September 11 and the Death of Moral Judgment The nation is in crisis: a crisis of national security and a crisis of moral judgment. What is the right thing to do? People disagree. Then comes the big mistake: observing disagreement, people conclude that there is no right answer, no way to make a judgment. Worse, they conclude that judging is arrogant and dangerous, so much so that, in a strange twist, the only thing that seems morally irresponsible is the attempt to make a morally responsible judgment. On the contrary, the problem is to abdicate judgment. Democracy itself is based on the idea that reasonable people will disagree and that it is possible to make judgments about our disagreements – not that there is necessarily a right answer; there may be several partially right answers. But there are certainly some wrong answers and better and worse judgments about them. So, how do we judge? First, we can think clearly about the words we use. Second, we can stop seeking pure good or pure evil; innocence and guilt are not found in pure forms in the real world. Third, we can learn to distinguish between types and degrees of evils (and there are many types: cruelty, neglect, exploitation, etc.). To illustrate: “One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.” causes call themselves "freedom fighters." But they usually let us know what they mean. Osama bin Laden's statements tell us that his goal is to free the Muslim world from infidels and their influence. It seeks the freedom to establish theocratic regimes that suppress women, as well as religious and political dissidents. We can debate whether or not this is "freedom" in any meaningful sense, but the important thing is to be clear about what he means. For the sake of argument, let's say he's a freedom fighter. Martin Luther King was a freedom fighter. Mahatma Gandhi was a freedom fighter. Neither could be called “terrorists” by any stretch of the imagination. They have renounced violence as a means. Osama Bin Laden, on the other hand, embraces the strategy of targeting civilians to terrorize and intimidate the population, weaken opposing governments, and achieve his political goals. Whether he is a freedom fighter or not, he is a terrorist."The enemy of my enemy is my friend"This is an important practical principle, but it is not a moral principle.