A Scrutiny Of The Slogan:" A Lesser Evil Is Still An Evil.

By Sodium

The slogan, " A lesser evil is still an evil ", is morally and logically correct statement. I have no disagreement with the morality and logic of  such a fine statement. What I do have disagreement with is the intent behind using such a morally and logically fine statement in the last American Presidential campaign to defeat President Obama. During the campaign up to election day on November 6,2012, I had reviewed so many articles, columns and so many blogs that followed them; and the end result of my massive reviews had convinced me that the intent on using such a fine statement was solely used just to defeat President Obama in his bid for re-election. In fact, the voters who were Anti-Obama have changed, intentionally or unintentionally, the essence of a good and fine statement into a slogan, which is usually used in advertisement, publicity or propaganda. Some of them had even dared accusing the voters who planned to vote for the lesser evil, meaning voting for Obama, as being "dishonest? ". " Dishonest?" is my foot.

Because of all of the foregoing, I have found it compelling to write this essay, in order to expose the fallacy of turning a fine statement into a cheap slogan fits nicely for advertisement and propaganda purposes:

In our mundane world, there are only two absolute truths. They are:

~  Ceaseless Changes.
~  Death.

Since the day we are born, we go through Ceaseless Changes and finally we all encounter Death and die, as the following scheme shows:

Baby grows up to Kid----Youth---- Man ---- Middle Age ---- Old Age----- Death.

If one accepts his or her fate as the above scheme shows, he or she must also accept that every other truth in our mundane world must be relative to one other. In other words, what I see as the truth, some one else may not see it so, at all.

In short, as one accepts that the Ceaseless Changes and Death are the only absolute truths human beings encounter in their journey of life on Planet Earth, then and only then, it becomes clear that all other truths are relative, even the strength of the slogan," the lesser evil is still an evil ", is really in its relativity. In it one has "evil" and "lesser evil". Now, let us see how strong such a relativity is by examining  how a legitimate Court of Law handles and treat the following two different evils:

(1)  Deliberate Murder is evil.  Is not it?
(2)  Deliberate Theft, for the sole accumulation of wealth, is evil.  Is not it?

Both evils, listed above, are committed deliberately. Two questions:

Question One:
=============
Is there a legitimate Court of Law, world wide, that can pass the same punishment on the two different acts of evil committed deliberately?  No, sir, there is none, in spite of the fact there is a common denominator connecting the two acts of evil, and that is the word or adverb," Deliberately ".

Question Two:
=============
Since a Court of Law is made up of human beings such as the Judge, Prosecutor, a Lawyer for Defense and Jurors who, by law, are the ones whose actions determine the level or degree of punishment each of the two different acts of evil must face. Since the actors in the Court of Law are human beings who, by law, can pass judgment on two different evils differently, why it is wrong for voters, who are also human beings, cannot  do similarly in an extremely important Presidential Election, as the Jurors and Judge do finally, in a Court of Law? The similarity is truly striking !

A Metaphor:
============
By way of metaphor, one may consider that the Voters, in a Presidential Election, as the Jurors in a Court of Law, which is the United States. The Voters, acting as Jurors must pass verdicts on two Presidential candidates, one seems and sounds to be more of an evil than the other one. Remember that with the exclusion of the two absolute truths,( Ceaseless Changes and Death ), all other truths are relative. Therefore, those voters who decided to pass their verdicts in favor of the greater evil could do so, since, they felt, it was their prerogative to do so. And those voters who decided to pass their verdicts in favor of a third party, could do so, since, they felt, it was also their prerogative to do so. Those voters who decided to pass their verdicts in favor of Obama were challenged by the slogan," the lesser evil is still an evil ", and even some of them accused the Independent Voters who decided to pass their verdicts in favor of Obama, as " dishonest? "  Most Unreal  !

Conclusion:
===========
Those who threw their tactical slogan," A Lesser Evil Is Still An Evil ", on the faces of Independent Voters who were in favor of Obama, in the American Presidential Election of 2012, should also throw it on the faces of the Judges and Jurors of all legitimate Courts of Law, across the United States of America. It is only fair to do so ! And then, it will be interesting to watch what would happen.

END.