed intolerance against those who truly stand for good.

Evil might also favor us to believe that we are imperfect and thus necessarily evil. While we may be imperfect, we do have the power to seek the truth and goodness. Just as an athlete's game performance improves with practice, practicing good even down to seemingly small things helps to combat evil in the world. But practice works both ways. Evil will attempt to exploit every flaw to its advantage, and may have much patience. Without purposefully striving for goodness, a human may be an open target.

Kind regards,

- John

---

From: Liamror

GEORGE BUSH!!!!, Who ever was responsible for Red China and the rapes and killing of many Chinese people. (I know he is Japanese.)

---

From: "Mister Wade"

I couldn't help but feel sick when I read that Moses was on your list of good people. According to the Bible, he had ordered thousands of people to be killed. There are entire pages of the Bible that say nothing other than who to kill. This, of course, lead to fanatical murder for thousands of years in the name of God. If God were real, he would be the king of evil for commanding this. Most Christians think he is all loving, but if they paid attention to the Bible they would see that God's message is to love few and kill many.

---

From: Abnaki96

Add the piece of garbadge Mcveigh to the evil list. May he burn in hell for all he has done.

---

From: Folktribunen

Dear Mr Pickover

I usually don't bother to write and tell my opinion about things on the internet, but I must tell you that your discussion with the romanian Marius and the irish woman deb about Vlad Tepes is very unintelligent and ignorant from your side.

I cannot understand how you can call yourself Dr. and have such an ignorant and stupid approach to historical matters. I have read to little to know if Vlad Tepes is "evil" or "good". But I certainly know that if you want to know something about historical matters, you cannot go the cinema and look att Count Dracula. Why don't you read some books about the subject, and if you think you don't have the time you shouldn't make a statement about it.

Regarding Clinton, you said to Deb say: "I think the fact that you say Clinton is as evil as Hitler and as evil as the leader of the Spanish Inquisition makes your point very clearly. I suppose the six million Jews who Hitler gassed might not have agreed, but who can tell for sure? But forget the Jews. They can't talk because they died."

Well, I suppose that the countless Iraqi babies and women who were bombed during the Gulf war might not agree with you that Clinton is a good guy. Neither would the thousands of civilian serbs who were brutally bombed to death by your dear mr Clinton in the last "war of freedom".

I think that you americans should try to consider that other people also have an opinion about what you americans do. Maybe we europeans do not want you to bomb our cities, kill our woman and children and try to rule over governments with the help of your military powers.

I DO NOT say that Vlad is a good guy, for I am not familiar with the subject. But I do say that Bill Clinton is a very, very evil person and that the your american government is very very evil if I judge by your own definition of evil.

If you can justify Clintons and your governments actions against the arab people and the european peoples as something good, then you must understand that other people can justify their leaders actions as something good. Because Clintons actions when he is killing arab or european babies and women is not less evil than Vlads actions when (If?) he killed romanian babies and women.

By the way, if you do not understand this simple logic, I cannot understand how you can call yourself an intellectual and a Dr.

Best Regards Martin
My Reponse to Martin:

> Ref:  Your note of Sat, 05 May 2001 16:29:57 +0200
>
> Hi, as a follw up to my previous note, would you consider
> Clinton as evil as Hitler?
> The reason I ask is that I think it's important for me to
> learn from other people's perspectives.
>
> Thanks, Cliff

Hello Cliff

Yes you can add my opinion to your page.

To your other question, I must answer no. I think that Clinton as a person is much more evil than Adolf Hitler was. I do not have the time or patience to try to get you to understand me, because I have learned from your discussion with Marius that you will not listen to what I am saying. As a matter of fact, you will not even try to understand how I am thinking and reasoning.

As a tip: if you "americans" want to continue ruling the earth for another hundred years or more; try not to be so oversatisfied with yourself and so egocentric. This is neither a noble trait or a good strategy. Your behavior to the rest of the world will punish the whole of your people.

Regards

Martin

---

From: "Bonnie Marinaccio" so basically ivan the terrible was not terrible at all--he actually had an physical disfigure with his spine causing him to have high dosages of mercury in his body ( a form of medicine at the time) making him shake and barely speak. he didnt even rule, but had nobles run the country and do things for him

also ab lincoln raped his slaves lara

---

From: "Waterman, Mathew"



I think one of the most important things to consider when judging whether someone or whether an action is evil is in the rationalization. As seen in your conversations regarding Vlad the Impaler vs. Clinton, and, similarly, in many of the posts related to our own government, almost any action can be rationalized away. For example, some of the respondants said that Vlad's actions were, "necessary", or could not be understood today because that is what was done, "back then." The crux of the issue becomes intention.

Put it this way: No one wakes up in the morning and decides they are going to be evil. Every person on your "evil" list had some sort of rationalization for their actions. As many pointed out, Vlad and Hitler alike had the intention of doing good things for his countrymen while passing off the amorphous "others" as the enemy. Their methods were the part where they crossed the line. Likewise, each of us every day find ways to rationalize our unduly harsh or unforgiving actions. Now, on the other side of the coin, the people on the "good" list largely practiced forgiveness and tolerance. To them there was little rationalization for cruel, callous behavior.

Therefore, if one is to separate the "good" from the "bad" it is certainly not going to be an issue of black and white. Instead, it can be looked at as being more or less grey. Does this mean that Vlad should be considered "evil" because, though he allegedly did help some of his country's poor, he also tortured and murdered thousands and, more importantly, enjoyed it? Personally, I would say this does qualify him as an evil human being. Did Clinton lie to the country and act foolishly (...and in a soupbox moment: What leader hasn't?)? Of course. But does this put him on the level of Hitler? Certainly not. As I believe you mentioned at one point, would one rather be a Jew under Hitler's reign or one of the Americans 'insulted' by Clinton's behavior. Some realism is in order here.

My personal feeling is this: All of these people are human and will be falliable. The key question when judging anyone's actions is intention. While Lincoln may have also had the economic incentive on his side and Vlad had some countrymens' interests in mind, there is no way you could rationailize the two as being morally equal.

---

From: "tianmere"

Greetings, As I emailed earlier, I was thrilled with your "ESP" page. It was = terrific, so was the computer hard drive reading page [that one was a = terrifically sneaky display of HTML]. However, the more I read your = site, the more I realize just how English your sense of humor is. = You're almost as funny as PDQ Bach.

But, as for the top ten evil people...... Yes, Clinton does not fully = satisfy the definition of good. [So, that makes him either neutral or = evil. And, I don't think he's neutral.] He's not trustworthy, that's = for sure. And, only time will be able to tell if he really harmed the = world or not. I've heard that it takes about two years after a = president leaves office for everything to start taking effect, thus = throwing the public scorn on the next of office, when the proverbial = fecal matter has hit the rotary cooling device.

But, I'd like to nominate George Lucas for one of the modern really good = people. While he may not qualify for saint-hood, he definitely has = inspired hope and the desire to achieve in numerous young people. =20

Other great and wonderful people exist, but due to our capitalist = society, they aren't saleable. Bad, evil, illfortuned, etc can be = sensationalized, dramatized, and strewn out for weeks. Hatred is a = strong emotion that I'm sure has some instintucal survival traits = attached to it. Good, on the other hand, is comforting. Comfort is = something that is only noticed when it's missing. Heros are the stuff = of myths. In this day and age of glorified violence, the hero's actions = go unsung. And since they go unnoticed, there isn't any chance of them = becoming mythical. =20

Thanks for letting me ramble. As I get through more of your website, I = will probably feel compelled to write you more.

