The Scales of Good and Evil: Part II

Cliff Pickover

Copyright 2000, 2001, 2002 by Cliff Pickover
If you liked this page, visit Cliff Pickover's main home page for more lists.
"The Scales of Good and Evil" is a trademarked term.

On the main web page on Good and Evil I presented a list of the Top Ten evil and good people of all time. The debate started on this page and continues below.

Please add your votes. Who would you like to see added to the list? What alterations would you make to the list or the ordering? Do the scales of good and evil balance?

Paul L:
First off, I found your site most interesting, not because of who you had or did not have on the evil/good list, but because of the debating that followed. I'd like to throw these comments out about the evil side. It seems most of these men committed their atrocities against something they found inherently evil and needed to be dealt with, but for me the most evil acts done are those against the truly innocent. Let's face it -- no man is with out sin so none of us are innocent [for does it not state in the bible "the wages of sin is death"]. So really these who died deserved what they got, but the argument is did these men possess the right to place this judgment upon the souls of the victims. Let's add to the list the men who raped and or murdered the children {i.e. pedophiles}, which I think can be held almost universaly evil in all cultures, countries and classes, even in or out of war time where really the only thing that really counts is to win by almost any means? But those who chose to destroy innocents for sexual gratification top my list of the truely damned soul with no means of salvation and which no man or woman sheds a tear for this lowest form of humanity. Not only does this personify pure evil it is a form that does not change , does not feel regret or remorse , and is only going to reaffend until death does the deed for us. I'd like to hear your thoughts on these points of evil?

"Lorenzo G.":
I think that good and evil should be better defined before attempting the kind of rating of these lists; some problems and limits, that many comments from readers have already pointed out, undermine the meaningfulness of the lists, regardless of what specific persons are on them. Only famous people get listed; this is unavoidable if the list is to be universal. But this means that many more obscure people are neglected, even if they are more good or evil of the well known people listed. Only important good or evil accomplishments can be evaluated, not actual moral attitude. Political leaders are most prominent in the lists and in user suggestion, but only because they had the means and opportunities to do what other people just desired; so force of will and external circumstances are an important factor that cannot be easily eliminated. Many deeds are done not only because of goodness or evilness, but for reasons of convenience, external pressure, insanity (in the broadest meaning of the word, and even slight or transient), stupidity (and involuntary errors), imprinting from education, and so on. How can we judge good and evil from deeds alone? My opinion is that good and evil are the entirely subjective acts of voluntarily choosing and doing what is perceived as "right" or "wrong". It is responsibility (that is, free will) which gives a moral value to how a person behaves; not effectiveness of the acts or their consequences. Regarding what is right and wrong, I consider these terms synonimous with "beneficial" and "harmful", first to the individual (directly or indirectly) and then to whatever that person loves. So an evil attitude is typically self-destructive (e.g. going to play tennis etc. instead of attending to university lessons, thus throwing away your chances to get a degree and a good job; or enjoying criminal activities now knowing that you will be caught later). An evil person is first of all a corrupt person, who feels the burden of his evil (more or less consciously; many mental disorders arise from the twisting of bad feelings). So the correct way to evaluate good and evil should be investigating what people think of themselves; of course this is practically impossible, and any attempt at ranking the most good and evil people is difficult enough to be futile. A small avenue for philosophical research, however, is considering what is good or evil with respect to personal opinions only or with respect to natural and objective reasons. It is the very difficult and very old issue of deciding the boundaries, in society and law, of personal freedom and public interest.

From: "Rhonda C"
I nominate my ex husband for taking my girls for the summer and keeping them and fighting for custody. Because his mistress,whom he left me for, cant have children. He is evil.

From: "Matthew K"
And taking from the good list. Please consider the following:, You may find them enlightening about two of your 'Good' entries. Ghandi I don't think you could go with as evil, just a hypocrite. But The Saintly Sister, Mother Theresa... Well, she certainly isn't one of the worst people in the world, all the people on the evil list are worse, but she seems rather objectionable to me.

From: Freddy C.
Carl Marx would be nice. also dalai lama didn't do too much great things.. if only for the sake of nobel prize, I think Mandela is way better surprise to see them mentioned.

From Ben J. W, London:
It's hard to make lists like these, but your one is pretty good and there are people that I hadn't thought of. Personally I would include Oliver Cromwell for the genocide that he committed and maybe Pinochet.

For the good list I am glad that you recognised Siddhartha Gautama and not letting the popular western figures. Two people that would feature highly on my list are Michael Collins and Karl Marx, but I suppose that depends on your politics. Not many people know much about the Baha'i faith which i discovered this summer when i went to one of their Houses of Worship in Chicago, Illinois. It was a surprise to see them mentioned.

From: Kevin H.
I think you should add Courtney love to your top 10 evil list, she killed her Husband Kurt Cobain and attacks and bullies other to as she says, it's a common fact that she hates people who try and leave her on stop her get what she wants. her dad also believes she's pure evil also.

From: "jimmy"
hi, i agree with Bostjan T religeon is evil, man created god to create himself. all this bull sh*t about God and how he is "good" screw that, people are good, people that do stuff. 'drunk fruitcakes' dont deserve the spotlight. i dont either, but dont contradict me, just think about it, there is no proof of God. If you think that 'he' is up there, think again 'cause religeon is EVIL the #1 choice from me, put it on the evil list.

From: "Mehrnoush Y"
Please add Ayatullah Khomaini to your evil list for his count less blood shed of innocent Iranians in the name of God.

From: "Ben W." dear cliff i agree with your placing of vlad tepes. i think he was a good leader but as a person he was bad. i don't think that chairman mao should be included, he was no hero but compared to stalin he was not a power mad tyrant who twisted socialism to suit him. i think as you have many people who have tried to comit genocide you should consider Oliver Cromwell.

i am pleased to see the Buddha Siddhartha and Baha'u'llah so high on your good list. people such as these are often overlooked in the west. mother theresa, abraham lincoln and carl djerassi should not be on the list and especially not above gandhi and martin luther king. the reasons given for these people do not justify their placings.

my personal top five good people is
1. Siddhartha Gautauma
2. Karl Marx
3. Michael Collins
4. the current incarnation of the Dalai Lama
5. Mohandas Gandhi

i think marx and collins may depend on your politics though from B. J. Whelan, London

From: Sandie
Jeoffrey dahmer

From: JMBibles. What About Elizabeth (aka Ezerbet) Bathory? She was a woman in Romania who had 600+ young girls murdered and bled for no reason other than because she thought bathing in their blood kept her skin looking young. Because she was nobility, she was never able to receive full punishment for her deeds. She wasn't too long after Vlad the Impaler. Think it was something in the water? Pretty creepy woman. She REALLY needs to be on your list.

From: "Tim G."
I think you should be on the cutting edge with your list. If I was going to include somebody on the 'most evil list' I wouldn't have to go too far to see that Al Gore should be up there. It may be a hunch, but something tells me, if he is elected, we are all going to be in deep deep.. well you know. On a more serious note,but not being too serious. An Evil person would have to be hmmm.. Eve, as in Adam and Eve. If it wasn't for her, we wouldn't have sin. With out sin, there would be no evil people. So, as Eve being the pioneer in Evil ways, I think she is number one. Good people ( I was just thinking evil people are much more easy to choose from), back to the good ones.. I don't know if anyone mentioned Princes Dianne. She was big on helping out many children. Ohh, another bad person, or sick in the head about to be bad person-- Richard Seed. The guy that is trying to clone humman beings. Well, I don't like the idea of that. It goes against all that is moral and ethical. There one to the list. Billy the Kid, he was a pretty mean SOB. He was cool, but he did kill quite a number of people. Other evil people: The tobacco people, some one can add names, Statistically, they have killed more people than Hitler. You can argue that, but I will win.

Number one on the list, even though his intentions were not to have this happen, I hold him personally liable. Charles Darwin! He influenced Hitler, Eichmann, Lenin and Stalin.

great page cliff, I will be back in the future to see how everything is turning out.

From: Mari

I don't have any names for the evil list, although I'm sure they are out there, however, I have a couple of thoughts I'd like to share. First, I read over the arguments some shared with you concerning the Romania Vlad Tepes, and it seemed that both responders' point was that we can't judge the actions of 14th or 15th century people by 20th century standards. My point is this...why can't we? After all, we certainly judge medicinal activities back in those days from a modern stand point, and as such we (collectively, for the most part) agree that "bleeding" people, not washing one's hands, shocking people without any understanding of how the human mind works, demanding that labor be painful for women, etc, etc...I could go on and on....were all activities that happened as a result of people's ignorance or lack of concern in dealing with the "medical" profession. So, if we judge those happenings with a "modern" mind, why not the evil actions of other individuals from that long ago time period? Also, while I think that it is sad what America has done in the past by the way of war, one notable difference to be considered might be that one who enlists in the service of one's country and kills for the "cause"..does not necessarily take great personal gratification in one's actions.....but that exactly seems to be what the "evil" list persons did...took great personal, and in my opinion sick, satisfaction and gratification in committing their "evil" acts. And for anyone who has committed tortuous acts, subjugation, etc against a person or a group of people and taken personal pleasure in it...would qualify as evil. Just my thoughts on the issue...

One last thing, for your list of the top "Good" people....don't you think it would be more productive to have a list that includes only those individuals that have been historically proven to have actually existed? Correct me if I'm wrong, but there is some historical discrepancies as to whether Jesus or Moses actually existed...or at least were the people as they were "written" to be in that one and only source...the bible.

Thanks for allowing me to share too.

I was sent a web site about Skeptic's View of Christianity, and your web page was a link, and I was that's how I found in.

I enjoy reading as much as I can about various issues, religion, particularly christianity and judaism are the ones I have been studying on and off for the last year. I am a reformed christian....if that's the correct term...a former believer so to speak.

As to the thing about Jesus, if one is going to rely on the bible to understand the person that was supposedly this Jesus...then one can also make valid arguments from the bible that he wasn't such a great guy much of the time either. His messages seem to oppose one another at various stages and places in the scriptures. He said he came not to bring peace, but with a sword - which is actually the anti-thesis of what the Messiah was to do. He said to obey the ten commandments, but he did not do much in the way of honoring his father and mother. He said he came to bring the word of God, then he preached in secret to only his disciples on supposedly "key" issues. I could go on and on and on about a vast majority of that which is found in the bible about this man and how it's a lot of bunk. However, my point was, I don't personally think that he earns a place on the "good" list. There isn't enough historical documentation of him, his existence, or his actual preachings and teachings, and what we do have to go on shows him to be as much a fantatical zeolot as some really "good" guy who preached all about love. There are individuals, I am sure, that have existed that have done far much greater than he and are a lot closer to our time than 2,000 years ago. In fact, I don't even think he can actually be credited with starting chrisitianity, that bane of society can be laid at Paul's doorstep. Mari

From: "DaveW"
How about the Marquis de Sade? I'm embarrassed to write the details of his perversions but, the real reason I'm nominating him is the legacy he leaves. People are still very much into his shit.Of course putting him on a 'superstars of sin' list would probably only add to the pain...

From: "Christen L"
Okay- Well I don't have any more evil people except for this one guy I know, but he wouldn't make the top 100. Any way, I thought about your list and how you said how it was easier for us to think of evil people and I think it was easier to think of good people. I recognized many more of the good people than I did the evil. I want to tell you that I think the Beatles should be added to the good list. If you just listen to the songs they wrote, they talk about things like all you need is love and about how where all the lonely people come from and it makes you think... What if all the world (or even all the world leaders) thought this way?? There would be no fighting, and I believe it would eliminate all suffering. And that is my plea for the Beatles to be on the good list. As to why some people find it easier to think of evil people, I believe that the reason is that it is much simpler as humans to think of others as being inferior to our selves than it is to think of them as superior. Thank you for reading this and if you would contact me with more of your views on what I have said that would be great. My email is so let me know. If you would like to post what I have said that would be fine, but please do not put my name or email address on line. Thanks!!

From: Babe F
Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer. Ok -- here's my "ignorance" or "forgetfulness" -- that Japanese General who "ran" the Japanese war camps during WW2, I can't remember his name -- though I'm certain you know to whom I refer!!!!!!

Good: Harriet Tubman

From: "William K.":
Bogdan Kmelnitza, leader of one of the largest Cossack tribes, butchered and tortured tens of thousands in a massive pogrom.

"Jennifer L":
Cliff, I'm new to your web site but find it very interesting. Regarding Vlad - boy, you sure opened a can of worms here didn't you.

I'm curious about Marius' argument. He seems to question your sources of information on details that happened over 500 years ago, however, he then expects us to believe that everything the bible contains is 100% factual. Myself, I tend to question anything I read as it is solely the opinion or understanding of the person that wrote it. Same goes for any history books or the bible.

You apparently are intrigued by difficult questions - so here's mine.... How do we really know what happened in the past?? The written word, as I said above, is someones interpretation of events, even pictures are subject to our own interpretation. Perhaps everything that happens is mearly our own perspective there is no one answer that fits as perfectly correct.

From: "Emilio G"
I believe Gen. Augusto Pinochet, ex dictator of Chile, should be on your "Evil List". He murdered and tortured thousands of men, women and children in Chile and around the world. Mass grave sites are still being found (unearthed) today, over 20 years after the military coup in 1973. A slaughter where, military jets and tanks were used against farmers, factory workers and University students armed with small arms, rocks, slingshots etc.

