Edit: I intentionally put "bad people" in the title in order to provoke. ๐
If you don't know what I'm talking about:
Black Mirror - Hated in the Nation
I'm not sure how to limit the scope of this discussion, since it touches upon so many areas of morale:
- the value of life
- the right to kill
- vengeance/revenge
- crime
- good and evil
So I encourage you to be articulate and to follow some structure: "what(thesis) - why(evidence) - what (thesis)". Other easy to follow variations, such as "why(background + evidence) - what(thesis)" or "what - why - what - by the way(discussion)" or just a simple "what" are of course good too. I'm not trying exclude comments, and I won't, just encouraging an easy to read discussion. As for me:
I would not kill using a Death Note, unless for some utterly personal vendetta. I would also not kill those that did, if we were talking about some sort of society wide phenomenon. I believe that taking action against human life on the macro scale, such as a nation state against another or such as one confined justice system against one of its subjects (state versus an individual, for instance) or in the fictive case of the above mentioned media, is wrong. This is because I don't believe it right to through politics or legislation qualify or quantify the value of a human life, such as is done in jurisdictions that allow capital punishment. While I'm against such "marco actions" on human life, I for some reason have less of a problem empathizing with the individual victims involved, which is to say, I don't think I'd rage against, say, a grieving mother avenging her murdered child by killing the murderer. But then again, not all individuals have the ability or the capacity to exact revenge and maybe they have to rely on their nation state for some kind of restitution? My opinion is probably logical mess, full of contradictions, but there it is. Feel free to poke holes, in a kind manner!
Absolutely not.
I'm as capable as anyone of identifying some of the scumbags that are fucking the world over, but I'm certainly not going to fool myself into believing that I could fix everything by killing all the non-believers.
Your last sentence is a non-sequitur.
You have a small group of scumbags fucking the world over, but your conclusion is you can't kill all the non-believers.
I cannot kill all scumbags and therefore cannot guarantee that a worse one is not going to take their place. I of course realize that most people would then keep the killing going, yet that does not solve the original problem.
You know the starfish analogy? Guy walking along the beach crowded with dying starfish and hucking them back in one-by-one.. Someone tells him, "You can't save all these starfish." "No," they guy says, holding a starfish, "but I can save this one."
You're telling me, "I can't kill all the scumbags."
That aside, though, there might be a theory that doing a massive systemic change can yield a new system that is remarkably stable. For instance, in an ecosystem, if you lower a population of a dominant species, another species takes over, and that new arrangement can be stable over time. ,