Strong opinions about the publicized actions of others both in a singular sense as well as in terms of avowed policy of a larger organized group of same always comes easier than any deeper attempt to understanding them as a collection of like minded individuals who despite their own differences believe in a reasonable amount of compromise. Taking a stand against a blatant tyranny infers that those who would strongly call it into question have taken no small amount of effort to understand those interactions and what struggles of their own that were sorted out which in turn went into making their decisions. Even the worst of sorts of people perpetrating the most despicable of acts have a positive rationale that explains their moves as what is ultimately best.
To defamed one as ‘Iago’ suggests that the the accuser understands the candid nature of what the character puts forth in terms of the limits of their intellect and the factor of the corresponding amount of humanity connected with it. To hear what most of the great leaders throughout history have spoken is to realize that they all call upon an intention to serve a greater good beyond their own immediate goals. In a former era of American prosperity in the last century, the re-elected vice president, Calvin Coolidge as a champion of the middle class declared the following notion within his inaugural speech.
“. . . if we wish to continue to be distinctively American, we must continue to make that term comprehensive enough to embrace the legitimate desires of a civilized and enlightened people determined in all their relations to pursue a conscientious and religious life. We can not permit ourselves to be narrowed and dwarfed by slogans and phrases. It is not the adjective, but the substantive, which is of real importance.”
The default attitude of underlying cynicism so characteristic of our current century has come with the philosophical evolution of man’s technology standing in as his only religion. One that is indifferent to the human spirit that was at the central core of the all the significant belief systems that have come before our own times. Perhaps this explains the greater part of the dilemma of assigning the title of villain or savior? The moral imperative of efficiency and the continued growth of profit has infected the discussion of the quality of mankind’s existence. Phrasing it in terms of the overall goal of amassing creature comforts while securing animal necessities as being the most desirable governing factor in terms of the health of the society. Our current epoch finding the larger overbearing state stressing the social necessities of the latter over the rapidly diminishing availability of the former.
A government body serving a corporate entity is incapable of comprehending the needs of any given group of individuals as anything other than an external force that can equally serve as a helpful asset or a dangerous liability. It can only deal with a given segment of humanity in a manner that understands them as part of their own unique conception of a larger organism. The personalities that are charged with the responsibility of running these entities deal work within the particular focus that these units espouse. Everything else beyond this focus comes down to the art of selling and ‘P.R.’ So when a given group or individual promises one policy and then continues to maintain the former one the key to understanding comes in researching just who in specific stands in the shadows behind them and which temple gods that they all collectively tend to worship.