Also, many families were destroyed and separated; due to those who were forced to flee and were exiled to countries throughout the world. Many second and even third generation Chileans continue to suffer from this evil man. His actions destroyed a goal, a movement, a dream; inspired by Dr. Salvador Allende, who was executed by Pinochet's henchmen, in the Presedential Palace he was democratically elected into.

Thanks for your time Cliff.

Chilean survivor

From: Fritzmichele G
I think you should add Francois Duvalier and a.k.a. (Papa doc) and his son Jean-Claude Duvalier(Baby doc) both ex dictatorial presidents of Haiti.The total of their reign went from 1957 to 1986.I think you should get into that and find out more about them. And tell me if they are possible candidats for the top 100 evil people in history.

From: AhB4dog
J. Edgar Hoover: his abuse of power caused untold suffering and maintained a national attitude of fear for years.

From: "Kallisti B"
Hi there, It has been very entertaining reading your list and the criticisms of others, but I was very disappointed to see that only one person mentioned a musician. Music is a very powerful medium, eliciting a wide variety of emotions through complex rhythms and patterns, and I feel that there are a few musicians who are worthy of being on your good list, however far down the list that might be. Among those whom I feel have struck a chord (no pun intended) with many people, spanning a somewhat large time-frame are as follows: the classicals, such as Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, Mozart, Lizst, et. al. Also, for a more recent addition, I would like to add The Beatles. They emerged in a time when not just our country, but much of the world was going through major changes, political and otherwise. They were a beautiful voice for a generation, nay, generationS! They touched the hearts and minds of millions of people with their intriguing and thoughtful lyrics and music, not to mention their outspokenness on many issues. It takes a hell of a band to outlast three decades and to still affect new listeners. I know they have changed my life, as I'm sure they've changed many others. Also, I was somewhat disappointed to see that more writers were not brought to light, Shakespear being the foremost in my mind. He challenged the ideas and norms of his society with his prolific writings, which are still required reading for school children hundreds of years later. Also on the literary side, I would like to include the likes of Plato, Aristotle, Sappho, Homer and others who have outlived the test of time, forcing people to think in new ways, both then and centuries later. I would also like to point out the writings of both Aldous Huxley and George Orwell for their far-sightedness in the way our world COULD be if things continue to go as they are now. I would also include, on a more personal note, Dr. Timothy Leary, for trying to expand, educate, and enlighten the minds of millions with his theories and writings. I'm sure there are more that I would add to the list, but at least, as of now, I can't think of any more. Good news for you!

From: "Shanna S"
Hi. You have Moses credited on your top ten list as being the originator of the Sabbath day. It was actually God that instituted this day of rest for mankind, Moses simply obeyed orders. Read Exodus chapter 20, verses 8-11, in the Holy Bible. The thanks goes to God.

Also, you credited Jesus for preaching "love," but He also showed mankind the way to find peace, purpose, and meaning in life, as well as security in the afterlife. He and his followers were, and are, taught to be honest, hard working, gracious, faithful, and peace loving. I found the write up on Jesus to be painfully thin compared to the list of Buddhist qualities.

Hi. You have Moses credited on your top ten list as being the originator of the Sabbath day. It was actually God that instituted this day of rest for mankind, Moses simply obeyed orders. Read Exodus I see most of your "Evil" figures are political leaders and most of your "Good" examples are religious figureheads. This shows a bias in your thought patterns that is not altogether rational. I personally would shuffle most of the religious figures to the evil list as religion usually leads to the prejudices that justify most of the mass killings that put the political figures on the "Evil" list. I feel that most of the political figgures that you listed are no more evil than any other wartime leaders. What about all the innocents that were burned to death by napalm during the Viet Nam war? Do we put these deaths on the head of the president who presided over that conflict?? I think "GOD" should go on to the top of the evil list because of all the attrocities he allowed to be done in his name over the centuries. (Ok, so actually I am an athiest who thinks more harm than good has been caused by religion but even though "GOD" doesn't exist he should still go the top of the list) (there, I have just displayed my own biases) In the end, I feel that your "good" and "evil" list is moot and pointless although it is sure to cause some interesting discussions.

Romina C (Malta):
I see most of your "Evil" figgures are political leaders and most of your "Good" examples are religious figureheads. This shows a bias in your thought patterns that is not altogether rational. I personally would shuffle most of the religious I've just came to know of your website yesterday, and it left me fascinated. It is now the opening web page of my browser. I have already forwarded your page to a number of friends!

I am writing in response to your 'good and evil' nominations. The first thought that came to mind was to add Lady Diana as a very good person indeed, for we all know the goodness and love she shared with the more needy and sick people. I believe that many people would agree to my line of thinking, and it would be nice to see her name on your list. Keep up the good and fascinating work,

Jim W
Hi Cliff: I'm surprised you did not include the most influential politician of the 20th Century, Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin).

Ulyanov founded the Soviet Union. He also founded the CHEKA, the predecessor to the KGB. The Soviet Union subjugated Eastern Europe from 1945 to 1989. The KGB killed a huge number of people, even after Stalin died. The number of people killed by the KGB, on the orders of Lenin, Stalin, and their successors, is huge, more than 50 million.

Ulyanov, in my opinion, was a sociopath. He took no pleasue in killing, just as he took no pleasure in anything. He was responsible for killing 3 million people in his 4 years in power (1917 -1921, when he had a stroke and was moved to the background by Stalin).

While 3 million may not seem like a lot, in comparison with Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, it still puts him in the top 10 murders of the 20th century.

Thanks for an interesting web page.

From: "T.J.R"
BILL CLINTON is the spawn of Satan ! Not just for a life time of lies, trickery,links to murders,(WACO) crimes,pervertions etc.etc.Including TREASON against America ! Yet he was able to brain wash so many people.

From Chris:
What about Cain? Talk about a pioneer, the first man to commit a crime a gainst fellow man, and to start out he went with nothing short of murder. While he lacks the body count, (though you could say he killed 1/4th of the world's population), he did set the patch that those on this list followed. This list owes alot to our frient Cain.

Sultan Abdul-Hamid II should be on your list. Remember what he did to the Armenians?

Let's not forget about Oliver Cromwell. He took rule of Britain centuries ago and then stole Ireland and made it a British territory

Elaine D.:
Definitely the evil Margaret Thatcher and her equally evil Government who for almost 20 years brought misery, poverty and deprevation to millions of working class people here in the UK.

Amanda W.:
I'm not to sure I agree with all of your listings, although it was a novel idea. Mao Zedong, for example, honestly thought he was doing the right thing. Does that make what happened go away, well no, but I think that he can hardly be compared to Ivan the Terrible or serial killers. Mao was willing to make sacrifices for the good of China, and unfortunately overestimated his countrymens' own desires, and built his reforms on ideologies unstead of science and fact.

And some of your military listings (Geghis Khan, for example) I have to disagree with for a similar reason: These leaders first of all were out to expand their countries' glory, and also, that is simply how war was fought in those days. Not as neat as the way the US won WWII, with a nice fat atomic bomb in heavily poopulated cities, nor as technologically advanced as biological warefare, but effective none the less. The numbers of people killed in ancient wars are a drop in the bucket compared to modern warefare. The relative level of cruelty depends on a lot of circumstances.

In any event, I was dissapointed that you allowed yourself to cop out on some of your evil listings. Over all, however, I had a marvelous time stalling writing my essays, to which I had better return.

From: clever
Lincoln should be on the evil list, he made Americans kill each other. And his goal wasn't to free slaves, because he had slaves of his own.

From: "seidensticker"
You mentioned the different views of people on your list (Vlad seen by Romanians and non-Romanians). Another example is Tamerlane, ruler of one of the offshoots of the Ghengis Khan's empire. In Samarkand, Tamerlane is seen as a great ruler, though his methods were ruthless.

From: "Paul E"
i don't believe you didn't have the marquis de sade on the list of evil ppl.

i know many ppl into the bdsm scene might object to it how ever if you can stomach his books you will soon find out how evil that man truely was.

on passage i remember him stomping on a pregnant woman's belly until she aborted the baby. he shoved hot pokers up both the vaginal and rectal orifices of women and then once they scarred over he would do it again.

i haven't read his books but i have read some passages and he deserves to be on that list even higher up than some that you do have on the list

From: Adlihassa
I am very disappointed that Abraham (Peace be upon him) the patriarch of Jews, Christians, and Muslims does not appear on your good list. Also the prophet Mohammad(Peace be upon him) deserves to be at the top as he reafirmed the teachings of all the prophets from Adam to Jesus(Peace be upon him) before him. As to Mohammad being a war monger as Mr. Ross S. states,is entirely false. The Koran has to be read along with the traditions in order to understand what happened during that time. Mohammad(PBUH) and his followers were persecuted because they denied the many gods of their parents and their ancestors. These conflicts escalated into major confrontations and even war amongst the various Arab tribes of that era. Mohammad(PBUH) and his followers were only protecting themselves.The Pagans of that time wanted the muslims dead just like Pharoah wanted Moses(PBUH) and his people dead. Mohammad(PBUH) only taught what was revealed to him which was for all mankind to know and worship our maker and to respect your fellow man. Islam is a religion of peace. A true Muslim upon meeting anyone must say Salaam Alikum(Peace upon you). And the word Islam means(Peace or submission). A muslim is someone who is at peace or a submittor to the will of his maker.

From: "Earl Cruz"
Dear Cliff,
I found your list of evil and good people entertaining and educational. I believe the reason why it was hard to add more people to your good list because a lot of good deeds are not recorded especially in the early part of history. Also I think that the true good people are also inherently humble and thus their deeds are unrecorded. If you define people who donate money for charities as good then you have more to add to your list. Although I believe that using wealth to do good is relatively easy for the wealthy and thus do not involve any personal sacrifice. If so should they be included in the good list?
Sincerely, Earl

From: "Sergio Glogowski"
The people I would add to the List of good people would be:
Itzak Rabin (Nobel Peace Prize, Prime Minister of Israel, killed).
Elie Wiesel (writer, Holocaust survivor, Nobel Peace Prize)
Mordechai Anilevich (leader of a revolution in the ghetto of Warsov, killed)
Ernesto "Che" Guevara (liberated Cuba, killed)
Nelson Mandela (fighted for the black rights in South Africa)
Steven Biko ( fighted for the black rights in South Africa)
Gadi Glogowski

From: "aristeas"
Dear Cliff,
Having read most of the replies to your list of Top Good/Evil People In History I'm struck by the amount of knee-jerk vitriol, prejudice, ranting and incoherence of many of the replies. So let's keep this brief and to the point ..

To the list of Evil People-

Can I suggest you replace Eichman with Reinhard Tristan Eugen Heydrich (1904-42)?

Eichman was merely a functionary, a follower of orders. His fame (or infamy) is derived entirely from his arrest and trial in Israel. He is the only Holocaust perpetrator to be so tried, and his guilt has been made to serve for those (much worse) who were never brought to justice.

Heydrich built the 'police state' organisation of the Third Reich (including the Gestapo, SD, and concentration camps) and ran it until his death in '42. He organised and chaired the Wannsee Conference, which planned the Holocaust, the Einsatzgruppen and the death camps.When the Einsatzgruppen were created for the 1941 invasion of Russia and the resulting murder of millions of Jews (and others), it was on his orders, to his plan and his original idea. He developed the ideological training program for Einsatzgruppen leaders, necessary to 'steel' the resolve of those who would undertake this epoch-making crime. He opened the training program, he gave the valedictory speech, he inspired the evil 'worldview' (weltanschauung) which they took into the killing fields.

On his death in 1942 (the only senior Nazi assassinated on Allied instructions) thousands were murdered in retaliation, the village of LIdice was obliterated, and 'Aktion Reinhard' - the pogrom staged in his honour involved the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Jews (the only historical figure so commemorated, as far as I can recall). He was seen at the time as a possible future successor to Hitler and the greatest threat in the regime..

Possibly the most demonic figure of the Third Reich, Heydrich directly inspired, planned, created and led the terror mechanisms which resulted in the deaths of millions and created a legacy of misery and suffering which persists to this day. Someone had to take the genocidal wish of the Fuhrer and make it real through diligent, creative, purposeful, practical means. This was Heydrich, a man who enjoyed personal involvement in torture in the cells of Gestapo Headquarters, a man who brought all the elements of terror, political oppression and state violence together under one organisation with him at it's head (the RSHA), a man feared by his immediate suprior, the creatively-myopic Heinrich Himmler.

To the list of 'Good People' -

Might I suggest replacing Lincoln (a much propagandised figure with a 'mythic' quality at odds with his actual historical record) with William Wilberforce (1759-1833).

All religions have tolerated slavery, but only Christianity has fought against it and successfully seen it eradicated in the Western World. As the prime mover behind the Anti-Slavery Movement Wilberforce (along with his fellow Quakers) has a legacy probably second to none in the amelioration of human suffering in history.While many scientists (Lister, Jenner etc) have made a huge difference through their work, Wilberforce's work was entirely in improvement on moral grounds. His was the voice that called the Christian West to live up to it's creed of love and compassion (not, mark you, the voice of the Catholic Church or of Lutheran and Protestant Churches).

