,
6 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
I keep hearing people say, about people that have done significant, intentional harm, "well, they did a lot of good, too!" Like, yes, this guy abused people but also he raises a ton of money for charity! That's... such a bizarre argument.
You can't "balance out" harm with unrelated good. There's no cosmic ledger where if you do 3 more good things than harmful things, voila, you are a Certified Good Person. What's this whole "balancing out" bullshit?
If you want to "balance out" harm you've done, you have to *directly address and repair THAT harm.* Giving money to charity doesn't undo embezzling.
But, like, also, there aren't Good People and Bad People. There are people who are trying, people who aren't trying, and people who are trying *effectively* to not do harm and to do good. And we're all each of those people at different times.
If you're spending most of your life not trying to mitigate harm and maximize help, (or, heaven forbid, actually trying to *do harm*), you're probably what most people are talking about when they talk about Bad People. But that doesn't prevent you from sometimes doing good.
So, like, the fact that a tyrant loves their children, or a serial abuser raises money for charity, or whatever, is not an argument for forgiving them. And people shouldn't be surprised by it. Like, "people are complex" is People 101?
