right and wrong | 11:26 PM >

Politically, the week was very interesting.

Firstly there was the elections in Canada. Living here I can certainly say that the Liberals handled the election very badly, not that they really could have fixed up a lot of the mistakes they'd made previously, but I'm not too surprised that the Conservatives won. Unfortunately, that's like Bush winning the election in the US-- just watch how long Canada's nice, well-though-out system of laws stays that way, especially considering how much Harper seems to be buddy-buddy with Bush. Interestingly enough is that the Bloc is the swing vote in Parliament now. Not that I've followed Canadian politics in a while, but I don't recall the last time that happened. I give Harper two years before the next election is forced and the Liberals are back in power.

Then there's Hamas. They didn't just win by a narrow margin, like the Conservatives, but they seem to have "swept" the elections in Palestine.

Interesting.

I've been thinking a lot about right and wrong this week. There are a lot of people, theologians, politicians, philosophers, who've said that the ideas of right and wrong, of good and evil, are human creations. If the Axis hadn't been beaten in WWII, then the Allies would have been branded as the evil ones blocking the path to righteousness, would they not? This is regardless of deeds done. To the victor go the spoils, which always include the ability to write story from the victor's point of view.

If right and wrong are human creations, then as with all things we've named the definitions must rest with the agreement of the majority. For example, everyone knows what a chair is, because everyone agrees on the definition of a chair. Not everyone agrees on right and wrong, but I'd say there are large groups whose opinions fit together well enough to make majority definitions of the terms.

Why am I bringing this up?

If the majority of Palestinians chose Hamas as their representation democratically, as the party which has their best interests at heart, that tells me that the majority of Palestinians believe what Hamas did / does can be defined as right. Just like enough Americans believed in what Bush was doing to vote him in for a second term.

So what do the rest of us do when our definition of right and wrong doesn't run parallel with that of the majority?

* * * * *

この上は善と開くの話だ。最近、全世界でみんなの「善と開く」の考えは前と違うと思ってる。ハマス党はパレスタインで選挙を勝った。前にハマス党はイスラエルでテロをしやがっても選挙を勝ったんだ。なぜ？なぜ人間は正しくなく選ぶのか？なぜブッシュは２回アメリカの選挙を勝ったのか？僕の意見は僕の「善と開く」の定義がみんなのと違う。

上の方はもっと良く言ったけどね。日本語で三寸の舌を持たないからさ。