Wilberforce's legacy was the first Anti-Slavery Law in Britain, and the spread of this as a moral force throughout the world. Entire races and peoples owe him their liberty, their equality, their rights as human beings. In terms of lasting impact his place in history is greater than that of Ghandi - Indian 'untouchables' still bear the brunt of caste-prejudice, and violent suppression of their rights.

Quote from Wilberforce November 1793 "Never, never will we desist till we ... extinguish every trace of this bloody traffic, of which our posterity, looking back to the history of these enlightened times will scarce believe that it has been suffered to exist so long a disgrace and dishonor to this country."

Regards, Aristeas

From: "Suzy/Todd Lebo"
I'm sure the Aztec would nominate Cortez to one of the two lists and didn't something happen to the American Indian?
Todd Lebo
author, teacher, wine vendor

From: Karolina Topola



From: "David Griggs"

First of all, I really like your site, but there are a few problems that should be addressed. First, Abraham Lincoln should not be given any credit for the freeing of the slaves. That is just a twisted lie that he cared about the slaves. I've read in countless history books that if he could keep the union together and free no slaves, he would, if he could free one slave and keep the union together, he would, and even if he had to free every last slave to keep the union together he would. For this I discredit him for that remark. He was only interested in his image and position, not the slaves.

Second, I know the ranking is just personal opinion, but why is Jesus Christ in fourth place? If I didn't want you to read this letter knowing I was most sincere I would certainly have plenty of unpleasant things to say about Jesus Christ being fourth place!

From Rod:

Some of your correspondents mentioned his acts, but not his name- US Gen. Harold 'Hap' Arnold (WWII) Liked to fight wars by firebombing civillians. Responsible for turning Dresden, Germany and Tokyo, Japan into Dante-esque Infernos. Also recomended using the A-Bomb. To see a graphic portrayal of the effects of firebombing on civillians, watch the animated movie "Grave of the Fireflies", from Japan.

Rodney J Shepard

I should kill you for saying all these people are evil. the most evil people of all are the people who run the Government they have down more damage to this land and killed more people for no reason at all. They go into war because our country is going poor and draft people and expect them to go and die for the country that they were only born in and didn't have a choice to move. they will draft an 18 year old kid who has just barely gotten to start his life and then have to die for some bullshit nation that is only worried about money, and power. They don't gove a damn about me you or any one else. For them to be in control is more important. And humans industrialize this land kill helpless animals, poison the air, land and the water. So my point is humans in general are the worst of all there is no good human. They take from the land and don't give back a damn thing. the only damn thing that is worthless greedy and does not produce anything but things for himself.

From: "Kristopher Dylan Andrews"
Like Vlad Tepes Dracula, The Great Khan Temujin is revered by natives of Mongolia, and I think that an objective review of history would have to place the USA higher on your evil list than Ghengis Khan (or Dracula for that matter) especially in context of the potential for good and evil in each case. Also, Guatoma Buddha, besides his practice of hedonism, drug use, and social deviance, is an ironic choice for either list since the philosophy based on his teachings culminates in a non-dualistic point of enlightenment that embraces detachment and inaction (to dissolve ones karma ultimately). Abraham Lincon was not nearly as virtuous as intelligent (emancipating only slaves in rebel states!), and it is suspect to praise a US president for being one of the last heads of state in the world to denounce and abolish slavery. Further, it is a logical truism that any tribal leader in a position like Moses' allegedly was in would be able and certain to make up new laws for their people, and I am certain that most in the past did a better job of it. Not to mention the fact that many Native American tribes had less than a 24 hour work week before being blessed with European puritanical tyranny, persecution, and drudgery.

I submit that if "good" and "evil" exist at all beyond the realm of philosophical discussion, that they can be simplified to a measure of how sincere each of us are in trying to understand ourselves and each other, how honest we are to ourselves and each other, and how well we accept and act upon our complete freedom and responsibility as individuals. Or, even simpler, the two may be only poorly cast sides of the coin of truth, defined with little regard for relativity, objectivity, or even natural law.

Kris Andrews

From: Susan Shipman

Part of the reason it is easier to think of evil people rather than good is that evil is flashier and memorable and good can be the cumulation of lots of little things over the course of a lifetime. Many unknown people have probably done good that benefits the entire world. Or, is good merely the absence of evil?

I think one person who should be added to the evil list is the Pope for his stance on birth control. What greater evil can be done than to ruin this lovely planet? The ruination of the planet will come from overburdening it with a population that cannot be adequately fed, clothed, housed, freed from disease, etc. When the planet is ruined, we shall all die. Many of the Pope's followers are in poorer countries, such as Mexico and other Latin American nations, too.

I do not mean to be anti-Catholic. I feel the same about certain Protestant issues, too. It's just that the number of people involved in this birth control issue is so great.


From: "Reg Salter"

Interesting list of good "People". There is no confirmable proof that = half of these "People" even existed.

From: "Winkel, Heather P." Evil - Reverend Jones - the person who made hundreds of people drink purple coolaid.

From: "W. H. Bryant"
I don't understand how you can rate Jesus Christ as 4th on the list of good. I believe He should be first. He did not only preach love, He is love. He died for the sins of the entire world-the entire world-the people of today, tomorrow, yesterday, the future,the present, the past-for everyone that they may not perish, but have ever lasting life. John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life."

From: "Marcus Rauchfuss"
Hello Cliff!

Your site is really one of the cool examples for good stuff on the WWW. But enough compliments!

I find your good/evil scale most interesting, it is, as one might expect, biased but since we are all influenced by our (pick one any or all) upbrin ging/moral values/religion/social circles/education being biased is to be expected. Personally (and my views are just as biased) I would remove Linc oln and add a number of US Presidents (possibly including Lincoln) somewhe re between ranks 7-10 on the evil list for being responsible for the most effective genocide in the known history of mankind: the slaughtering of th e Native Americans. This propably even beats Vlad Tepes (who should not be that high on the list) since a number of treaties were signed with the Na tive Americans only to be broken a few years or months later. I would repl ace Adolf Hitler with "The Nazi Government" since people like Goering, Goe bbels and Himler were no less evil only less prominent. I would also remove Ghengis Khan from the evil list, he was a brutal conqu eror but he made Asias trade routes secure and in the end that aided Europ e A LOT. And if you keep him on the list you should put the aformentioned US presidents on the list because they fit into the same category (from a certain point of view).

And I don't know the guys nam but who ever is responsible for the appeal w= hich lead to creation being tought in some southern and midwest States ins= tead of evolution should be on the evil list because religous bigotry whic= h leads to people being educated with lies and myths IS evil.

OK, see you!


From: "bmeacham"

I am saying it is easier to be negative than positive, because I do think that there have been far more evil people in this world than good. I can't rate them, and I can't say they are the goodest people the world has ever seen. I think it may be one aspect of goodness to be humble and consequently run the risk of not being recognized. I agree with all your choices, including Jesus, Abraham Lincoln, and Mother Theresa, I also think that goodness has different aspects to it, and it depends on the value judgements of the rater (or even his or her feelings at the time they do the rating) to include someone on the list.

Some people off the top of my head who haven't been written about yet:

St. Elizabeth Ann Seton
Joan of Arc
Galileo who stuck to his guns and therefore was prosecuted by the Inquisition for insisting that the world revolved around the sun and his daughter, Sister Marie Celeste, who lived a life of obscurity, poor health and poverty but emotionally and intellectually supported her father during his prosecution and died shortly after his release at a relatively young age)

That is what I mean by people who are not recognized who are just as good if not more so. They support the people who do the great acts.

I also have information about a system of divination that you might be interested in. I haven't had experience with it yet, but the developer promises great things. Her name is Katherine Cover Sabin, and it is called the Associative Card Code.


From: "Gidge S"
Dear Dr. Pickover,
First I have to say that I'm amazed by your page and your books. I'm the only teenage girl I know who gets into heated discussions about the fourth dimension and time travel, and I've only yet read two of them (I'm saving the rest for thsoe loooong family car rides. Yikes). Anyway, this email is in regards to your list of the "top ten" good and evil people.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn said that "If only there were evil people somewher, insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" Therefore, if the capacity for good and evil is in everyone, I don't see how anyone person can be labeled as ultimately evil or ultimately good. Of course, that is from a detached viewpoint. As a living, emotional person, there's no way I'm going to argue that Hitler wasn't one evil dude.

Selecting candidates for your good list is even harder. Millions are eternally grateful to Mozart for his music, but does this mean he's "good"? I can't tell you the various degrees of joy I go through when I'm singing along to a Beatles album, but I don't think this should qualify them. Or maybe it should. The only thing that's concrete about your list is that there will always be people who disagree.

Sincerely, Jane S.

From: Thomas Bodine

Hi Cliff
Like the web site.

I am living on Antigua in the West Indies.

I just returned from visiting St. Kitts where they have a place called Bloody Bay where the Europeans massacred 2000 Carib indians. Evil or Not?

They say the indians were about to do the same to them.

I'm not happy with those replies that infer there's no absolutes with regards to killing or murder.

I want absolutes. But then maybe there aren't any.

From: Mel Montgomery

Just finished scanning around your good and evil page and I came to the conclusion that the idea of political leaders as being good or evil is just not a good idea. The problem with being a politician or a leader is the fact that you must (at least try to) make your people agreeable with you. Biggest example would be Mousolini of Italy. The only reason why he wanted to attack Abysinnia was to get the "love and support" of his people. And (according to some sources) France let him do it! So in your grand scheme of things with evil and good, the French Ambassador and Mousolini should be considered evil. But if we continue with this method, then pretty much one could find good and evil in every political leader in history. Even Vlad. Even Hitler. Even Churchill and Gladstone. Genuinely good people are also difficult. The only ones that seem that way are religious leaders. So now we're getting the whole "separation of church and state" in which most Americans hold so dear. But if you're looking for somebody who has CONTRIBUTED to this world, well then, you've hit it spot on! But I would have to say, I would add such talented people as The Beatles for changing our music and singing about love. (and yes, I agree that they have their "bad" or "evil" sides as well.) And pretty much one could add anybody talented like them. Such as Steven Speilburg for bringing us such thought provoking films as "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan." Hell, if it wasn't for Speilburg, only a small amount of historians and their spouses would know anything about Schindler! One person who wrote, talked about Vlad being a literary inspiration. Well then! If we're still talking of contributions, how about the literary scene? Jack Keroac, Edgar Allen Poe, John Keats, etc etc. In all reality, this could go on forever. And in all reality, it is a question worth asking. But like all questions like these, it's too broad and difficult to answer. Where does one weigh go! od and evil but in their own head. To open it all up to everybody, well that takes guts. Nice job.

Best regards, and good luck
Melissa M.

From: Gargoyle

Please remove Abraham Lincoln and Moses from your 'good' list - or transfer them Hitler or Mao as well.

Moses was a Jewish crazed religious fanatic and a butcher of thousends. For example, he destroyed completely destroyed the world's first city of Jericho killing every man, woman and children (40,000?) in the world's oldest city, with exception of a pair of traitors - and the Bible-writers were proud of it. His other infamous orders incude ruthless massacre of 5,000 Jews after he returned from a mountain where 'God' gave him so-called '10 Commendments' (also mentioned in Old Testament) or a proud confess to 'summoning' of '10 Egypt Plagues' (looks like he liked 10 number) what - according to the 'Holy Bible' - resulted in death of thousends Egyptians, including every first-born son in every family in the land. I can't understand how this kind of lunatic psychopath can be thought as 'good'!

And as for Abe Lincoln...let me quote something:
Abraham Lincoln, born in 1809 and assassinated in 1865, was sincere in his desire to free the slaves. His debates with Judge Steven Douglas are legendary. To this day Lincoln is a symbol of integrity and honesty in our country. He was also a racist and believed only in the white race. On September 18, 1858 in Charleston in a debate against Douglas, Lincoln was asked how he felt about "negro citizenship" he replied, "I am not in favor of negro citizenship."[1] Lincoln was for freeing slaves and disbanding that evil institution of slavery, but he did not want "Negroes" in the country. During the mid-1800s, African-Americans were not wanted in the United States. Abolitionist wanted to free them, make them Christians and send them back to Africa. African-Americans were not considered to be on the same level as white Americans. Nevertheless, the fact that Lincoln freed the slaves, yet did not want them in the country does not mesh well with his being considered a great humanitarian. In addition to the Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln wrote a truly remarkable proclamation. The Emancipation Proclamation was written to free the slaves. However, he mentioned freeing the slaves in "states or designated parts of a state that people whereof shall be in rebellion against the United States shall be then, thenceforward and forever free."[2] The proclamation was truly a derogatory statement against the Southern states only. The Northern states were to free their slaves also. Some did and some did not. Earlier, in May 1862, Lincoln received a letter from the Headquarters of the Southern Army, which basically said Georgia, Florida and South Carolina slaves were set free.[3] However, Lincoln sent word back in a proclamation revoking that letter from the Southern Army. His reason was "not any other commander or person, has been authorized by the government of the United States to make a proclamation declaring the slaves of any state altogether void"[4] Thus, Lincoln thought he could set slaves free when they were not part of his country, but the South could not set them free when the slaves were part of the Confederate States. Lincoln, Spokesman for White Supremacy Abraham Lincoln's legend is truly exaggerated. No other president has had so much written about himself. One might believe that Lincoln was a greater President than Thomas Jefferson or even George Washington. Although Lincoln was against slavery he was also against "Negroes". In the South, having "Negroes" in the country was never an issue. Unfortunately, much of what Lincoln stood for was opposed to Southern culture, and he personally was against the South. In another debate with Judge Steven Douglas, Lincoln himself shows one more reason why he should not be immortalized. On September 18, 1858 he had this to say:
I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black racesthat I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.[5]
So there stands Mr. Abraham Lincoln, a spokesman for White Supremacy! To be fair it must be pointed out that a many of Southerners and Northerners felt the same as Lincoln. But to immortalize the man who freed the slaves, and claim he was righteous or just, is wrong. By contrast, there were many in the South who did not own slaves and worked comfortably alongside African-Americans.
Any winning side in a war will usually be considered the moral and just side. The winners are marked as heroes for saving their side and even for saving (as well as conquering) the opposing side. The North was thought to have saved the American union. "They fought to save the American government. They fought to free the slaves." What this myth hides is the real reason the North went to war with the South. The North was trying to protect the Union, but the South was not part of this union during the war and shortly before the war.

