Debaitor,
It seems you mistake sufficiency for efficiency, complacency for happiness, and convention for truth.
Men are not the same way at all. We’ve insisted upon creating a false dichotomy between ‘man’ and ‘animal’, which became a fundamental error upon which we base our ethics. We are no longer allowed, nor given occasion, to live amorally (naturally). We are not driven solely by nature in our value placement anymore; but by each other.
People are “bad” if you deem them as such, or feel threatened by them otherwise. If a person exercises a negative influence on you, you have every right to refer to him as “bad” (of course that is a subjective judgment). On a broader scale, an person or group seen as negatively influencing the whole of humanity may be deemed “bad.”
As a human being, if you have an opinion other than “bad” about Nazis, you aren’t necessarily insane; just an idiot. If we came to find out a wild monkey considers forest fires “good”, we’d either assume insanity or ignorance.
Men have no need to make prey of one another, therefore to do so is an ethical dilemma. Lions hunt gazelle out of natural necessity – see the difference?
