Skip to primary content

Terrace | Jun 09 2004

I want to write a taxonomy of evil. This occurred to me five Thursdays ago, during lunch, which I ate, as I do each Thursday, on the Fragrance Terrace of the Brooklyn Botanic Garden. The Fragrance Terrace is for Garden staff. I’m part-time staff, so I get to eat there. Four of my colleagues were with me, and we—or they—discussed the torture of Iraqi prisoners, which was big news right then. I learned all about it from my colleagues.

Never did I determine why it was such big news. Did the American people seriously believe that Iraqi prisoners were not being tortured? Do the American people seriously believe that the people in our jails and prisons are not being tortured today? Do the American people seriously imagine that the Geneva Convention or the U.S. Constitution or any law ever written can prevent people with power from abusing that power? What world are we living in, in the mind of the American people?

I perked up when someone called Rumsfeld evil, and someone else—me—called Cheney eviler. The distinction hinged on a particular interpretation of each man’s morality. Now, this could be totally off-base, but it appears from a distance that Rumsfeld operates according to a specific and consistent set of moral precepts (immoral moral precepts, but moral precepts nonetheless). Cheney, by comparison, appears to have no morality whatsoever and is interested only in power. Said another way, Rumsfeld believes his actions will bring about a better world, while Cheney believes his actions will protect or expand his power. Said a third way, Rumsfeld is Hilter, and Cheney is Stalin. Hilter believed in Arayan supremacy; Stalin believed in his own personal hegemony. Of course it’s entirely possible that Hilter believed in his own personal hegemony no less than Stalin but did a better job of camouflaging it in the rhetoric of Arayan supremacy.

Also, it can be argued that Stalin and Cheney are moral according to a version of morality that values power above all else.

One of my colleagues objected when I put Nixon in the Stalin category. Nixon’s crimes hardly compare to Stalin’s in terms of scale, he said.

Fair enough. My taxonomy of evil will include an adjustment for scale. This means that Jeffrey Daumer will be considered less evil than, say, Dick Cheney, despite the fact that Cheney has not, so far as I know, killed and eaten anyone. I mean, not directly.

My taxonomy of evil will also include an adjustment for how directly evil one is, although in an odd twist, indirectly evil acts, such as expanding the Army’s policy about the use of torture, will be considered more evil than directly evil acts, such as torturing people. It’ll work just like Amway, with a percentage of evil flowing back up the pyramid.