Not mentioning his ultra-racism towards American Indians, and murder of tens of thousends Confederate civilians and prisoners of war. This man should be on the 'evil' list instead.

And now, some statistics - to know who were the XXth Century biggest killers (these are _minimal_ numbers):


II. 128,168,000 VICTIMS: THE DEKA-MEGAMURDERERS 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill 20,946,000 Murdered: The Nazi Genocide State 10,214,000 Murdered: The Chinese Nationalist Regime


5,964,000 Murdered: Japan's Savage Military 2,035,000 Murdered: The Khmer Rouge Hell State 1,883,000 Murdered: Turkey's Genocidal Purges 1,670,000 Murdered: The Vietnamese War State 1,585,000 Murdered: Communist Poland's Ethnic Cleansing 1,503,000 Murdered: The Pakistani Cutthroat State 1,072,000 Murdered: Tito's Slaughterhouse Yugoslavia


1,663,000 Murdered? Orwellian North Korea 1,417,000 Murdered? Barbarous Mexico 1,066,000 Murdered? Tsar Russia

And now the under-million murderers, like Saddam Hussein, Leonid Brezhniev, Boris Yeltsin, Vladimir Putin, Slobodan Milosevic, Karadic, Franco, Pinochet, and dozens of other fascist, communist, nationalist and religious regimes across the world.

Most probably near 170,000,000 people have been murdered in cold-blood by governments. The most such killing was done by the Soviet Union (near 62,000,000 people), the communist government of China is second (near 35,000,000), followed by Nazi Germany (almost 21,000,000), and Nationalist China (some 10,000,000). Lesser megamurderers include WWII Japan, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, WWI Turkey, communist Vietnam, post-WWII Poland, Pakistan, and communist Yugoslavia. The most intense genocide was carried out by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, where they killed over 30 percent of their subjects in less than four years.

Gargoyle, Poland

From: "Taylor, Henry"

Enjoyed the page but would like to suggest a deeper exploration (perhaps on another linked page) of the criteria for the greatest extremes of evil and good. I would agree, for example, that DeSadean delight would be a good criteria for profound evil. But, along-side that would need to be an acknowledgement of the equally great evil of compassionless expedient murder and suffering of "non-combatants" (for lack of a better word). The dropping of the A-bomb may technically have saved more lives than it took, at least in the short run....but the callousness and indiscriminate quality of the event, the equivocation of infants with trained and cognizant combatants, is unacceptable I would think it qualifies even with the remorse of the major engineers and initiators of the project.

Another aspect might be that Good and evil exist on a continuum and side-by-side. A person may reveal both qualities, both extremes of good and evil...the point, as with Vlad would be to weigh them against one another. Could Vlad's goodness outweigh or even balance his evil? It might be claimed to mitigate his evil aspect but then do the extremes on both sides match up. How many lives did Vlad bring into the world and protect from suffering of violence hunger? This would be in a state in a positive or above the norm aspect relative to Romania and surrounding states of the time... Put simply, how many lives received the benefit of elevation to upper middle class by Vlad and his policies? How many lives were equally changed for the better by Roosevelt? Maybe Roosevelt receives note for both goodness and evilness....his evilness might land him on the Ten Worst list but does his goodness get him onto the Ten Best list?

Just more stuff to think about I guess

From georg.

henri dunant- founder of the red cross, nobelprize winner

From: NaziJS3

I think Josph Stalin should be first on the evil list because he killed billions of peaents, political and military leaders, an entire political party, and anyone else that oppose him. He also brian washed Russa's children to turn in thier parent if they oppsed him at all so he can kill them.

and Dina R.

I think Lincoln should be on the good list because when he did abolish slavery he lost a lot of suport during the war which lead to riots and death of alot of Blacks IN the North and BY Northeners

and I think Jesus Christ should be first not just because he is God and that he died for us but he dedicated his life in bringing others to God and brought peace and healing to a terrible time

From: LMDFMY Personally, I think you're right on target with those you've put on your good and evil lists.

Poor Marius' problem arose, I think, because you, like George Orwell in his essays, paint very graphic word-pictures that force readers to see the uncomfortable. Therefore, insignificant things --like typos -- became his defense against the unpalatable. Then too, other nations do not typically air their dirty laundry like we do.

So do you think achieving social order makes ruthlessness non-evil?

From: "Heidi Milton"

From: mb

Dear Sir,

I find your list fascinating beyond belief. The diverseness of the recipients of the most evil and most good men and women to ever live show a broad knowledge of history and if not a great degree at least some degree of study. Although I think that a larger description of some people on the page would make it a better resource for students. Maybe birth and death dates and a larger description for Jesus and Adolph Hitler. I must admit I do find one fault with the page, Carl Djerassi on the same page with Jesus? I think not and Abraham Lincoln was a good man but his influence was nowhere near the scope of any one else on the list. I think you should reconsider his place. Thank you for your time.


Dr. mb

From: Alfred Lehmberg

Happened on your list regarding the top ten good and evil. Have a look at Chrispher Hitchens' book, "The missionary position, mother teresa in theory and practice" for citations on why she should be jerked right off your top ten good list... she's not bad enough to be added to your bad list (not quite) but she should certainly come off the good one.

One of the more minor points? Think about the kind of medical care she received when she got ill (and it was the finest) compared to what she provided to the sick and dying of Calcutta as a matter of institutional doctrine... the woman was just another evil religious fundamentalist, baptising Hindus and Moslems without their knowledge and against their will.

From: Rittergould

H.H., his real last name was Mudgett, was indeed an extremely evil person. He was certainly more enterprising and creative than the average serial killer. However, I suspect that he was included on your list due to the mistaken belief that he killed about 200 people. That figure is probably grossly inflated. Nobody really knows how many people he killed. Before he was executed he confessed to having killed 28 people.

I nominate King Leopold II of Belgium whose empire building schemes in the Congo resulted in the deaths of millions of Africans, an international scandal which has been largely forgotten, but not entirely so thanks to Adam Hochschild's excellent book, King Leopold's Ghost

From: "tenbear123"
Josef Mangela (Doctor Death)
WWII under Hitler. Experimented with twins. Tortured them to see how much pain they could take before they died.

From: "J.D."
Here are some thoughts I had in response to your web page.

> Why is it easier to think of evil examples than good ones?
The forces and influences of evil are currently thriving.
> Developing this list was not an easy task due to the complexity of human personalities and the fact that goodness and evilness depend on the perspective of the time.
I suggest that what is good and evil does not vary over time, just as light and dark. What may change over time is the influence of evil, and the human perception of what is evil. Some humans may even become at peace with forms of evil, thus opening the door for all kinds of atrocities. Evil may also draw strength from confusion over what is good or evil.

Evil may offer much truth. It is the last few percentage points of deception that is the key for evil to achieve its means. Evil can be successful, and can offer good solutions to real problems. Offered amidst the true solutions is the dark poison, masquerading as yet another solution.

For example, the tolerance that allows benevolence towards fellow humans despite their flaws is good. Evil would again preach tolerance, but with the hidden agenda of legitimizing that which advances the cause of evil. Ironically, evil could falsely represent good and condemn intolerance against something that harbors concealed evil, and thus breed intolerance against those who truly stand for good.

Evil might also favor us to believe that we are imperfect and thus necessarily evil. While we may be imperfect, we do have the power to seek the truth and goodness. Just as an athlete's game performance improves with practice, practicing good even down to seemingly small things helps to combat evil in the world. But practice works both ways. Evil will attempt to exploit every flaw to its advantage, and may have much patience. Without purposefully striving for goodness, a human may be an open target.

Kind regards,

- John

From: Liamror

GEORGE BUSH!!!!, Who ever was responsible for Red China and the rapes and killing of many Chinese people. (I know he is Japanese.)

From: "Mister Wade"

I couldn't help but feel sick when I read that Moses was on your list of good people. According to the Bible, he had ordered thousands of people to be killed. There are entire pages of the Bible that say nothing other than who to kill. This, of course, lead to fanatical murder for thousands of years in the name of God. If God were real, he would be the king of evil for commanding this. Most Christians think he is all loving, but if they paid attention to the Bible they would see that God's message is to love few and kill many.

From: Abnaki96

Add the piece of garbadge Mcveigh to the evil list. May he burn in hell for all he has done.

From: Folktribunen

Dear Mr Pickover

I usually don't bother to write and tell my opinion about things on the internet, but I must tell you that your discussion with the romanian Marius and the irish woman deb about Vlad Tepes is very unintelligent and ignorant from your side.

I cannot understand how you can call yourself Dr. and have such an ignorant and stupid approach to historical matters. I have read to little to know if Vlad Tepes is "evil" or "good". But I certainly know that if you want to know something about historical matters, you cannot go the cinema and look att Count Dracula. Why don't you read some books about the subject, and if you think you don't have the time you shouldn't make a statement about it.

Regarding Clinton, you said to Deb say: "I think the fact that you say Clinton is as evil as Hitler and as evil as the leader of the Spanish Inquisition makes your point very clearly. I suppose the six million Jews who Hitler gassed might not have agreed, but who can tell for sure? But forget the Jews. They can't talk because they died."

Well, I suppose that the countless Iraqi babies and women who were bombed during the Gulf war might not agree with you that Clinton is a good guy. Neither would the thousands of civilian serbs who were brutally bombed to death by your dear mr Clinton in the last "war of freedom".

I think that you americans should try to consider that other people also have an opinion about what you americans do. Maybe we europeans do not want you to bomb our cities, kill our woman and children and try to rule over governments with the help of your military powers.

I DO NOT say that Vlad is a good guy, for I am not familiar with the subject. But I do say that Bill Clinton is a very, very evil person and that the your american government is very very evil if I judge by your own definition of evil.

If you can justify Clintons and your governments actions against the arab people and the european peoples as something good, then you must understand that other people can justify their leaders actions as something good. Because Clintons actions when he is killing arab or european babies and women is not less evil than Vlads actions when (If?) he killed romanian babies and women.

By the way, if you do not understand this simple logic, I cannot understand how you can call yourself an intellectual and a Dr.

Best Regards Martin
My Reponse to Martin:
> Ref:  Your note of Sat, 05 May 2001 16:29:57 +0200
> Hi, as a follw up to my previous note, would you consider
> Clinton as evil as Hitler?
> The reason I ask is that I think it's important for me to
> learn from other people's perspectives.
> Thanks, Cliff
Hello Cliff

Yes you can add my opinion to your page.

To your other question, I must answer no. I think that Clinton as a person is much more evil than Adolf Hitler was. I do not have the time or patience to try to get you to understand me, because I have learned from your discussion with Marius that you will not listen to what I am saying. As a matter of fact, you will not even try to understand how I am thinking and reasoning.

As a tip: if you "americans" want to continue ruling the earth for another hundred years or more; try not to be so oversatisfied with yourself and so egocentric. This is neither a noble trait or a good strategy. Your behavior to the rest of the world will punish the whole of your people.



From: "Bonnie Marinaccio" so basically ivan the terrible was not terrible at all--he actually had an physical disfigure with his spine causing him to have high dosages of mercury in his body ( a form of medicine at the time) making him shake and barely speak. he didnt even rule, but had nobles run the country and do things for him

also ab lincoln raped his slaves lara

From: "Waterman, Mathew"

I think one of the most important things to consider when judging whether someone or whether an action is evil is in the rationalization. As seen in your conversations regarding Vlad the Impaler vs. Clinton, and, similarly, in many of the posts related to our own government, almost any action can be rationalized away. For example, some of the respondants said that Vlad's actions were, "necessary", or could not be understood today because that is what was done, "back then." The crux of the issue becomes intention.

Put it this way: No one wakes up in the morning and decides they are going to be evil. Every person on your "evil" list had some sort of rationalization for their actions. As many pointed out, Vlad and Hitler alike had the intention of doing good things for his countrymen while passing off the amorphous "others" as the enemy. Their methods were the part where they crossed the line. Likewise, each of us every day find ways to rationalize our unduly harsh or unforgiving actions. Now, on the other side of the coin, the people on the "good" list largely practiced forgiveness and tolerance. To them there was little rationalization for cruel, callous behavior.