Have a great day! Donni

---

From: "Louise"

Hi Cliff,

I've been thinking about your good and evil lists and I agree it's harder to think of people who are good. I think your visitors who speculate about evil being more obvious and easier to define than good are right on the money.

So I tried to decide what was "good" if "bad" is killing folks and so forth, but I don't think killing people is always bad, for example perhaps in some contexts killing an individual might be considered good. And I think it's not so much the action of killing that is bad, but perhaps the effect on the population, ditto with other non-good acts. Perhaps the most evil acts are those which make us feel despairing, or that devalue life, the things that deprive our lives of beauty and transcendence.

And that's why the only actual candidate for "good" I could come up with (amongst a whole bunch of 'the guy who started the tulip craze'; 'whatshisname who brought chocolate to Europe's; 'that great composer guy.....Handel? Bach?' and so on) is .... I was going to say St Benedict, the gardening monk, who really started a lot of the way we think about gardens today, but as I was writing that it seemed to me that really gardens are an Arabic thing - but I do stand by the garden as a major force of good.

Louise

---

From: Mark Pokras

lenin could be another evil person

---

From: Pimphomieothe1st

i think you should but saddam hussain on your list

---

From: "Roger Herbert"

Am wholly surprised that Margaret Thatcher does not figure more highly. I suppose this is a US site, but she has not only caused misery in the UK but worldwide. She has caused wars, been Pinochet's advocate and her first job after being PM was promoting Marlborough cigarettes to Third World children. It seems to me it is easier to pin down acts of evil largely because good is EVERYWHERE and we take much of it for granted. However, I debate the whole idea of evil. I believe there is only love and fear. Bigotry comes from fear, evil acts and systems come from fear. There are good people and there are ***ked up people. Remember everyone was an innocent child at one point in their lives. No-one can say that a baby is evil! Ruth

---

From: Brian Leahy

On your 'Good and Evil' page, Adolf Hitler is often spelled "Adolph". I'm no historian, but I've always seen it spelled with an 'f' rather than a 'ph'. -BL

---

From: Sockmonkey2001 Marquis de Sade...now there was a twisted individual. Your list is very well done. As a fan also of your books, your work constantly continues to influence me help me grow in so many ways. Thank you for all your words.

Eric M. Stobie

---

From: "Aaron Saunders"

I would happen to, (like many others,) disagree with your list. For starters, I don't believe in the existence of good and evil. Two reasons: 1.) The Spooks-in-the-Sky-Swindle has yet to be confirmed, and apparently, that's what decides what is and what isn't good or evil. 2.) There are no concrete definitions or standards as to what good and evil are. However, whereas Right and Wrong are concerned, then I will agree that they exist, but only in the eye of the beholder.

However, I too, am going to have to object to this list. Here are my objections:

1. Martin Luther King - a closet Commie and pervert! Sound like a guy who deserves to be at the top of the "Good-guy list to you?"

2. Abe Lincoln - who obviously wasn't interested in the welfare of negroes, whatsoever, but rather in some idiotic agenda that would rivel those of today. He doesn't does deserve to be at the Top of the "Good-Guy" list for anything.

3. Jesus Christ - a Jewish comic book character, whose existence is not substantiated by history or by any archeological finds whatsoever. Does Thor, Odin and Loki deserve to be at the Top of the Good-guy List too?

4. Adolf Hitler - like it or not this Man has been one of the best damn friends to Western Civilization, during the 20th century. If people will actually READ - YES, READ - up on the actual history behind the 3rd Reich rather than swallow that atrocious garbage spewed by the media, then they may learn to appreciate the 3rd Reich for what it actually was rather than what some sicko from Hollywood's imagination makes it out to be.

5. Vlad Tepes - one of the most brilliant and legendary leaders of Eastern Europe of all time! This Man, too, crushed the threat of advancing Turks and was, genuinely, as one of your respondents' claimed A Peoples' Leader. His villiany is way too overrrated.

6. The Pope of all People... Quiet frankly, I don't care what Pope it is, these Spook-Diddlers do not deserve the grace of a brown-nosing media.

7. WHERE THE HELL'S CLINTON ON THE BAD GUY LIST?

8. Moses - this guy was some psychotic, babbling moron who would rivel some nutcases, such as Jones, Manson or Koresh.

Conclusion: If these are your idols and foes, you must be either one gullible chump or some nutcase. Which, I don't know you tell me.

---

From: "Manon Masteric" Dear Cliff I propose you to add to your list of "evil" persons Radovan Karadzic, the lidership of bosnianserbs during the war in Bosnia (1992-1995) who wanted to exterminate the muslim population in Bosnia and Herzegovina. More information on that you can find on

http://www.wcw.org/icty/suspects/Radovan_Karadzic.html

or

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/karadzic

Good luck in your future work

Manon from Bosnia

---

From: AnnieB007

NAPOLEON SHOULD DEFINITELY BE RANKED BETTER THAN LINCOLN OR KING. NAPOLEON ESTABLISHED INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND FREE ENTERPRISE FOR ALL OF US. HE DESTROYED THE OPPRESSIVE POWER STRUCTURES IN EUROPE THAT OPPOSED THESE CONCEPTS, AND EVEN EXECUTED MANY WHO UPHELD OPPRESSION OF THE INDIVIDUAL. THEN HE REALIZED THAT THE PEOPLE WERE TO IGNORANT TO REALIZE THEIR NEW FOUND POWER, AND SEEING THE CORUPTION OF GOVERNMENT, HE OPPRESSED THE PEOPLE'S RIGHTS--WHILE STILL TEACHING THEM ABOUT IT--UNTIL THE PEOPLE EXERCISED THEIR RIGHTS EVEN AGAINST HIM. HE DIED DISGUSTED WITH THE IGNORANCE OF THE PEOPLE, BUT GLAD THAT THEY FINALLY ROSE TO THE TASK OF THEIR OWN WORTH.

---

From: B. M.

Hi cliff,

I just stayed somewhat longer on your site and viewed the good/evil top tens... My personal opinion is that there is really no "big" or "small" evil or less or more, only the impact of certain deeds on "the world" are bigger as others differs... And maybe if I ste pon an ant purposely to destroy it and to feed my hate or anger the impact is much bigger than I ever can imagine... ;) We only see what we believe we see (I'm not sure, but I feel that this might be a quote from someone), anyway the impact of people like Hitler, Stalin seems very big... but maybe it was something small that happened in their youth that lead them to what their lives have become... maybe it was something what happened thousends of years before they were ever born that lead us into existence and made/make us do "bad" things... (excuse my poor english by the way, i hope you understand what i'm trying to say here)

Personally I have a strong feeling that their are very powerful people (probably very rich, old banking families, nobles, former kings and queens maybe) of wich most of them we never hear and who we will never see nor hear of... people who can make or break a whole nation (lead it to war, destroy it) Hitler and people like him are maybe mere puppets in a big game of chess... Ok, maybe this sounds paranoid but if you check on what happens to people and how easy they can be manipulated I think there are some really bad motherfuckers (excuse me) over in this category of powerful, rich mass media controllers and manipulating puppetmasters... it's like most religions wich were used most of the time as a means of manipulating people, now it has become money... who doesn't believe in money anymore (well, everybody here in Holland does, and I think it's the same in the US)

So... I don't have any names for you, but what I'm trying to say is that it is not always the rude puppet wich is the most evil, most of the time it is his or her boss... like with dogs, if you raise'em well the chances that they will be nice are bigger than if I kick my dog veryday and don't feed him, yell at him, etc... one day he bites a little child... who's the evil then??? me or the dog?? you tell me;)

---

From: JOEL BECKER

YOU SHOULD INCLUDE FARAH VEST MY EX-GIRLFRIEND, SHE WAS PURE EVIL! THE DEVIL'S DAUGHTER!

