No. I don't care for terms like good and bad unless I'm talking about how something tastes or how music sounds. I think that people acting in their own rational self interest with ownership of themselves do right things rather than bad things and that children taught how to use their minds will grow up to do much the same.

Who decides what is good? Oh, he does, of course. I should never have doubted that he has the best interests of all the little people at heart.
Wonder what percentage of the public school educated people will recognize his agenda?

Were the people of Germany (who did nothing while Hitler ordered Jews killed) bad, or were they coerced and threatened with great force?
The 'arguments' made are shallow and unsupportable.

By natural rights, people are not made, or molded, or controlled. They make themselves. By understanding that each person owns themselves, there is no need to 'make good people.

IR4P, the origins of "German guilt" for the holocaust are a multifaceted tangle. Fundamentally, the vast majority of Germans were NOT coerced with great force, but only acted in concert according to their shared beliefs. Adolph Hitler was a commanding public speaker who announced a mishmash of bad ideas - wrong perceptions, lack of inspection, poor integration, and a blank-out on consequences as evidence. But he was not alone. He had competitors who later joined his cause and whose own garble resonated with the masses. And Germany was not alone. Greece, Poland, Hungary, France... In every nation, maybe some isolated individuals or rare institutions existed, but largely, the entire continent was given over to Kant and Hegel. And it infected America.

I offer two scenes from popular films of the time. In the opening of _All Quiet on the Western Front_ Paul Baeumer is a high school student. He is in rapture, ecstasy as he sits staring at his teacher who lectures on the Idea of the State. After the Second War, in the American movie, _The Stranger_, Orson Welles plays an escaped Nazi war criminal who hides in a New England town as a high school history teacher. At a dinner table, the boys listen attentively as he speaks of Barbarossa and Frederich the Great.

The American Revolution is proof that you cannot coerce and threaten a population that resists.

IR4P, if you read about Dennis Prager, you will find out that while he might indeed subscribe to a free will theory of human action, as an active religionist, for Prager, the question is not how to discover for yourself how to live a good life, but how to understand God's Commandments. He summarizes a political agenda based on "E pluribus Unum" and "In God We Trust" and then in Liberty. The problem, of course, is that the first two make Liberty impossible.

Robbie, you seem not to understand _Atlas Shrugged_. If being selfish were easy, then Ayn Rand would not have challenged 2500 years of moral philosophy. Her ideas would have been accepted as commonplace. Egoism rests on reason. If you know the historical record - literally, what has been written these past 5000 years or so - then you would be hard put to find clear expositions of reason. _Atlas Shrugged_ dramatized the lives of people who chose reason and selfishness and contrasted them with those who chose mysticism and altruism. Have you seen the movie or read the book?

Troubling discussion. He sees a need to 'make' people good. He sees that as the major need of society, to 'make' people, to 'mold' them, to have laws to control behavior.

That's evil, the epitome of wrongness.