Therefore, if one is to separate the "good" from the "bad" it is certainly not going to be an issue of black and white. Instead, it can be looked at as being more or less grey. Does this mean that Vlad should be considered "evil" because, though he allegedly did help some of his country's poor, he also tortured and murdered thousands and, more importantly, enjoyed it? Personally, I would say this does qualify him as an evil human being. Did Clinton lie to the country and act foolishly (...and in a soupbox moment: What leader hasn't?)? Of course. But does this put him on the level of Hitler? Certainly not. As I believe you mentioned at one point, would one rather be a Jew under Hitler's reign or one of the Americans 'insulted' by Clinton's behavior. Some realism is in order here.

My personal feeling is this: All of these people are human and will be falliable. The key question when judging anyone's actions is intention. While Lincoln may have also had the economic incentive on his side and Vlad had some countrymens' interests in mind, there is no way you could rationailize the two as being morally equal.

From: "tianmere"

Greetings, As I emailed earlier, I was thrilled with your "ESP" page. It was = terrific, so was the computer hard drive reading page [that one was a = terrifically sneaky display of HTML]. However, the more I read your = site, the more I realize just how English your sense of humor is. = You're almost as funny as PDQ Bach.

But, as for the top ten evil people...... Yes, Clinton does not fully = satisfy the definition of good. [So, that makes him either neutral or = evil. And, I don't think he's neutral.] He's not trustworthy, that's = for sure. And, only time will be able to tell if he really harmed the = world or not. I've heard that it takes about two years after a = president leaves office for everything to start taking effect, thus = throwing the public scorn on the next of office, when the proverbial = fecal matter has hit the rotary cooling device.

But, I'd like to nominate George Lucas for one of the modern really good = people. While he may not qualify for saint-hood, he definitely has = inspired hope and the desire to achieve in numerous young people. =20

Other great and wonderful people exist, but due to our capitalist = society, they aren't saleable. Bad, evil, illfortuned, etc can be = sensationalized, dramatized, and strewn out for weeks. Hatred is a = strong emotion that I'm sure has some instintucal survival traits = attached to it. Good, on the other hand, is comforting. Comfort is = something that is only noticed when it's missing. Heros are the stuff = of myths. In this day and age of glorified violence, the hero's actions = go unsung. And since they go unnoticed, there isn't any chance of them = becoming mythical. =20

Thanks for letting me ramble. As I get through more of your website, I = will probably feel compelled to write you more.

Have a great day! Donni

From: "Louise"

Hi Cliff,

I've been thinking about your good and evil lists and I agree it's harder to think of people who are good. I think your visitors who speculate about evil being more obvious and easier to define than good are right on the money.

So I tried to decide what was "good" if "bad" is killing folks and so forth, but I don't think killing people is always bad, for example perhaps in some contexts killing an individual might be considered good. And I think it's not so much the action of killing that is bad, but perhaps the effect on the population, ditto with other non-good acts. Perhaps the most evil acts are those which make us feel despairing, or that devalue life, the things that deprive our lives of beauty and transcendence.

And that's why the only actual candidate for "good" I could come up with (amongst a whole bunch of 'the guy who started the tulip craze'; 'whatshisname who brought chocolate to Europe's; 'that great composer guy.....Handel? Bach?' and so on) is .... I was going to say St Benedict, the gardening monk, who really started a lot of the way we think about gardens today, but as I was writing that it seemed to me that really gardens are an Arabic thing - but I do stand by the garden as a major force of good.


From: Mark Pokras

lenin could be another evil person

From: Pimphomieothe1st

i think you should but saddam hussain on your list

From: "Roger Herbert"

Am wholly surprised that Margaret Thatcher does not figure more highly. I suppose this is a US site, but she has not only caused misery in the UK but worldwide. She has caused wars, been Pinochet's advocate and her first job after being PM was promoting Marlborough cigarettes to Third World children. It seems to me it is easier to pin down acts of evil largely because good is EVERYWHERE and we take much of it for granted. However, I debate the whole idea of evil. I believe there is only love and fear. Bigotry comes from fear, evil acts and systems come from fear. There are good people and there are ***ked up people. Remember everyone was an innocent child at one point in their lives. No-one can say that a baby is evil! Ruth

From: Brian Leahy

On your 'Good and Evil' page, Adolf Hitler is often spelled "Adolph". I'm no historian, but I've always seen it spelled with an 'f' rather than a 'ph'. -BL

From: Sockmonkey2001 Marquis de there was a twisted individual. Your list is very well done. As a fan also of your books, your work constantly continues to influence me help me grow in so many ways. Thank you for all your words.

Eric M. Stobie

From: "Aaron Saunders"

I would happen to, (like many others,) disagree with your list. For starters, I don't believe in the existence of good and evil. Two reasons: 1.) The Spooks-in-the-Sky-Swindle has yet to be confirmed, and apparently, that's what decides what is and what isn't good or evil. 2.) There are no concrete definitions or standards as to what good and evil are. However, whereas Right and Wrong are concerned, then I will agree that they exist, but only in the eye of the beholder.

However, I too, am going to have to object to this list. Here are my objections:

1. Martin Luther King - a closet Commie and pervert! Sound like a guy who deserves to be at the top of the "Good-guy list to you?"

2. Abe Lincoln - who obviously wasn't interested in the welfare of negroes, whatsoever, but rather in some idiotic agenda that would rivel those of today. He doesn't does deserve to be at the Top of the "Good-Guy" list for anything.

3. Jesus Christ - a Jewish comic book character, whose existence is not substantiated by history or by any archeological finds whatsoever. Does Thor, Odin and Loki deserve to be at the Top of the Good-guy List too?

4. Adolf Hitler - like it or not this Man has been one of the best damn friends to Western Civilization, during the 20th century. If people will actually READ - YES, READ - up on the actual history behind the 3rd Reich rather than swallow that atrocious garbage spewed by the media, then they may learn to appreciate the 3rd Reich for what it actually was rather than what some sicko from Hollywood's imagination makes it out to be.

5. Vlad Tepes - one of the most brilliant and legendary leaders of Eastern Europe of all time! This Man, too, crushed the threat of advancing Turks and was, genuinely, as one of your respondents' claimed A Peoples' Leader. His villiany is way too overrrated.

6. The Pope of all People... Quiet frankly, I don't care what Pope it is, these Spook-Diddlers do not deserve the grace of a brown-nosing media.


8. Moses - this guy was some psychotic, babbling moron who would rivel some nutcases, such as Jones, Manson or Koresh.

Conclusion: If these are your idols and foes, you must be either one gullible chump or some nutcase. Which, I don't know you tell me.

From: "Manon Masteric" Dear Cliff I propose you to add to your list of "evil" persons Radovan Karadzic, the lidership of bosnianserbs during the war in Bosnia (1992-1995) who wanted to exterminate the muslim population in Bosnia and Herzegovina. More information on that you can find on


Good luck in your future work

Manon from Bosnia

From: AnnieB007


From: B. M.

Hi cliff,

I just stayed somewhat longer on your site and viewed the good/evil top tens... My personal opinion is that there is really no "big" or "small" evil or less or more, only the impact of certain deeds on "the world" are bigger as others differs... And maybe if I ste pon an ant purposely to destroy it and to feed my hate or anger the impact is much bigger than I ever can imagine... ;) We only see what we believe we see (I'm not sure, but I feel that this might be a quote from someone), anyway the impact of people like Hitler, Stalin seems very big... but maybe it was something small that happened in their youth that lead them to what their lives have become... maybe it was something what happened thousends of years before they were ever born that lead us into existence and made/make us do "bad" things... (excuse my poor english by the way, i hope you understand what i'm trying to say here)

Personally I have a strong feeling that their are very powerful people (probably very rich, old banking families, nobles, former kings and queens maybe) of wich most of them we never hear and who we will never see nor hear of... people who can make or break a whole nation (lead it to war, destroy it) Hitler and people like him are maybe mere puppets in a big game of chess... Ok, maybe this sounds paranoid but if you check on what happens to people and how easy they can be manipulated I think there are some really bad motherfuckers (excuse me) over in this category of powerful, rich mass media controllers and manipulating puppetmasters... it's like most religions wich were used most of the time as a means of manipulating people, now it has become money... who doesn't believe in money anymore (well, everybody here in Holland does, and I think it's the same in the US)

So... I don't have any names for you, but what I'm trying to say is that it is not always the rude puppet wich is the most evil, most of the time it is his or her boss... like with dogs, if you raise'em well the chances that they will be nice are bigger than if I kick my dog veryday and don't feed him, yell at him, etc... one day he bites a little child... who's the evil then??? me or the dog?? you tell me;)



From: "Bruce Burns" Cliff,

I must disagree with your inclusion of Moses in your "Good" list. = Besides the question of whether Moses, and incidently Jesus Christ too, = ever existed, a thorough reading of the Pentateuch, the 5 books of the = Old Testament that are attributed to Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, = Numbers and Deuteronomy) clearly show that Moses was a murderer (Exodus = 2:12), ordered the murder of prisoners (Numbers 31:17), ordered the = keeping of female prisoners who were virgins (Num 31:18), led mass = killings of women and children (Deuteronomy 2:34), ordered killings = (Deut 13:15) etc.....In other words you would not want Moses babysitting = your children or get into a religious disagreement with him.=20 Sincerely, Bruce

From: edward elias


You included Ben Yoshua aka Jesus of Nazareth and Moses on the top 10 "good people". I dont think they deserve to be there because:

1. Jesus in the New Testament prove to be a racist when he refused to heal the son of the Greek woman.

2. If we are to believe the New Testament, Jesus has promised to come back to enjoy the death of countless millons of people who have not accepted his word. Read Revelations

In regards to Moses:

1. If we are to believe the Old Testament, then Moses is a Genocidal maniac camparable to Hilter and others. He murders innocent children, just because he does not agree with the politics or religion of their parents. (see Exodus)

2. Murders a security officer in cold blood. (read Exodus)

3. Murders people of his own group because they choose another religion. (read Exodus and the Murders of Aaron by Moses comand. Read the definition of genocide, and this qualifies as so.

Therefore, I dont think that is scholarly to include this caracters in your list. I would appreciate an answer.


Rev Elias Bernard

From: "digits"
Hello Professor Pickover

A few things about the good and evil list.

Wouldn't it be better to run the Good/Evil list either totally democratically with a voting page, or to make it completely your work by doing all the research yourself. By taking bits and pieces from email submissions, you will be heading the advice of some liars and biased folk and ignoring the occasional verifiable submission. This hybrid between the two just seems unworkable.

You also included no real criteria for determining evil. Most evil in mind and intent? Most evil in utilitarian result?

There is also no real criteria for determining good. Lincoln did free the Southern slaves, but probably not out of moral conviction if you've read all his speeches esp. pre-Civil War. Mother Teresa, while a wonderful woman didn't affect the world nearly as much, but was undoubtably more devoted to the suffering masses.

And what in the world in Eichman doing up there? While he did his job effectively he neither masterminded the plan, nor carried it out with glee. Just sort of a plodding success. As Arendt said a shearly banal evil. Without him the Holocaust would have probably been the same, there just would have been someone else either more zealous, or just as determined as Eichman. While Eichman may be more relevent and understandable, if frightening, I fail to see how he is "more evil" in either a utilitarian results-based, or kantian decision-based ethical system.

I just don't see what you are trying to accomplish with this list

ps. and if you need student researchers next summer, I am a 3rd year physics major at Calvin College...

thanks, D. B.-Clarke

From: "Daoist Raver"

This e-mail will be a bit long, so I apologize in advance.

As to your first question, my friend sent me the link. As to your second: well, there are some parts where the typography and design could be better, and the spelling and grammar, but the content is pretty darn good the way it is. Also to add to your list of Evil Persons (funny how so many of them are national leaders, eh?) - Enver Hoxha, ruler of Albania from the 40's to the 90's. I can't really go into too much detail here, but he was rather evil. Slobodan Milosevic (ethnic cleansing) also comes readily to mind - he seems far more evil than say, Saddam Hussein, who is not a particularly nice fellow either. On the list of Good, I would nominate Buckminster Fuller, who gave tirelessly of himself to try and bring new ideas that would be in his own words "omni-advantageous", and tried to prove, through the World Game, how evil harms us all.

"My goal in conducting this little demonstration was to emphasize how easily we can be fooled and how great our will is to believe in the spiritual, the paranormal, and phenomena beyond science. I hope this simple test reinforces the need for skeptical thinking when evaluating claims of the paranormal."

- Right. There's enough weirdness that exists within the realm of the verifiable without having to make things up. I am into Information Theory right now, which is leading me towards some interesting interpretations of the quantum non-locality situation, a merging of the many-worlds and copenhagen interpretations. I am also a daoist (as was Niels Bohr, one of my personal idols), and it bothers me a bit that people misidentify that philosophy (well, as laid out in the Dao De Jing at least...), assuming that it makes untestable paranormal claims. It doesn't, and is not incompatible with the scientific method at all. It is merely a set of observable patterns of nature and human behavior. Perhaps not as precise as those discovered by years of experimentation but a good guideline as to how the universe seems to behave on a macro-level. I think that most of these critics never bothered to actually study the text but just lump it together with 'eastern religion'. I am very happy to see skepticism in others on the other hand, and I agree with your statement. There may well be a god in the machine, but if there is, we must have some restraint in what we can claim about it. The exclusive or may not be broken. Glad to get your response.