---

From: "Bruce Burns" Cliff,

I must disagree with your inclusion of Moses in your "Good" list. = Besides the question of whether Moses, and incidently Jesus Christ too, = ever existed, a thorough reading of the Pentateuch, the 5 books of the = Old Testament that are attributed to Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, = Numbers and Deuteronomy) clearly show that Moses was a murderer (Exodus = 2:12), ordered the murder of prisoners (Numbers 31:17), ordered the = keeping of female prisoners who were virgins (Num 31:18), led mass = killings of women and children (Deuteronomy 2:34), ordered killings = (Deut 13:15) etc.....In other words you would not want Moses babysitting = your children or get into a religious disagreement with him.=20 Sincerely, Bruce

---

From: edward elias

Hello!

You included Ben Yoshua aka Jesus of Nazareth and Moses on the top 10 "good people". I dont think they deserve to be there because:

1. Jesus in the New Testament prove to be a racist when he refused to heal the son of the Greek woman.

2. If we are to believe the New Testament, Jesus has promised to come back to enjoy the death of countless millons of people who have not accepted his word. Read Revelations

In regards to Moses:

1. If we are to believe the Old Testament, then Moses is a Genocidal maniac camparable to Hilter and others. He murders innocent children, just because he does not agree with the politics or religion of their parents. (see Exodus)

2. Murders a security officer in cold blood. (read Exodus)

3. Murders people of his own group because they choose another religion. (read Exodus and the Murders of Aaron by Moses comand. Read the definition of genocide, and this qualifies as so.

Therefore, I dont think that is scholarly to include this caracters in your list. I would appreciate an answer.

Sincerely

Rev Elias Bernard

---

From: "digits"
Hello Professor Pickover

A few things about the good and evil list.

Wouldn't it be better to run the Good/Evil list either totally democratically with a voting page, or to make it completely your work by doing all the research yourself. By taking bits and pieces from email submissions, you will be heading the advice of some liars and biased folk and ignoring the occasional verifiable submission. This hybrid between the two just seems unworkable.

You also included no real criteria for determining evil. Most evil in mind and intent? Most evil in utilitarian result?

There is also no real criteria for determining good. Lincoln did free the Southern slaves, but probably not out of moral conviction if you've read all his speeches esp. pre-Civil War. Mother Teresa, while a wonderful woman didn't affect the world nearly as much, but was undoubtably more devoted to the suffering masses.

And what in the world in Eichman doing up there? While he did his job effectively he neither masterminded the plan, nor carried it out with glee. Just sort of a plodding success. As Arendt said a shearly banal evil. Without him the Holocaust would have probably been the same, there just would have been someone else either more zealous, or just as determined as Eichman. While Eichman may be more relevent and understandable, if frightening, I fail to see how he is "more evil" in either a utilitarian results-based, or kantian decision-based ethical system.

I just don't see what you are trying to accomplish with this list

ps. and if you need student researchers next summer, I am a 3rd year physics major at Calvin College...

thanks, D. B.-Clarke

---

From: "Daoist Raver"

This e-mail will be a bit long, so I apologize in advance.

As to your first question, my friend sent me the link. As to your second: well, there are some parts where the typography and design could be better, and the spelling and grammar, but the content is pretty darn good the way it is. Also to add to your list of Evil Persons (funny how so many of them are national leaders, eh?) - Enver Hoxha, ruler of Albania from the 40's to the 90's. I can't really go into too much detail here, but he was rather evil. Slobodan Milosevic (ethnic cleansing) also comes readily to mind - he seems far more evil than say, Saddam Hussein, who is not a particularly nice fellow either. On the list of Good, I would nominate Buckminster Fuller, who gave tirelessly of himself to try and bring new ideas that would be in his own words "omni-advantageous", and tried to prove, through the World Game, how evil harms us all.

"My goal in conducting this little demonstration was to emphasize how easily we can be fooled and how great our will is to believe in the spiritual, the paranormal, and phenomena beyond science. I hope this simple test reinforces the need for skeptical thinking when evaluating claims of the paranormal."

- Right. There's enough weirdness that exists within the realm of the verifiable without having to make things up. I am into Information Theory right now, which is leading me towards some interesting interpretations of the quantum non-locality situation, a merging of the many-worlds and copenhagen interpretations. I am also a daoist (as was Niels Bohr, one of my personal idols), and it bothers me a bit that people misidentify that philosophy (well, as laid out in the Dao De Jing at least...), assuming that it makes untestable paranormal claims. It doesn't, and is not incompatible with the scientific method at all. It is merely a set of observable patterns of nature and human behavior. Perhaps not as precise as those discovered by years of experimentation but a good guideline as to how the universe seems to behave on a macro-level. I think that most of these critics never bothered to actually study the text but just lump it together with 'eastern religion'. I am very happy to see skepticism in others on the other hand, and I agree with your statement. There may well be a god in the machine, but if there is, we must have some restraint in what we can claim about it. The exclusive or may not be broken. Glad to get your response.

ad-m

"It is not the logic of the universe which is fuzzy, but the perception of it." ________________________________ "Both knowledge and experience are real, but reality has many forms, which seem to cause complexity.

By using the means appropriate,(reason and observation) we extend ourselves beyond the barriers of such complexity, and so experience the Tao. " - Tao Te Ching, Chapter 1

---

From: "Liza Simonova"

Jesus should not be on the list since it never was proved beyond doubt that he actually existed perhaps it was a story to convert the Egypstians to christianity? and what says the story had not been told and told and retold and changed in such a way that his possible mistakes had been eliminated and good deeds exaggerated?

also, if you really need someone for your evil list, try Marquis de Sade he vafoured torture for his sexual pleasure as well, and wrote books (well... those big roll thingies of a coupla meters long anyway) on it finding something on him should not be hard, put his name into any search engine and you should have enough hits

oh, and put Ford and who-ever else invented the car on the evil list too.. so many people died in agony because of that! (if you excuse the bad of that because it's done so much good, consider the environment damage too and if you still excuse the bad parts, you must excuse Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, Vlad, and more folks as well.)

---

From: NDABritti

I think I'm on to you, though I might be totally wrong. Were some of the people and their accompanying explanations, such as Mose for concieving of the wonderful invention we call the weekend and Abraham Lincoln for freeing "the" slaves (which should be the American slaves; besides, he really didn't free them), included only to be provoke responses? If they were, it was a brilliant success, as is indicated by the massive amount of responses you recieved!

Dominic -

---

From: "Phill"

Very interesting site you have. Im glad you put teh evil first and the Good last. It makes a welcome relief.

I would like to nominate Dr Harold Shipman (Dr Death) for entry into your Evil Gallery.=20 Recent (June 2001) estimates by the UK Police suggest a kill total of upto 1,200!!

http://www.terryhayden.free-online.co.uk/murder/serialkillers/drharold.htm

Phill

---

From: "Christopher Fingerhut"

I think, that Ossama Bin Laden should be added to the "evil" list. Even = if it isn't certain, that he had anything to do with the atacks on new = york and washington, he has done enough in his own country, to stick him = among people like Hitler, Stalin and the others. He supports the Taliban = in Afghanistan with loads of money, weapons etc. Also he is supposed to = have said, that he is going to destroy all religions other than the = moslems. This man is definetly a person, you can call evil.

---

From: Litsigns

Osama Bin Laden. For obvious reasons.

---

From: Jennifer MacKnight

Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Jerry falwell, Pat Robertson

---

From: "Lori Y. Downie"

I think I speak for millions of Americans--radical-Islamic militant groups should be added to your "evil list".

