In my English class, we are STILL discussing Crime and Punishment. However one idea came up that caught my attention. Raskolnikov murders his victim primarily for an idea. The idea that the great man has the privilige, even the right to overstep law because he is great, while the average man should suffer the consequences for the same action.
This idea seemed absurd when I read it in the novel, but after thinking about it I realized that this kind of philosophy is often used to justify the misdeeds of many people throughout the ages. In the Middle Ages, such a philosophy was the justification of the Crusades. During WWII it was Hitler's justification for his final solution.
This philosophical mindset is still true today. The Bush Administration's justification of the war in Iraq was/is "spreading democracy." Without this ideal of spreading freedom, who would have initially supported the war? Especially now that information is out that the claimed WMD never existed in Iraq. Anyone can see from news reports that the war for freedom in Iraq is not going well, with elected officials being shot, kidnapped, killed, etc.
I read a quote (which annoyingly, I cannot find) which states that all wars are important for those who have to fight them. People initiate wars because they stand to gain, either with land, money, or resources. But who would willingly fight a war based on those aims? Instead, causes must be created and glorified to get other people to support and fight war, willingly and passionately.
I agree with this (paraphrased) quote/idea, because a million examples come to mind. Human nature hasn't changed, so the same 'greater man' philosophy leads on.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