"It is not the logic of the universe which is fuzzy, but the perception of it." ________________________________ "Both knowledge and experience are real, but reality has many forms, which seem to cause complexity.

By using the means appropriate,(reason and observation) we extend ourselves beyond the barriers of such complexity, and so experience the Tao. " - Tao Te Ching, Chapter 1

From: "Liza Simonova"

Jesus should not be on the list since it never was proved beyond doubt that he actually existed perhaps it was a story to convert the Egypstians to christianity? and what says the story had not been told and told and retold and changed in such a way that his possible mistakes had been eliminated and good deeds exaggerated?

also, if you really need someone for your evil list, try Marquis de Sade he vafoured torture for his sexual pleasure as well, and wrote books (well... those big roll thingies of a coupla meters long anyway) on it finding something on him should not be hard, put his name into any search engine and you should have enough hits

oh, and put Ford and who-ever else invented the car on the evil list too.. so many people died in agony because of that! (if you excuse the bad of that because it's done so much good, consider the environment damage too and if you still excuse the bad parts, you must excuse Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, Vlad, and more folks as well.)

From: NDABritti

I think I'm on to you, though I might be totally wrong. Were some of the people and their accompanying explanations, such as Mose for concieving of the wonderful invention we call the weekend and Abraham Lincoln for freeing "the" slaves (which should be the American slaves; besides, he really didn't free them), included only to be provoke responses? If they were, it was a brilliant success, as is indicated by the massive amount of responses you recieved!

Dominic -

From: "Phill"

Very interesting site you have. Im glad you put teh evil first and the Good last. It makes a welcome relief.

I would like to nominate Dr Harold Shipman (Dr Death) for entry into your Evil Gallery.=20 Recent (June 2001) estimates by the UK Police suggest a kill total of upto 1,200!!


From: "Christopher Fingerhut"

I think, that Ossama Bin Laden should be added to the "evil" list. Even = if it isn't certain, that he had anything to do with the atacks on new = york and washington, he has done enough in his own country, to stick him = among people like Hitler, Stalin and the others. He supports the Taliban = in Afghanistan with loads of money, weapons etc. Also he is supposed to = have said, that he is going to destroy all religions other than the = moslems. This man is definetly a person, you can call evil.

From: Litsigns

Osama Bin Laden. For obvious reasons.

From: Jennifer MacKnight

Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Jerry falwell, Pat Robertson

From: "Lori Y. Downie"

I think I speak for millions of Americans--radical-Islamic militant groups should be added to your "evil list".

From: BritBrat830

I think Charles Manson is worthy of the top 100 evil people list... what a horrible man.

Thank you. -


I believe the Armenian slaughter was led more by Enver Pasha (there were 3 in charge but he was the most notable), the revolutionary leader of new Turkey that helped them survive the first world war. They likely would have been destroyed were it not for him, and in turn he rounded up all Armenians and killed them rather then sort through who was docile and who was dangerous. War has no morals.

As to the definition of Evil/Good which you provided on another page, it still uses morality within it, another debatable argument. In order to simplify for argument, I modified the definition to evil being anything which culls human progress to some attainable goal, and good that which spurns it. It is fairly oblique in this sense, but covers what I think is necessary. Some may include all life, or all animal life, but I say unquestionably that humans stand out as the caretakers of these morals, so for them to exist humans must come first.

Now an issue with progress is its seemingly indeterminability at a given time, so I resolve this by making it whatever helped cause progress up to a given moment, so yes, the status of good/evil in people will change as history writes itself as we've so seen throughout the ages (one huge example is the contempt Christopher Columbus was held under in the 80's where as he was a hero in ages before).

In this light, Clinton was quite probably worse than Hitler, and Bush worse than both. Hitler, despite all his heinous acts, motivated the world to vast technological/biological gains. Atomic physics would have been much slower in gains without him. He ended the biggest worldwide recession, and actually forced the democratic world to unite.

Bill Clinton on the other hand was the first president ever to leave office with one last detrimental maneuvre (all other presidents, except the dead, have left their term with an unpopular bill or move that is beneficial in principle to the economy). He esentially blew our economy with energy regulations, and avoided opening the Yucca mountain or helping alleive the ban on nuclear power plants in the US. Plus many various acts during his presidency which led to a general biterness in the nation. These however, might turn around as the nation sees need to fix problems, whence his blundering will become a gateway to change. Then he would be considered good again.

Of course if there is no goal or Omega point to human endeavors, this becomes potentially meaningless to, and perhaps the definitions should be good: that which best ameliorates human pain, evil: that which increases it.

Otherwise good and evil and endlessly disputable ideas and it proves an excercize in futility to debate them.

Cory Przybyla

From: Renee Simon


From: "Rodger K. Johnston"

GOOD- Jesus Christ , died for the sins of every person and through him we have life eternal- John 3:16

(giver of life, love, justice, truth and spirit, hope, charity, faith, happiness, peace, joy, our savior......the Alpha and the Omega

EVIL-SATAN- father of all lies . He has worked on every person in every place and in all ages, to secure their destruction. All evil comes from him.

(death, suffering, torture, hate, crime, ..........time grows short for him

From: "Michael Montez"

First of all I was greatly intrigued by your good and evil list finding it veryinteresting but a bit vague as to why some where on the list and others were not. You continue to argue the Vlad Tepes place and may or may not be correct according to our friends in Romania (this I will study for myself) and left out people such as Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer... and the rest of the 'serial killer' group whose actions could seriously fall into a very evil catagory.

As for good how about FDR, and his new deal which created aid to assist americans in need during the great reccession an dustbowl here in the US.

How about leaders who manage to avoid war and find a peaceful solution in the face of eminant threat such as Nelson Mandella, or those who strive everyday to make a difference such in the lives of others in a positive manner like Jimmy Carter with his Habitats for Humanity campaign alive and well today.

To do great good is not always noted and is often overlooked especially in today's society where the standard in the media is, "If it bleeds, It leads". Could this not be considered eveil as well..... In the way that it is preferable to fill telivision with sensational horror and devistation to millions rather than try to enlighten and uplift. Would that make Ted Coppel evil (no offense Ted)??

As to how you spoke to Deb and Marius, I found that a bit ingratiating and do agree that to judge those of the past by today standards is arrogant, though unintentionally I'm sure but to be a fair Devil's Advocate I cannot argue with you either that yes Vlad's way of punishment, 'hobbies' and dining ambiance were quite appaling hence yes = he belongs on the list but as to where becomes the question.

Lastly please forgive me but this has been bugging me terribly since = I read your exchange page, so If I may.....Ahem....... President George = Bush was in office during the gulf war the older. In fact President = Clinton had our military reduced and gave more to educational programs = than the previous two presidents.=20

Yes he did make a very big mistake which he will probably will regret = his entire life but does that make him evil. Yes the poor bastard lied, = probably in hopes to save what little love was left in his marriage, and = to save his daughter further humiliation. Hell yah, he down played it = and tried to imply he did not feel it was sex.... Mrs. clinton had him = dead to rights and he new it, he tried to save his proverbial butt = anyway he could, personally I feel for the guy because his legacy as = president will now and forever be a stain on a blue party dress. No when it comes down to it Cliff evil and good are nothing more than = ones perspective and due to the 'Norm' most of your list would be = inarguable but thank our lucky stars for the diversity offered = throughout our world or else i would not have found out that Vlad Tepes = may or may not have been the monster I thought him to be and is even = revered in his homeland for things our sensationalist country had = forgotten to tell us about.

In any case thank you for hearing my ranting and thank you for such a = very interesting perspective on your website

From: "Pedersen"

What an intriguing compilation. The evil people are much more interesting to read about than the good people. perhaps it's an instinctive interest acquired from violent chimp-like ancestors?

My nominee for evil person: God/Yahweh/Jehovah. Most people believe God exists and is real in some sense of the word. The God of the Bible did many evil things, not the least of which was creating evil itself, in the form of fallen angel "Satan". God-given free will resulted not only in the Devil, but in all these evil people on your list. God also destroyed all life on Earth, with the exception of the Ark inhabitants, via a global flood, he killed great numbers with pestilence, he toyed with his follower's emotions, such demanding Abraham kill his son, etc etc.


From: Lawrence

Subject: countries bad or bad leaders?

I think Nanking and Nazi Germany brings up difficult question, are some countries more evil than others. Is it just bad regimes or bad people in power, or are the people more evil (genetically or culturally) Hard to believe America or Great Britain could ever do what Nazi Germany did. Optimists will say it's just product of bad leadership or bad regime, but most people are good. However hard to believe this about Germany = (with it's concentration camps or Japan with its Nanking etc. Maybe = answer is humanitiy is basically bad - that may be easier for me to = believe. If you beleive a country of people are more evil than another = - does that make you a racist. What are your feelings? If countries can be bad than it makes you feel better using A Bomb to = accomplish your goal. Might doesn't make right, but if right has the = might why not use it. Herr Hill thought German's weren't bad or worse than Americans, just a = bit misguided. That "Nazi Germany" behaviour could occur in USA for = example if bad leaders in place and not stopped, or certain conditions = arose. (the we're all equal theory) LP

From: artstatistict

hands down..... Osama Bin Ladin

From: "Beth M"

I think Mohammed should be on your good list, especially these days, to remind people that Islam was created as a peaceful religion. Malcolm X should also be on it.
As for the person who said Jesus should not be on the good list, I think her name was Liza, if you're going to say that, you would also have to ask to take Buddha off among other so called "unproven" persons. Although there is actually a lot of proof he existed, even if he didn't exist, the ideas surrounding his "believed" existence are enough to put his name on the list. The same goes for Buddha and others like them.<

From: Nick Poole

I do not agree Ghandi should be on the top ten good people. He encouraged the Indians to rebel against the British during WWII. = This was very harmful to the Allied war effort, not simply the British. It seems therefore he preferred the tyranny of Japan and we all know what they were like then, don't we? Massacres in Nanjing, hospitals in HK & Singapore etc etc. =A0 Nick Poole - Hong Kong

From: Pedro Luiz Gazoni

Dear Cliff, Having first gone through other less controversial aspects of your site probably helped me on checking this link with a little less prejudice (i think, i still am not sure if a thought can be totally or even deprived of any form of prejudice, my first intuition is that it is impossible, but that's the subject of a completely diverse discussion). I do not really want to go into the question if either Vlad, Clinton or even Hitler for that matter are evil or not. My point here is that in some contexts this kind of behavior can be justified to some people. You probably has read The Prince by Machiavel. The book is sort of a rulers manual and in many instances it advocates the use of violence (including murder) to better serve your loyal subjects. Thus, in the context of the book, just to give one example, its not only justifiable for the emperor to kill, but it is mandatory for him to do so, because if he does not his people will suffer greater evils and he will not be performing his task to the best of his ability. Maybe that's the message the romanians are trying to get across to you. Of course, these things are hard to measure, was it necessary for Vlad to go to such level of atrocities to defend and protect his country? Who knows? He did it because he felt like it was necessary or because he liked it? Who knows? You may say that those are arguments from people that are only trying to see things from one side (full of prejudice, etc). But as you saw for yourself, even though you did not anticipate it, in the eyes of a lot of people yours was a list full of prejudice too. My point here is that for such matters it is hard if not impossible to create an impartial scale. And no I do not regard majority consensus as always being a fair form of judgement, some other requirements have to be fulfilled to make that assumption true (Symetrical information etc). I guess this is the sort fo subject that gave Descartes a lot of nights without sleep - so much for objective reasoning.

I do not know if you are going to be able to make any sense of my digressions here, but i felt compelled to write.

Regards, Pedro

From: "Brent Farch"

I found your # 10 choice for good to be a personal choice, the man may have done a good thing for women. Just becuase he was an intellegent man who discovered the makeings of a pill dose not mean that he was a good man. I do agree with what you stated about ending endless childabuse cases and such regardless, what if he did it all for money or personal gain who really knows. (just a thought)

I am sure people have e-mailed you about uncle binny but what about Men like Noreaga, Paul Bernardo(& wife), Sadam Hussien (mostly for useing mustard gas on his own people), The leader of the Jonestown cult mass = suicide of over 2,000 people or even that nut heavensgate boy Richard = Applegate.

Enough dising your site, dispite my last two paragraphs I think your site is dope, Buddah is one of my personal idols, and you even gave me a education whith some of your picks, you really did your looking around = before making your choices that's obvious, Hey as I am writing this I = can't remember any women on the evil side and on the good side only = Mother Theresa but what ever I don't care about that just another.

Subject: Religion is the source of all evil!

There was an article in the Iranian site about how if it wasn't from religion, likes of Ben Ladin wouldn't exist. She wrote that no "Atheiest" would ever crash a plane to a building, etc, etc. Here is a nice response to it!


Atheists killed more

I have to disagree with the premise behind the commentary by Setarah Sabety and state that atheists are to blame for more deaths and wars in the last century than the religious ["Anthrax of the masses"]. I can't recall Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge being to big on God during their little fiasco in Cambodia. Or maybe Stalin and his politburo when they creatively killed of millions of Ukrainians.