---

From: BritBrat830

I think Charles Manson is worthy of the top 100 evil people list... what a horrible man.

Thank you. -

---

From: no.one.cares

I believe the Armenian slaughter was led more by Enver Pasha (there were 3 in charge but he was the most notable), the revolutionary leader of new Turkey that helped them survive the first world war. They likely would have been destroyed were it not for him, and in turn he rounded up all Armenians and killed them rather then sort through who was docile and who was dangerous. War has no morals.

As to the definition of Evil/Good which you provided on another page, it still uses morality within it, another debatable argument. In order to simplify for argument, I modified the definition to evil being anything which culls human progress to some attainable goal, and good that which spurns it. It is fairly oblique in this sense, but covers what I think is necessary. Some may include all life, or all animal life, but I say unquestionably that humans stand out as the caretakers of these morals, so for them to exist humans must come first.

Now an issue with progress is its seemingly indeterminability at a given time, so I resolve this by making it whatever helped cause progress up to a given moment, so yes, the status of good/evil in people will change as history writes itself as we've so seen throughout the ages (one huge example is the contempt Christopher Columbus was held under in the 80's where as he was a hero in ages before).

In this light, Clinton was quite probably worse than Hitler, and Bush worse than both. Hitler, despite all his heinous acts, motivated the world to vast technological/biological gains. Atomic physics would have been much slower in gains without him. He ended the biggest worldwide recession, and actually forced the democratic world to unite.

Bill Clinton on the other hand was the first president ever to leave office with one last detrimental maneuvre (all other presidents, except the dead, have left their term with an unpopular bill or move that is beneficial in principle to the economy). He esentially blew our economy with energy regulations, and avoided opening the Yucca mountain or helping alleive the ban on nuclear power plants in the US. Plus many various acts during his presidency which led to a general biterness in the nation. These however, might turn around as the nation sees need to fix problems, whence his blundering will become a gateway to change. Then he would be considered good again.

Of course if there is no goal or Omega point to human endeavors, this becomes potentially meaningless to, and perhaps the definitions should be good: that which best ameliorates human pain, evil: that which increases it.

Otherwise good and evil and endlessly disputable ideas and it proves an excercize in futility to debate them.

Cory Przybyla

---

From: Renee Simon

BIN LADEN

---

From: "Rodger K. Johnston"

GOOD- Jesus Christ , died for the sins of every person and through him we have life eternal- John 3:16

(giver of life, love, justice, truth and spirit, hope, charity, faith, happiness, peace, joy, our savior......the Alpha and the Omega

EVIL-SATAN- father of all lies . He has worked on every person in every place and in all ages, to secure their destruction. All evil comes from him.

(death, suffering, torture, hate, crime, ..........time grows short for him

---

From: "Michael Montez"

First of all I was greatly intrigued by your good and evil list finding it veryinteresting but a bit vague as to why some where on the list and others were not. You continue to argue the Vlad Tepes place and may or may not be correct according to our friends in Romania (this I will study for myself) and left out people such as Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer... and the rest of the 'serial killer' group whose actions could seriously fall into a very evil catagory.

As for good how about FDR, and his new deal which created aid to assist americans in need during the great reccession an dustbowl here in the US.

How about leaders who manage to avoid war and find a peaceful solution in the face of eminant threat such as Nelson Mandella, or those who strive everyday to make a difference such in the lives of others in a positive manner like Jimmy Carter with his Habitats for Humanity campaign alive and well today.

To do great good is not always noted and is often overlooked especially in today's society where the standard in the media is, "If it bleeds, It leads". Could this not be considered eveil as well..... In the way that it is preferable to fill telivision with sensational horror and devistation to millions rather than try to enlighten and uplift. Would that make Ted Coppel evil (no offense Ted)??

As to how you spoke to Deb and Marius, I found that a bit ingratiating and do agree that to judge those of the past by today standards is arrogant, though unintentionally I'm sure but to be a fair Devil's Advocate I cannot argue with you either that yes Vlad's way of punishment, 'hobbies' and dining ambiance were quite appaling hence yes = he belongs on the list but as to where becomes the question.

Lastly please forgive me but this has been bugging me terribly since = I read your exchange page, so If I may.....Ahem....... President George = Bush was in office during the gulf war the older. In fact President = Clinton had our military reduced and gave more to educational programs = than the previous two presidents.=20

Yes he did make a very big mistake which he will probably will regret = his entire life but does that make him evil. Yes the poor bastard lied, = probably in hopes to save what little love was left in his marriage, and = to save his daughter further humiliation. Hell yah, he down played it = and tried to imply he did not feel it was sex.... Mrs. clinton had him = dead to rights and he new it, he tried to save his proverbial butt = anyway he could, personally I feel for the guy because his legacy as = president will now and forever be a stain on a blue party dress. No when it comes down to it Cliff evil and good are nothing more than = ones perspective and due to the 'Norm' most of your list would be = inarguable but thank our lucky stars for the diversity offered = throughout our world or else i would not have found out that Vlad Tepes = may or may not have been the monster I thought him to be and is even = revered in his homeland for things our sensationalist country had = forgotten to tell us about.

In any case thank you for hearing my ranting and thank you for such a = very interesting perspective on your website

---

From: "Pedersen"

What an intriguing compilation. The evil people are much more interesting to read about than the good people. perhaps it's an instinctive interest acquired from violent chimp-like ancestors?

My nominee for evil person: God/Yahweh/Jehovah. Most people believe God exists and is real in some sense of the word. The God of the Bible did many evil things, not the least of which was creating evil itself, in the form of fallen angel "Satan". God-given free will resulted not only in the Devil, but in all these evil people on your list. God also destroyed all life on Earth, with the exception of the Ark inhabitants, via a global flood, he killed great numbers with pestilence, he toyed with his follower's emotions, such demanding Abraham kill his son, etc etc.

April

---

From: Lawrence

Subject: countries bad or bad leaders?

I think Nanking and Nazi Germany brings up difficult question, are some countries more evil than others. Is it just bad regimes or bad people in power, or are the people more evil (genetically or culturally) Hard to believe America or Great Britain could ever do what Nazi Germany did. Optimists will say it's just product of bad leadership or bad regime, but most people are good. However hard to believe this about Germany = (with it's concentration camps or Japan with its Nanking etc. Maybe = answer is humanitiy is basically bad - that may be easier for me to = believe. If you beleive a country of people are more evil than another = - does that make you a racist. What are your feelings? If countries can be bad than it makes you feel better using A Bomb to = accomplish your goal. Might doesn't make right, but if right has the = might why not use it. Herr Hill thought German's weren't bad or worse than Americans, just a = bit misguided. That "Nazi Germany" behaviour could occur in USA for = example if bad leaders in place and not stopped, or certain conditions = arose. (the we're all equal theory) LP

---

From: artstatistict

hands down..... Osama Bin Ladin

---

From: "Beth M"

I think Mohammed should be on your good list, especially these days, to remind people that Islam was created as a peaceful religion. Malcolm X should also be on it.

 

As for the person who said Jesus should not be on the good list, I think her name was Liza, if you're going to say that, you would also have to ask to take Buddha off among other so called "unproven" persons. Although there is actually a lot of proof he existed, even if he didn't exist, the ideas surrounding his "believed" existence are enough to put his name on the list. The same goes for Buddha and others like them.<

---

From: Nick Poole

I do not agree Ghandi should be on the top ten good people. He encouraged the Indians to rebel against the British during WWII. = This was very harmful to the Allied war effort, not simply the British. It seems therefore he preferred the tyranny of Japan and we all know what they were like then, don't we? Massacres in Nanjing, hospitals in HK & Singapore etc etc. =A0 Nick Poole - Hong Kong

---

From: Pedro Luiz Gazoni

Dear Cliff, Having first gone through other less controversial aspects of your site probably helped me on checking this link with a little less prejudice (i think, i still am not sure if a thought can be totally or even deprived of any form of prejudice, my first intuition is that it is impossible, but that's the subject of a completely diverse discussion). I do not really want to go into the question if either Vlad, Clinton or even Hitler for that matter are evil or not. My point here is that in some contexts this kind of behavior can be justified to some people. You probably has read The Prince by Machiavel. The book is sort of a rulers manual and in many instances it advocates the use of violence (including murder) to better serve your loyal subjects. Thus, in the context of the book, just to give one example, its not only justifiable for the emperor to kill, but it is mandatory for him to do so, because if he does not his people will suffer greater evils and he will not be performing his task to the best of his ability. Maybe that's the message the romanians are trying to get across to you. Of course, these things are hard to measure, was it necessary for Vlad to go to such level of atrocities to defend and protect his country? Who knows? He did it because he felt like it was necessary or because he liked it? Who knows? You may say that those are arguments from people that are only trying to see things from one side (full of prejudice, etc). But as you saw for yourself, even though you did not anticipate it, in the eyes of a lot of people yours was a list full of prejudice too. My point here is that for such matters it is hard if not impossible to create an impartial scale. And no I do not regard majority consensus as always being a fair form of judgement, some other requirements have to be fulfilled to make that assumption true (Symetrical information etc). I guess this is the sort fo subject that gave Descartes a lot of nights without sleep - so much for objective reasoning.

I do not know if you are going to be able to make any sense of my digressions here, but i felt compelled to write.

Regards, Pedro

---

From: "Brent Farch"

I found your # 10 choice for good to be a personal choice, the man may have done a good thing for women. Just becuase he was an intellegent man who discovered the makeings of a pill dose not mean that he was a good man. I do agree with what you stated about ending endless childabuse cases and such regardless, what if he did it all for money or personal gain who really knows. (just a thought)

I am sure people have e-mailed you about uncle binny but what about Men like Noreaga, Paul Bernardo(& wife), Sadam Hussien (mostly for useing mustard gas on his own people), The leader of the Jonestown cult mass = suicide of over 2,000 people or even that nut heavensgate boy Richard = Applegate.

Enough dising your site, dispite my last two paragraphs I think your site is dope, Buddah is one of my personal idols, and you even gave me a education whith some of your picks, you really did your looking around = before making your choices that's obvious, Hey as I am writing this I = can't remember any women on the evil side and on the good side only = Mother Theresa but what ever I don't care about that just another.

---

Subject: Religion is the source of all evil!

There was an article in the Iranian site about how if it wasn't from religion, likes of Ben Ladin wouldn't exist. She wrote that no "Atheiest" would ever crash a plane to a building, etc, etc. Here is a nice response to it!

=========================================================

Atheists killed more

I have to disagree with the premise behind the commentary by Setarah Sabety and state that atheists are to blame for more deaths and wars in the last century than the religious ["Anthrax of the masses"]. I can't recall Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge being to big on God during their little fiasco in Cambodia. Or maybe Stalin and his politburo when they creatively killed of millions of Ukrainians.

Hitler and friends dabbled in the occult but were atheists for the most part. Mao and his revolutionary compadres were responsible for the biggest massacre and forced starvation in recorded history. The North Vietnamese didn't hold prayer breakfasts and the gruesome Albanian socialist party didn't go to confession or celebrate ramadan.

But that was just the last century, lets look back a little further. Julius Caesar said he seriously doubted the existence of the gods, maybe that helped him plan the enforced genocide of 2 million Gaul's. Kublai Kahn though semi-enlightened didn't really favor any particular religion, and ordered the wiping out of whole cities. And how about the bloody french revolution and it's reign of terror? Choc full of atheists, no religious allowed. Even bloody old Napoleon wasn't religious and often fought the clergy.

In fact when you take a step back and look at the whole picture of human history you find more people were murdered by atheists than all other belief systems combined.

Sincerely,

Edwin Duthie

---

From: "nicholaus smith"

How could you rate all of those people on your top ten evil list? Obvious ly your not to interested in all of those disgusting people who enjoy the torture of young children. You only have one person in which you actuall y typed about. Gilles De Rais the guy who preferred to take young boys an d sodomize them before and after decapitation. That is so evil and disgus= ting. Even the thought of that just brings tears to my eyes. Now tell me = how all the people who are on your list even amount to the evilness of th= at. There are so many people in this world who are so much more evil then= some that not even you or I can catagorize them. Evil to me is not so s= imilar to your thoughts of evilness. Children in this life time are our f= uture and our future is taken away from us by torture for the pleasure of= another soul who does not even deserve to live. Try to recognize all the= evil that people hold in their pleasure. This goes on day by day and wil= l never be stopped. Now that is evil. Now don't get me wrong the people t= hat you have listed are in deed evil but not evil enough to me. To me eve= ry one has evil in them even if there evil is not recognized it is hidden= like a secret another soul in the closet waiting to be discovered by th= e world today. That is evil. =20 Cryst= al S. =20 -

---

From: "Phil Campagna"

Valerie (practicing witch) principal of a catholic school. Has been a known liar cheat and other unmentionables

---

From: "Mina"

To webhost,

I do not agree with Genghis Khan being on the list of most evil men. Yes he did awful things, but so have everyone else in every other war.I am from England and my name is Mina.I am a historian and I would like to share my infomation on Genghis Khan with you.

Genghis Khan was a ruler of his people. I mean in a way of fairness and and justness. He treated his army with great kindness and never moved from one place until every man in his army down to the most unimportant soldier was fed. He only wanted to bring good to his people and live in peace away from intruders. He was often seen as an assasin, which cannot be deinied lightly, but a story I read up once is quite interresting.

An English soldier was at war with the Mongols and he was knocked out in battle. His army had left him for dead, and he was left in the middle of unknown terratory, a desert. I travelled for miles for water, but found none.He passed out were he stood from dehydration. He awoke in a camp, surounded by Mongol warriors. He knew he was dead from were he sat. Then the man himself, Genghis Khan walked in the tent. The soldier coward under his gazed and awaited his death. Genghis Khan ordered something to his guards, and they brought the soldier food and drink. Genghis Khan watched the soldier eat and drink quietly. Then suddenly, Genghis Khan began to speak to him in English. The soldier quickly found out Genghis was a learned man and was very, VERY clever. After a week or so, Genghis Khan was allowing the soldier to walk around his camp unautharised. The soldier was looked after until he was well again. He became great friend s with the mongols, Until..

Genghis Khan was planning another attack against the English. The soldier felt out of place. He couldnt betray Genghises kindness, but couldnt betray his own country. Genghis Khan took the soldier out to the hills one night and told him the story of the Lion and the mouse. Enemys can become friends, but will always have their diffrences. Genghis Khan shook the soldiers hand and said, see you in hell.

The soldier resigned from the army and travelled back to England in honur of Genghis.

That stroy was based on fact, it actually happened.

I hope this helps, Yours, Mina

---

From: "Geoff McIntosh"

Hey,

You should move Lincoln to the "evil" side since he helped destroy the U.S. Republic and helped destroy our country. We didn't fight the Civil War over slavery...that's basic history. Also, FDR should be added since his dictatorial style contributed to the overblown evil government we have today and he was an admirer of that murderer Stalin. How about Woodrow Wilson whose interventionist political style is still in use today and is pretty much directly repsonsible for the widespread hatred of America found all around the globe? He also gave us the Federal Reserve and another Income Tax (Lincoln gave us the first income tax AND the first use of unconstitutional fiat money...more reasons to add that jerk to the evil list).