Hitler and friends dabbled in the occult but were atheists for the most part. Mao and his revolutionary compadres were responsible for the biggest massacre and forced starvation in recorded history. The North Vietnamese didn't hold prayer breakfasts and the gruesome Albanian socialist party didn't go to confession or celebrate ramadan.

But that was just the last century, lets look back a little further. Julius Caesar said he seriously doubted the existence of the gods, maybe that helped him plan the enforced genocide of 2 million Gaul's. Kublai Kahn though semi-enlightened didn't really favor any particular religion, and ordered the wiping out of whole cities. And how about the bloody french revolution and it's reign of terror? Choc full of atheists, no religious allowed. Even bloody old Napoleon wasn't religious and often fought the clergy.

In fact when you take a step back and look at the whole picture of human history you find more people were murdered by atheists than all other belief systems combined.


Edwin Duthie

From: "nicholaus smith"

How could you rate all of those people on your top ten evil list? Obvious ly your not to interested in all of those disgusting people who enjoy the torture of young children. You only have one person in which you actuall y typed about. Gilles De Rais the guy who preferred to take young boys an d sodomize them before and after decapitation. That is so evil and disgus= ting. Even the thought of that just brings tears to my eyes. Now tell me = how all the people who are on your list even amount to the evilness of th= at. There are so many people in this world who are so much more evil then= some that not even you or I can catagorize them. Evil to me is not so s= imilar to your thoughts of evilness. Children in this life time are our f= uture and our future is taken away from us by torture for the pleasure of= another soul who does not even deserve to live. Try to recognize all the= evil that people hold in their pleasure. This goes on day by day and wil= l never be stopped. Now that is evil. Now don't get me wrong the people t= hat you have listed are in deed evil but not evil enough to me. To me eve= ry one has evil in them even if there evil is not recognized it is hidden= like a secret another soul in the closet waiting to be discovered by th= e world today. That is evil. =20 Cryst= al S. =20 -

From: "Phil Campagna"

Valerie (practicing witch) principal of a catholic school. Has been a known liar cheat and other unmentionables

From: "Mina"

To webhost,

I do not agree with Genghis Khan being on the list of most evil men. Yes he did awful things, but so have everyone else in every other war.I am from England and my name is Mina.I am a historian and I would like to share my infomation on Genghis Khan with you.

Genghis Khan was a ruler of his people. I mean in a way of fairness and and justness. He treated his army with great kindness and never moved from one place until every man in his army down to the most unimportant soldier was fed. He only wanted to bring good to his people and live in peace away from intruders. He was often seen as an assasin, which cannot be deinied lightly, but a story I read up once is quite interresting.

An English soldier was at war with the Mongols and he was knocked out in battle. His army had left him for dead, and he was left in the middle of unknown terratory, a desert. I travelled for miles for water, but found none.He passed out were he stood from dehydration. He awoke in a camp, surounded by Mongol warriors. He knew he was dead from were he sat. Then the man himself, Genghis Khan walked in the tent. The soldier coward under his gazed and awaited his death. Genghis Khan ordered something to his guards, and they brought the soldier food and drink. Genghis Khan watched the soldier eat and drink quietly. Then suddenly, Genghis Khan began to speak to him in English. The soldier quickly found out Genghis was a learned man and was very, VERY clever. After a week or so, Genghis Khan was allowing the soldier to walk around his camp unautharised. The soldier was looked after until he was well again. He became great friend s with the mongols, Until..

Genghis Khan was planning another attack against the English. The soldier felt out of place. He couldnt betray Genghises kindness, but couldnt betray his own country. Genghis Khan took the soldier out to the hills one night and told him the story of the Lion and the mouse. Enemys can become friends, but will always have their diffrences. Genghis Khan shook the soldiers hand and said, see you in hell.

The soldier resigned from the army and travelled back to England in honur of Genghis.

That stroy was based on fact, it actually happened.

I hope this helps, Yours, Mina

From: "Geoff McIntosh"


You should move Lincoln to the "evil" side since he helped destroy the U.S. Republic and helped destroy our country. We didn't fight the Civil War over slavery...that's basic history. Also, FDR should be added since his dictatorial style contributed to the overblown evil government we have today and he was an admirer of that murderer Stalin. How about Woodrow Wilson whose interventionist political style is still in use today and is pretty much directly repsonsible for the widespread hatred of America found all around the globe? He also gave us the Federal Reserve and another Income Tax (Lincoln gave us the first income tax AND the first use of unconstitutional fiat money...more reasons to add that jerk to the evil list).

Now you can add Bush and Ashcroft well as most of the Congressmen and Senators currently in Washington. With the passage of the PATRIOT act we've now decended further into tyranny.

And finally, add to the "evil" list all of the proponents of gun control. By making laws that keep firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens they've made the streets more dangerous for all of us and have helped to turn this country into a nation of victims rather than responsible citizens who can take care of themselves.

"No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Gilmer, 1816. ME 15:24


Jack the ripper

From: "Catherine Napoli-Cohen" <>

Just found your site looking up Antebe.

I'topure you've received this email a million times, but we should put Osama bin Ladan at the top of the evil list. What most disturbs me about him (not what I find most repulsive, which is obvious, but most disturbing) is the look in his eyes. It in not a look of fierce evil or hate. In fact it is kind and almost loving and comforting. Seriously, if you just saw the eyes, you would not realize they were the eyes of The Devil himself. It is that, the ability to look so innocent (and gain so many followers by looking that way) that makes him more evil. Because nothing in him even remotely acknowledges the wrong. In evil people you see evil in their eyes because a part of them still knows they are evil. In bin Ladan, he is the devil truly because no part of him believes in evil. It is all good (the destruction) in his mind.

From: fahlawi81

I dont know if you will read this message and if you're the sensative type then stop reading after the next full stop.

You have got to be the worlds biggest hypocrite or the worlds biggest idiot. You put a scale for evil and good by asking yourself who you would rather or rather not be in a room with? In the list of evil you put Adolf Hitler but not Winston Churchil who probably infinitely times worse than Hitler. Need I remind you how after the germans accidentaly bombed an english civillian target Hitler apologized but all Churchill did was start a wave of bombing civillian targets which continues today in modern warfare not to mention how Churchill hoped that german U-boats would target american ships killing civillians onboard to force the states into the war early.

As for all the people who were responsible for the irradication of Jews. You must be a Jew because I dont see any Jews up on your list for perfectly engineering two world wars, I asure you there arent a lacking of any names. What about Herzl, But Hell how about Ariel Sharon He is still alive.

What about every american president since the states got its independance from persecution only to persecute rather obliterate the indians who were responsible for helping the first pilrims survive. And nowadays the states condems Iraq and north Korea for developing weapons of mass destruction while turning a blind eye toward Egypt and Israel and the CIA.

The above are just examples of the inconsistencies of your list.

There is no reletive position to good and evil if nor is there a maagnitude of good or evil. If its good its good and if its evil its evil. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilian cities the states killed civillians therefore that was an evil act get with the logic behind it or stay behind a physics book.

From: RFoor76

Texas serial killer Dean Corll most certainly belongs somewhere on the top 100 "Evil" list. This sick monster liked to lure young boys to his home with promises of candy and drugs. When they passed out from sniffing glue and paint fumes, he would strap them to his "torture board" and commit the most unspeakable atrocities upon them. He would insert long thin rods of glass into their urethras and then snap the rod in two, leaving the end of the tube in the childs penis to torture him unceasingly until he was finally allowed to die. Sometimes he would simply chew on their genitalia or bite off their testicles. Other times he would sodomize them with huge 17-inch dildos and even baseball bats. He would finally end their suffering - sometimes DAYS later - by strangling them, shooting them in the head or beating and kicking them to death. He killed 27 boys in only 3 years. An excellent book on this case is "The Man with the Candy: The Story of the Houston Mass Murders" by Jack Olsen http://www.crimelib I find it hard to believe that some here (such as Carol C. and Amanda W) think Mao Tse-tung doesn't belong on the evil list. He easily ranks up there with Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot as one of the bloodiest despots of the 20th century. Let's examine WHY Mao belongs on this list, and at the very top:

Mao's bloody "land Reform" campaign - According to atrocitologist R.J. Rummel, "For a population of about 500,000,000 peasants, ...around 7,500,000 were murdered." - China's Bloody Century P.222

Mao's cultural genocide in Tibet - "Tibetans were not only shot, but also were beaten to death, crucified, burned alive, drowned, mutilated, starved, strangled, hanged, boiled alive, buried alive, drawn & quartered and beheaded." - The Black Book of Communism p.544 According to the Tibetan Government-in-exile, around 1.2 million Tibetans have died as a direct result of the Chinese brutal occupation...

Mao's "Laogai" forced labor camps - "tens of millions of "counter-revolutionaries" passed long periods of of their lives inside the prison system, with perhaps 20 million dying there." - The Black Book of Communism p. 464

Various quotes from Mao: "What's so unusual about Emperor Shih Huang of the Chin Dynasty? He had buried alive 460 scholars only, but we have buried alive 46,000 scholars. In the course of our repression of counter-revolutionary elements, haven't we put to death a number of counter-revolutionary scholars? I had an argument with the democratic personages. They say we are behaving worse than Emperor Shih Huang of the Chin Dynasty. That's definitely not correct. We are 100 times ahead of Emperor Shih of the Chin Dynasty in repression of counter- revolutionary scholars." - China's Bloody Century p. 8-9

One Chinese general who protested that there were too many Chinese soldiers in Tibet was sent back to China in disgrace. Then there was another general who told Chairman Mao that so many Tibetans had been arrested there was not enough prison accommodation for them. Mao replied: "Don't worry. Even if you have to imprison the whole population, we'll find enough prisons." - Tears of Blood: A Cry for Tibet p. 85 In official 1948 study materials concerning "agrarian reform", for example, Mao Tse-tung, the undisputed ruler of the party and thus of the country in these years, instructed cadres that "one-tenth of the peasants [about 50,000,000] would have to be destroyed." - China's Bloody Century p. 223

From: "Justin Gibson"

I was very impressed by you're back ground and history on this page! I've just got a few comments and suggestions if you'd give me a minute, first , =20 for evil people would you consider Jack the ripper? I mean his body count was not that high, certainly not in the millions, not even in the hundre ds, but the utter atrocity in which he carried out his killings still pal es the works of mass murderers today! Should evil just reflect pure numbe r of horrors or the evil person's actual intent? And where's Cotton Mather, The sadistic leader of the Salem witch trails ? He was a very evil one, if you ask me. Would Cortez count? After all, h e is respocible (pretty much directly) for the extermination of a whole r ace (the Aztecs) Furthermore I also have a problem with putting Lincoln on the list, you k new he was a huge racist, hated the blacks and only freed them because he said "I have no desire to live with them or by them, and given to their own designs without the guidance of the white man, they will only result in poverty and criminality" (or something close to that) and because of p olitical pressure, and of course the second half of the Emancipation Proc lamation was to send all blacks back to Africa, but this was never carrie d out, because Lincoln kind of got killed. And further Martin Luther king was a big supporter of the communists and got a big chunk of his campaign money from the communist party, he talked a good talk, but I don't believe that being in bed with Americas greates t enemy (at the time) would constitute as a good deed. (look it up) Than k you for you're time. And again, you have an excellent sight!

From: Trevor Oxborrow


I have enjoyed reading some of your pages. However, the Gang of Four did not include Mao Tse Tung. It included his widow Jiang Qing and three young Shanghai politicians: Zhang Chunqiao, Wang Hongwen, and Yao Wenyuan.

From: "jason k"

Hi Mr. Pickover,

i'm sorry to say I have not read any of you books as of yet though i surely will. However, I have looked at your website and it is, without doubt, the most interesting page I have come across. There is one thing in particular that I think you may want to highlight now. On your Top Ten list of Evil guys you have some correspondance from folks who believe that Bill Clinton was/is more evil than Vlad the = Impaler, Hitler, etc. At first, I thought this was insignificant in = light of the small numbers these folks represent, their seeming = emotionalism, weak command of facts. Now, however, in the wake of Sept. = 11, I think the mentality and attitudes of these people should be called = attention to independently of the Evil list. There is without a doubt a psychology of anti-Americanism that warrants = investigation and your correspondance on the evil list may offer some = rare insights. Maybe you could get in touch with these people again and ask them their = opinion on the WTC attack? There are other variations of lists and = forums that might be interesting in this regard. Thanks for your time, jk

From: VladiFab

Thank you for your work.

Of course everything is in the eye of the beholder. But even when 2 peoples or 2 countries disagree, one think one was good and the other the opposite, an objective and rational eye should judge. Recognized and ever free-thinking and re-thinking morality should put red lines and not patriotism. So when somebody is killing, systematically, deliberately, painfully on purpose and with terrorizing intention and acts, it is bad. Good purpose can be bad as well. But the degree, like in a crime will be different. Mistakes are done in humanitarian ways, only when discussed will we be abble to try not to do them again. (unfortunately new mistakes will arise, we look only at a problem too close, we should look further, to see all the consequences, the other dimensions of it).