Now you can add Bush and Ashcroft too...as well as most of the Congressmen and Senators currently in Washington. With the passage of the PATRIOT act we've now decended further into tyranny.

And finally, add to the "evil" list all of the proponents of gun control. By making laws that keep firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens they've made the streets more dangerous for all of us and have helped to turn this country into a nation of victims rather than responsible citizens who can take care of themselves.

"No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Gilmer, 1816. ME 15:24

---

From: JFNRNA

Jack the ripper

---

From: "Catherine Napoli-Cohen" <>

Just found your site looking up Antebe.

I'topure you've received this email a million times, but we should put Osama bin Ladan at the top of the evil list. What most disturbs me about him (not what I find most repulsive, which is obvious, but most disturbing) is the look in his eyes. It in not a look of fierce evil or hate. In fact it is kind and almost loving and comforting. Seriously, if you just saw the eyes, you would not realize they were the eyes of The Devil himself. It is that, the ability to look so innocent (and gain so many followers by looking that way) that makes him more evil. Because nothing in him even remotely acknowledges the wrong. In evil people you see evil in their eyes because a part of them still knows they are evil. In bin Ladan, he is the devil truly because no part of him believes in evil. It is all good (the destruction) in his mind.

---

From: fahlawi81

I dont know if you will read this message and if you're the sensative type then stop reading after the next full stop.

You have got to be the worlds biggest hypocrite or the worlds biggest idiot. You put a scale for evil and good by asking yourself who you would rather or rather not be in a room with? In the list of evil you put Adolf Hitler but not Winston Churchil who probably infinitely times worse than Hitler. Need I remind you how after the germans accidentaly bombed an english civillian target Hitler apologized but all Churchill did was start a wave of bombing civillian targets which continues today in modern warfare not to mention how Churchill hoped that german U-boats would target american ships killing civillians onboard to force the states into the war early.

As for all the people who were responsible for the irradication of Jews. You must be a Jew because I dont see any Jews up on your list for perfectly engineering two world wars, I asure you there arent a lacking of any names. What about Herzl, But Hell how about Ariel Sharon He is still alive.

What about every american president since the states got its independance from persecution only to persecute rather obliterate the indians who were responsible for helping the first pilrims survive. And nowadays the states condems Iraq and north Korea for developing weapons of mass destruction while turning a blind eye toward Egypt and Israel and the CIA.

The above are just examples of the inconsistencies of your list.

There is no reletive position to good and evil if nor is there a maagnitude of good or evil. If its good its good and if its evil its evil. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilian cities the states killed civillians therefore that was an evil act get with the logic behind it or stay behind a physics book.

---

From: RFoor76

Texas serial killer Dean Corll most certainly belongs somewhere on the top 100 "Evil" list. This sick monster liked to lure young boys to his home with promises of candy and drugs. When they passed out from sniffing glue and paint fumes, he would strap them to his "torture board" and commit the most unspeakable atrocities upon them. He would insert long thin rods of glass into their urethras and then snap the rod in two, leaving the end of the tube in the childs penis to torture him unceasingly until he was finally allowed to die. Sometimes he would simply chew on their genitalia or bite off their testicles. Other times he would sodomize them with huge 17-inch dildos and even baseball bats. He would finally end their suffering - sometimes DAYS later - by strangling them, shooting them in the head or beating and kicking them to death. He killed 27 boys in only 3 years. An excellent book on this case is "The Man with the Candy: The Story of the Houston Mass Murders" by Jack Olsen http://www.crimelib rary.com/serial11/corll/ I find it hard to believe that some here (such as Carol C. and Amanda W) think Mao Tse-tung doesn't belong on the evil list. He easily ranks up there with Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot as one of the bloodiest despots of the 20th century. Let's examine WHY Mao belongs on this list, and at the very top:

Mao's bloody "land Reform" campaign - According to atrocitologist R.J. Rummel, "For a population of about 500,000,000 peasants, ...around 7,500,000 were murdered." - China's Bloody Century P.222

Mao's cultural genocide in Tibet - "Tibetans were not only shot, but also were beaten to death, crucified, burned alive, drowned, mutilated, starved, strangled, hanged, boiled alive, buried alive, drawn & quartered and beheaded." - The Black Book of Communism p.544 According to the Tibetan Government-in-exile, around 1.2 million Tibetans have died as a direct result of the Chinese brutal occupation...

Mao's "Laogai" forced labor camps - "tens of millions of "counter-revolutionaries" passed long periods of of their lives inside the prison system, with perhaps 20 million dying there." - The Black Book of Communism p. 464

Various quotes from Mao: "What's so unusual about Emperor Shih Huang of the Chin Dynasty? He had buried alive 460 scholars only, but we have buried alive 46,000 scholars. In the course of our repression of counter-revolutionary elements, haven't we put to death a number of counter-revolutionary scholars? I had an argument with the democratic personages. They say we are behaving worse than Emperor Shih Huang of the Chin Dynasty. That's definitely not correct. We are 100 times ahead of Emperor Shih of the Chin Dynasty in repression of counter- revolutionary scholars." - China's Bloody Century p. 8-9

One Chinese general who protested that there were too many Chinese soldiers in Tibet was sent back to China in disgrace. Then there was another general who told Chairman Mao that so many Tibetans had been arrested there was not enough prison accommodation for them. Mao replied: "Don't worry. Even if you have to imprison the whole population, we'll find enough prisons." - Tears of Blood: A Cry for Tibet p. 85 In official 1948 study materials concerning "agrarian reform", for example, Mao Tse-tung, the undisputed ruler of the party and thus of the country in these years, instructed cadres that "one-tenth of the peasants [about 50,000,000] would have to be destroyed." - China's Bloody Century p. 223

---

From: "Justin Gibson"

I was very impressed by you're back ground and history on this page! I've just got a few comments and suggestions if you'd give me a minute, first , =20 for evil people would you consider Jack the ripper? I mean his body count was not that high, certainly not in the millions, not even in the hundre ds, but the utter atrocity in which he carried out his killings still pal es the works of mass murderers today! Should evil just reflect pure numbe r of horrors or the evil person's actual intent? And where's Cotton Mather, The sadistic leader of the Salem witch trails ? He was a very evil one, if you ask me. Would Cortez count? After all, h e is respocible (pretty much directly) for the extermination of a whole r ace (the Aztecs) Furthermore I also have a problem with putting Lincoln on the list, you k new he was a huge racist, hated the blacks and only freed them because he said "I have no desire to live with them or by them, and given to their own designs without the guidance of the white man, they will only result in poverty and criminality" (or something close to that) and because of p olitical pressure, and of course the second half of the Emancipation Proc lamation was to send all blacks back to Africa, but this was never carrie d out, because Lincoln kind of got killed. And further Martin Luther king was a big supporter of the communists and got a big chunk of his campaign money from the communist party, he talked a good talk, but I don't believe that being in bed with Americas greates t enemy (at the time) would constitute as a good deed. (look it up) Than k you for you're time. And again, you have an excellent sight!

---

From: Trevor Oxborrow

Cliff,

I have enjoyed reading some of your pages. However, the Gang of Four did not include Mao Tse Tung. It included his widow Jiang Qing and three young Shanghai politicians: Zhang Chunqiao, Wang Hongwen, and Yao Wenyuan.

---

From: "jason k"

Hi Mr. Pickover,

i'm sorry to say I have not read any of you books as of yet though i surely will. However, I have looked at your website and it is, without doubt, the most interesting page I have come across. There is one thing in particular that I think you may want to highlight now. On your Top Ten list of Evil guys you have some correspondance from folks who believe that Bill Clinton was/is more evil than Vlad the = Impaler, Hitler, etc. At first, I thought this was insignificant in = light of the small numbers these folks represent, their seeming = emotionalism, weak command of facts. Now, however, in the wake of Sept. = 11, I think the mentality and attitudes of these people should be called = attention to independently of the Evil list. There is without a doubt a psychology of anti-Americanism that warrants = investigation and your correspondance on the evil list may offer some = rare insights. Maybe you could get in touch with these people again and ask them their = opinion on the WTC attack? There are other variations of lists and = forums that might be interesting in this regard. Thanks for your time, jk

---

From: VladiFab

Thank you for your work.

Of course everything is in the eye of the beholder. But even when 2 peoples or 2 countries disagree, one think one was good and the other the opposite, an objective and rational eye should judge. Recognized and ever free-thinking and re-thinking morality should put red lines and not patriotism. So when somebody is killing, systematically, deliberately, painfully on purpose and with terrorizing intention and acts, it is bad. Good purpose can be bad as well. But the degree, like in a crime will be different. Mistakes are done in humanitarian ways, only when discussed will we be abble to try not to do them again. (unfortunately new mistakes will arise, we look only at a problem too close, we should look further, to see all the consequences, the other dimensions of it).

I didn't understand why you explain for everyone of your evil the causes you judge him as bad and not with Hitler. This is quite desinformation. Don't you have description of Hitler and co. killings and tools. Don't you have numbers ? communists, handicapped, homosexuals, jews, tsygane, intellectuals, political opponants and so on.. Gaz chambers, torture, medical experimentation, mass grave, deliberate conditions of detention, crematory oven, and so on... With the help of german and french companies : Farber, SNCF etc... Sometimes a man can do horribles things, but when there is a theory behind him, it is much more dangerous, we see it even today, vlad died, but nazism, fascism are still among us, continuying to desinform ignorant, spreading bullshit of superior or supremacist race and inferior races, brain-washing new generation who can, I hope not, rescusite the horror of legally murdering people because of their religion, race, beliefs...

Somebody wrote "Is saving people "good"? If you feed a starving person, are you good? If that person lives to have children and the same basic problems of lack of resources still exists, haven't you made things worse, merely deferred a current problem and made it worse in the long term? Is that good or evil? Is the leadership of China good or evil - clearly their Draconian state enables a rapid reduction in their birth rate. Isn't that evil? Yet, if they didn't control their birth rate, millions would die - isn't that evil? ". And I am agree with him, always look in a bigger dimensioni. But the way to do good is important. Even if China really want to control the birth rate, the way it does is wrong, one children per familly will be one boy. And in 20 years. Millions of boys without bride. A war to kidnap girls in the future ?

---

From: VladiFab

"human nature remains the captive of instincts, as well as of unconscious assumptions and patterns of behaviour that have been culturally determined"

Some thoughts a philosopher friend of mine came on : If we we re sure the Earth is flat, or the center of the universe and so on, can't it be that we have still sure beliefs that seems logical but completely false ?

WHY ARE WE SURE WE HAVE THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE ?

If there is no freedom of choice, how somebody is bad or good. We can't judge, we can't punish anymore. If no freedom of choice, so nobody can control himself, or knows what is bad or good.

Why somebody is not driven to become a criminal ? How do we know he made the choice? If we don't know, what means our system of punishments ? Thousands of year of this system, and the situation is worse. Protect the society, yes of course,but why making a man guilty, he is the fruit of his environment , of his trauma, of the society. If we thinkwe have to make a better world. We should begin at the earlier age. But look in our schools, from the beginning there is a discrimination between thestudent who understand quickly and the others. What all the scores means ? Our reactions to somebody who is fat are innate ? Or we just copy the teacher'sreation, our parents and so on... The same with clothes ...

Our way of thinking has to be changed.

So if there is no freedom of choice, there is no bad or good. And we are all products of the society. Society, civilization, education.... are the bad

If there is freedom of choice, I still think that most of the criminals are products of the society. Society, civilization, education.... are the bad and the few very bad human, than despite good family, education, genes and so on, did choose the bad over the good.

I don't believe in satanic bad human. I believe that some people are mislead. They are brain-washed to hate, wrongly educated to racism and prejudices, were raised indespair and lack of good, had traumatic experience, made bad assumptions orconclusions, made generalization and went to extremism. This is so easy to hatethe one who hate. To kill the one who kill. To punish the one who punish society for his reasons.

Racists or other bad behavioured men were not born like that. They became like that. If somebody don't try to reach them (again and again) - , to contradict, to bring prooves, to show other reality, to love them because it is what is missed, - aworld is lost. And perhaps the children and the persons this person will educate, brain-wash and so on. If I am wrong, I hope somebody will try to help me. Our system does just want you want me or us to do. And look where we get ! More crimes,more hate, more poverty, more polution. I prefer to try to change bad things in my world. In a good manner. Not making what I think the bad person is making wrong. Not to be violent against violence. Asking questions. Trying to understand the answers or to proove they are wrong. If nobody does it, it can only get worse. I do it to help myself too. This world is the world I will give to the next generation.

Moses never enter Israel, he died in Jordan, so he couldn't be in Jericho and kill like somebody wrote you. And there is more about him and about others.

A lot of people are just lying but their messages appear. It is a pity. It is a long work, but if it is your site, you should make some research before printing the assumptions.

Like I told before, everyone can with bad influences do non-moral things. Drugs dealers,pedophils, supremacists of everywhere, the one in the US who provoke wars inother countries, serial killers and so on... I don't want to make a hierarchy between them. It is not the point.

Ben Ladin is not worse or better. He saw corruption in his country but instead ofself-critic, and fighting the corrupted leaders in his country or in the muslim "nation" ; (as muslims believers don't believe in the division into countries done by Europe in theIslam), Ben Ladin is someone who prefer to fight the one who are different fromhim that the one who are like him. A true politician and strategist. Because itis easier : to gain help and suporters, to call for holly war, to point thecause of all of the Islam's problem into the jew or the christian, into Israelor into US (everyone has his own scapegoat...), to call for unity against therest of the world, infidels...

I believethe thing I heard that he built orphelinage, hospitals and so on... I believehe thinks he is really fighting corruption, and fighting against US foreignpolicy that intrude internal matters of other countries, and he wants to stopthe israeli occupation.

But likemany of us, he sees only one side and he believes whatever he saw on his media.And like many men he wants power, and to be the new leader of the muslim world,with all 1 milliard followers (muslim countries are very poor and perhaps allof them are govern by dictators, more or less corrupted by Europe and US...)

He is justanother product of his culture and time, like I am of mine. He doesn't make himbetter or worse, it is the way of thinking who is bad or good. I think it is abig difference. Because it can be change or atenuated. Education is the key,perhaps not for him but for next generations.

He doeswhat other did before him. Found a target and send human to death, asking themto take as much as opponants with them.

So he isusing the instinct and logic of the jungle "I will kill them before theykill me." or better "kill them before they kill us".

This orthis other leader of our "civilized world" is not so different. Tokill civilians in Irak or else where. Because it is easier or politically correct(LOL) to kill civilians than to kill their leader. Greed, money, power, thethought that to be on the top is better than on the bottom (be the rich, and dowhat you have to do, and don't be the poor) all the same. But they attack farcountries and steal them, and we don't know all. Of course. Mediatisation can becorrupted too, propaganda is not only during times of war. journalists are ashuman as all of us. What we believe, they believe too. Like the doctor whoprefer the money of the big medicinal companies, journalist like allprofessions can be very subjective about morality, ethic, money. They are inthe jungle too.