I didn't understand why you explain for everyone of your evil the causes you judge him as bad and not with Hitler. This is quite desinformation. Don't you have description of Hitler and co. killings and tools. Don't you have numbers ? communists, handicapped, homosexuals, jews, tsygane, intellectuals, political opponants and so on.. Gaz chambers, torture, medical experimentation, mass grave, deliberate conditions of detention, crematory oven, and so on... With the help of german and french companies : Farber, SNCF etc... Sometimes a man can do horribles things, but when there is a theory behind him, it is much more dangerous, we see it even today, vlad died, but nazism, fascism are still among us, continuying to desinform ignorant, spreading bullshit of superior or supremacist race and inferior races, brain-washing new generation who can, I hope not, rescusite the horror of legally murdering people because of their religion, race, beliefs...

Somebody wrote "Is saving people "good"? If you feed a starving person, are you good? If that person lives to have children and the same basic problems of lack of resources still exists, haven't you made things worse, merely deferred a current problem and made it worse in the long term? Is that good or evil? Is the leadership of China good or evil - clearly their Draconian state enables a rapid reduction in their birth rate. Isn't that evil? Yet, if they didn't control their birth rate, millions would die - isn't that evil? ". And I am agree with him, always look in a bigger dimensioni. But the way to do good is important. Even if China really want to control the birth rate, the way it does is wrong, one children per familly will be one boy. And in 20 years. Millions of boys without bride. A war to kidnap girls in the future ?

From: VladiFab

"human nature remains the captive of instincts, as well as of unconscious assumptions and patterns of behaviour that have been culturally determined"

Some thoughts a philosopher friend of mine came on : If we we re sure the Earth is flat, or the center of the universe and so on, can't it be that we have still sure beliefs that seems logical but completely false ?


If there is no freedom of choice, how somebody is bad or good. We can't judge, we can't punish anymore. If no freedom of choice, so nobody can control himself, or knows what is bad or good.

Why somebody is not driven to become a criminal ? How do we know he made the choice? If we don't know, what means our system of punishments ? Thousands of year of this system, and the situation is worse. Protect the society, yes of course,but why making a man guilty, he is the fruit of his environment , of his trauma, of the society. If we thinkwe have to make a better world. We should begin at the earlier age. But look in our schools, from the beginning there is a discrimination between thestudent who understand quickly and the others. What all the scores means ? Our reactions to somebody who is fat are innate ? Or we just copy the teacher'sreation, our parents and so on... The same with clothes ...

Our way of thinking has to be changed.

So if there is no freedom of choice, there is no bad or good. And we are all products of the society. Society, civilization, education.... are the bad

If there is freedom of choice, I still think that most of the criminals are products of the society. Society, civilization, education.... are the bad and the few very bad human, than despite good family, education, genes and so on, did choose the bad over the good.

I don't believe in satanic bad human. I believe that some people are mislead. They are brain-washed to hate, wrongly educated to racism and prejudices, were raised indespair and lack of good, had traumatic experience, made bad assumptions orconclusions, made generalization and went to extremism. This is so easy to hatethe one who hate. To kill the one who kill. To punish the one who punish society for his reasons.

Racists or other bad behavioured men were not born like that. They became like that. If somebody don't try to reach them (again and again) - , to contradict, to bring prooves, to show other reality, to love them because it is what is missed, - aworld is lost. And perhaps the children and the persons this person will educate, brain-wash and so on. If I am wrong, I hope somebody will try to help me. Our system does just want you want me or us to do. And look where we get ! More crimes,more hate, more poverty, more polution. I prefer to try to change bad things in my world. In a good manner. Not making what I think the bad person is making wrong. Not to be violent against violence. Asking questions. Trying to understand the answers or to proove they are wrong. If nobody does it, it can only get worse. I do it to help myself too. This world is the world I will give to the next generation.

Moses never enter Israel, he died in Jordan, so he couldn't be in Jericho and kill like somebody wrote you. And there is more about him and about others.

A lot of people are just lying but their messages appear. It is a pity. It is a long work, but if it is your site, you should make some research before printing the assumptions.

Like I told before, everyone can with bad influences do non-moral things. Drugs dealers,pedophils, supremacists of everywhere, the one in the US who provoke wars inother countries, serial killers and so on... I don't want to make a hierarchy between them. It is not the point.

Ben Ladin is not worse or better. He saw corruption in his country but instead ofself-critic, and fighting the corrupted leaders in his country or in the muslim "nation" ; (as muslims believers don't believe in the division into countries done by Europe in theIslam), Ben Ladin is someone who prefer to fight the one who are different fromhim that the one who are like him. A true politician and strategist. Because itis easier : to gain help and suporters, to call for holly war, to point thecause of all of the Islam's problem into the jew or the christian, into Israelor into US (everyone has his own scapegoat...), to call for unity against therest of the world, infidels...

I believethe thing I heard that he built orphelinage, hospitals and so on... I believehe thinks he is really fighting corruption, and fighting against US foreignpolicy that intrude internal matters of other countries, and he wants to stopthe israeli occupation.

But likemany of us, he sees only one side and he believes whatever he saw on his media.And like many men he wants power, and to be the new leader of the muslim world,with all 1 milliard followers (muslim countries are very poor and perhaps allof them are govern by dictators, more or less corrupted by Europe and US...)

He is justanother product of his culture and time, like I am of mine. He doesn't make himbetter or worse, it is the way of thinking who is bad or good. I think it is abig difference. Because it can be change or atenuated. Education is the key,perhaps not for him but for next generations.

He doeswhat other did before him. Found a target and send human to death, asking themto take as much as opponants with them.

So he isusing the instinct and logic of the jungle "I will kill them before theykill me." or better "kill them before they kill us".

This orthis other leader of our "civilized world" is not so different. Tokill civilians in Irak or else where. Because it is easier or politically correct(LOL) to kill civilians than to kill their leader. Greed, money, power, thethought that to be on the top is better than on the bottom (be the rich, and dowhat you have to do, and don't be the poor) all the same. But they attack farcountries and steal them, and we don't know all. Of course. Mediatisation can becorrupted too, propaganda is not only during times of war. journalists are ashuman as all of us. What we believe, they believe too. Like the doctor whoprefer the money of the big medicinal companies, journalist like allprofessions can be very subjective about morality, ethic, money. They are inthe jungle too.

What yousee from there, is not what you see from here, I mean everything is in the eyeof the beholder. Almost : Tell me who you are and I will tell you what youthink. It is not always harsh propaganda, the soft one is so easy to accept.

THE PROBLEMFOR ME IS that Ben Laden should not use violence against violence and of coursehe shouldn't see the workers in the world trade center as the ennemis. They areonly the sheeps, sorry, the civilians. Soldiers are sheeps too, but at least weagree in a certain way when soldiers are attacked. We don't agree whencivilians are attacked. In Israel, I am not agree when 12 years old girls aremurdered in a discotheque. THERE IS NO EXCUSE, CIVILIANS SHOULDN'T BE TARGETED.PERIOD. By US, Ben Laden, Palestinians or israelis.

I amagainst violence and war and retaliation, terrorism, occupation .... To beagainst violence against violence is not to think the world is all right and itshould stay like it is. There are enormous change to be done but revolution isnot the good answer I think. I prefer it takes some more years but to do thework without violence. Revolution with its violence don't make always positiveor lasting change. One elite will remplace another. We the sheep, will stay thesheep. Usually, we will send our sons to war, not the one in power.

So even ifI am not agree with some policies done by the for-now emperor of the world, theUS, I am against the killing of civilians. The same in Israel and everywhere.Liberation will came through morality and love. Not revolutions, wars,uprisings and so on... It looks like it liberes the people, but it just put new dictator instead of the old one.

Because our rules if still of the jungle, will make only jungle.

We can't get rid the world of anything, not terrorism, not hunger,poverty, wars... We tried for centuries and failed, why will we succeed now ? Have we got a better theory, a better education-system, a better morality... ?

What is terrorism, to kill a doctor who do abortion, or to kill fetuses? Everything is in the eye of the beholder, in the mind of the believer.Free-fighter or terrorist...

Until we change our way of thinking, racism, crimes, violence and so onwill remain. The Americans think they know the truth as the Talibans and as Staline,Hitler, Napoleon etc... Everyone of us believe God is on his side, or there is no God and themoral, the truth is on his side. We still use violence against violence. We are still discriminating, teaching it at home, at school... In America or in Pakistan...

All justice system and of course the politic's is corrupted in one wayor another. Money governs everything. A few time in our history, men arose and stand against the whole world,and contradict the whole world beliefs. One time, it was against the polytheism, another, against the Earth being the center of the world, and soon... Everytime it was only a part of the truth, because the bigger truth is to be always open-minded, not to believe everything we were told, informed, forced to believe..., not to believe everything we think is logical, right, true...,not to believe the criminals are guilty because they did it, how do we know we have the free-will or choice and doing ? When was it proven ?

Why a American-Taliban is brain-washed and non-American Taliban or a Tchetchen or a Saoudi guilty of his thoughts and doings ? Justice is to condamn the guilty or to stop the crimes, to dovengeance or to protect the innocents (what is innocence) ?

Ben-Laden, Bush, Chirac, Chretien,... Americans, British, israelis,palestinians and so on, are just the same. Doing what they think has to bedone, God's will, people's will, majority's will, moral's will, security'swill... Different situation, same bad tools, same violence, more here, lesshere, to choose a scapegoat, to accuse somebody else of our misery, the meansare different but the goal is the same : to control the power, or to keep it,to arrive at the top, or to stay there, to be the rich for not becoming thepoor (equal to make the other poor, so it means I am rich), the same with strength, the same with rightness ...

Fabienne. vladifab

From: Skimandharley

I think you can honestly say that Osama Bin Laden should be added to the list. Due to the terrorist attacks on The World Trade Center Towers, and also the bombing that took place there in 1998. He also took part in the suicide bombing of the Navy ship, that took the lives of 17 sailors. Oh, what about the Embassy bombing too? I am sure I could go on, but you get the picture.

From: "Michael & Mindy Ray"


From: Dan-Cristian Dinca

I was looking for some information related to zero point energy. There was probably somewhere a link to your page. Then I stayed there for almost three hours. It's an interesting site, with good graphics and plenty of links. The "Scales of Good and Evil" article is interesting, especially because I'm from Romania and I spent 12 years in Tirgoviste. Vlad Tepes has there two statues. One in the main park of the town, and the second in downtown. Enforcing the law or deterring enemies by very cruel punishments was very common in that time. I don't think Vlad is evil because of that. On the other hand, I consider evil and even sick any person that takes pleasure from that kind of activities. I don't think is the perception of evil that makes most romanians appreciate Vlad Tepes, but his political achievements. I'm nuclear physicist, not historian, so take my opinion as a personal one. He is now viewed as one who brought hope to romanians in a time when the occupation of Otoman Empire was at its peak. Less than 10% of romanians know that Vlad fought also with Stephan the Great (Stefan cel Mare), prince of Moldavia, his own cousin. It's like an approximation. You neglect some things favouring the others. One cannot judge Mr. Clinton as politician by what he did with Ms. Lewinsky. As human he is imoral, as as human Vlad Tepes is a very sick psycho.

By the way, Ceausescu was judged and executed in Tirgoviste. Some say that he didn't receive a fair trial (I agree), but he received the kind of trial he deserved (I agree too). :-)

From: ZHall72703

I nominate Al Gore. If he succeeded in stealing the election through the counting and miscounting of votes, then I feel that our Nation will be in peril. He does not know what truth is, has no integrity and will do absolutely anything to become President. This makes him very dangerous and evil.

From: "Liza Simonova"

I believe mother Theresa sould be among the evil folks.

After all, in a poor, overpopulated country with so many hungry and poor people, she didn't consider an abortion clinique would have maybe done more good than helping the dying?

As for Vlad the impaler, I'm with the people from Romania on this one. Not evil, but strong!!

From: "Steve Hodgkiss"

I think old Charlie should make your evil list. He created a cult based upon, of all things, The Beatles White Album and out of context Biblical passages (Son of Man; i.e., Man-son). He directed others to do his bidding like a sorcerer.

On the GOOD side:

Moses could use more credit for being a man with a great childhood as a prince of Egypt, only to be outcast for supporting the captured Israelite slaves, to witness the essence of the Creator YHWH (the unpronounceable name of GOD) on Mount Sinai, and then to return to Egypt to free his people. He was an obedient servant of God and as a result, led a great nation from slavery -- thus being a role model for those mortal men who followed his example centuries later to accomplish the same thing and invoked the same words "Let my people go".

I also think you should elaborate more on Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, who demonstrated eternal life to his apostles, thus giving eternal hope to all mankind who accept Him.

Mother Teresa, beloved humanitarian known throughout the world for her charity towards the poor and her firm and passionate pro-life stance.

Food for thought:

Take the word EVIL and add the letter "D" to the beginning of it. What do you have? "DEVIL" Take the word GOOD and remove an "O" from the middle of it. What do you have? "GOD"

Just a point I once pondered.


Steve Hodgkiss A logical Christian

Click here if you would like to see thousands of more responses to the Scales of Good and Evil. The debate continues...

Return to Cliff Pickover's home page which includes questions on science and spirituality, computer art, educational puzzles, fractals, virtual caverns, JAVA/VRML, alien creatures, black hole artwork, and animations.