What yousee from there, is not what you see from here, I mean everything is in the eyeof the beholder. Almost : Tell me who you are and I will tell you what youthink. It is not always harsh propaganda, the soft one is so easy to accept.

THE PROBLEMFOR ME IS that Ben Laden should not use violence against violence and of coursehe shouldn't see the workers in the world trade center as the ennemis. They areonly the sheeps, sorry, the civilians. Soldiers are sheeps too, but at least weagree in a certain way when soldiers are attacked. We don't agree whencivilians are attacked. In Israel, I am not agree when 12 years old girls aremurdered in a discotheque. THERE IS NO EXCUSE, CIVILIANS SHOULDN'T BE TARGETED.PERIOD. By US, Ben Laden, Palestinians or israelis.

I amagainst violence and war and retaliation, terrorism, occupation .... To beagainst violence against violence is not to think the world is all right and itshould stay like it is. There are enormous change to be done but revolution isnot the good answer I think. I prefer it takes some more years but to do thework without violence. Revolution with its violence don't make always positiveor lasting change. One elite will remplace another. We the sheep, will stay thesheep. Usually, we will send our sons to war, not the one in power.

So even ifI am not agree with some policies done by the for-now emperor of the world, theUS, I am against the killing of civilians. The same in Israel and everywhere.Liberation will came through morality and love. Not revolutions, wars,uprisings and so on... It looks like it liberes the people, but it just put new dictator instead of the old one.

Because our rules if still of the jungle, will make only jungle.

We can't get rid the world of anything, not terrorism, not hunger,poverty, wars... We tried for centuries and failed, why will we succeed now ? Have we got a better theory, a better education-system, a better morality... ?

What is terrorism, to kill a doctor who do abortion, or to kill fetuses? Everything is in the eye of the beholder, in the mind of the believer.Free-fighter or terrorist...

Until we change our way of thinking, racism, crimes, violence and so onwill remain. The Americans think they know the truth as the Talibans and as Staline,Hitler, Napoleon etc... Everyone of us believe God is on his side, or there is no God and themoral, the truth is on his side. We still use violence against violence. We are still discriminating, teaching it at home, at school... In America or in Pakistan...

All justice system and of course the politic's is corrupted in one wayor another. Money governs everything. A few time in our history, men arose and stand against the whole world,and contradict the whole world beliefs. One time, it was against the polytheism, another, against the Earth being the center of the world, and soon... Everytime it was only a part of the truth, because the bigger truth is to be always open-minded, not to believe everything we were told, informed, forced to believe..., not to believe everything we think is logical, right, true...,not to believe the criminals are guilty because they did it, how do we know we have the free-will or choice and doing ? When was it proven ?

Why a American-Taliban is brain-washed and non-American Taliban or a Tchetchen or a Saoudi guilty of his thoughts and doings ? Justice is to condamn the guilty or to stop the crimes, to dovengeance or to protect the innocents (what is innocence) ?

Ben-Laden, Bush, Chirac, Chretien,... Americans, British, israelis,palestinians and so on, are just the same. Doing what they think has to bedone, God's will, people's will, majority's will, moral's will, security'swill... Different situation, same bad tools, same violence, more here, lesshere, to choose a scapegoat, to accuse somebody else of our misery, the meansare different but the goal is the same : to control the power, or to keep it,to arrive at the top, or to stay there, to be the rich for not becoming thepoor (equal to make the other poor, so it means I am rich), the same with strength, the same with rightness ...

Fabienne. vladifab

---

From: Skimandharley

I think you can honestly say that Osama Bin Laden should be added to the list. Due to the terrorist attacks on The World Trade Center Towers, and also the bombing that took place there in 1998. He also took part in the suicide bombing of the Navy ship, that took the lives of 17 sailors. Oh, what about the Embassy bombing too? I am sure I could go on, but you get the picture.

---

From: "Michael & Mindy Ray"

NAPOLEON BONAPARTE, OSAMA BIN LADEN, AIOTOLLA (?) HOMEINI, JOHN WAYNE GACY, JEFFREY DAUHMER,

---

From: Dan-Cristian Dinca

I was looking for some information related to zero point energy. There was probably somewhere a link to your page. Then I stayed there for almost three hours. It's an interesting site, with good graphics and plenty of links. The "Scales of Good and Evil" article is interesting, especially because I'm from Romania and I spent 12 years in Tirgoviste. Vlad Tepes has there two statues. One in the main park of the town, and the second in downtown. Enforcing the law or deterring enemies by very cruel punishments was very common in that time. I don't think Vlad is evil because of that. On the other hand, I consider evil and even sick any person that takes pleasure from that kind of activities. I don't think is the perception of evil that makes most romanians appreciate Vlad Tepes, but his political achievements. I'm nuclear physicist, not historian, so take my opinion as a personal one. He is now viewed as one who brought hope to romanians in a time when the occupation of Otoman Empire was at its peak. Less than 10% of romanians know that Vlad fought also with Stephan the Great (Stefan cel Mare), prince of Moldavia, his own cousin. It's like an approximation. You neglect some things favouring the others. One cannot judge Mr. Clinton as politician by what he did with Ms. Lewinsky. As human he is imoral, as as human Vlad Tepes is a very sick psycho.

By the way, Ceausescu was judged and executed in Tirgoviste. Some say that he didn't receive a fair trial (I agree), but he received the kind of trial he deserved (I agree too). :-)

---

From: ZHall72703

I nominate Al Gore. If he succeeded in stealing the election through the counting and miscounting of votes, then I feel that our Nation will be in peril. He does not know what truth is, has no integrity and will do absolutely anything to become President. This makes him very dangerous and evil.

---

From: "Liza Simonova"



I believe mother Theresa sould be among the evil folks.

After all, in a poor, overpopulated country with so many hungry and poor people, she didn't consider an abortion clinique would have maybe done more good than helping the dying?

As for Vlad the impaler, I'm with the people from Romania on this one. Not evil, but strong!!

---

From: "Steve Hodgkiss"

I think old Charlie should make your evil list. He created a cult based upon, of all things, The Beatles White Album and out of context Biblical passages (Son of Man; i.e., Man-son). He directed others to do his bidding like a sorcerer.

On the GOOD side:

Moses could use more credit for being a man with a great childhood as a prince of Egypt, only to be outcast for supporting the captured Israelite slaves, to witness the essence of the Creator YHWH (the unpronounceable name of GOD) on Mount Sinai, and then to return to Egypt to free his people. He was an obedient servant of God and as a result, led a great nation from slavery -- thus being a role model for those mortal men who followed his example centuries later to accomplish the same thing and invoked the same words "Let my people go".

I also think you should elaborate more on Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, who demonstrated eternal life to his apostles, thus giving eternal hope to all mankind who accept Him.

Mother Teresa, beloved humanitarian known throughout the world for her charity towards the poor and her firm and passionate pro-life stance.

Food for thought:

Take the word EVIL and add the letter "D" to the beginning of it. What do you have? "DEVIL" Take the word GOOD and remove an "O" from the middle of it. What do you have? "GOD"

Just a point I once pondered.

Thanks,

Steve Hodgkiss A logical Christian

---

Click here if you would like to see thousands of more responses to the Scales of Good and Evil. The debate continues...

---

Return to Cliff Pickover's home page which includes questions on science and spirituality, computer art, educational puzzles, fractals, virtual caverns, JAVA/VRML, alien creatures, black hole artwork, and animations.