Not a political discussion, but rather, a main stay in storytelling. Oftentimes there is a character who commits terrible acts of evil. Sometimes the villain does so for a “worthy cause”, following an end justifies the means methodology (sacrificing souls to power a weapon that can kill the Devil when he resurrects). On the other hand, the villain may just be committing acts of violence because they feel it’s their right (she was raised to be evil, and doesn’t know better). Suddenly there comes a point in the plot, where this evil joins forces with the good guys. Vegeta from Dragonball Z for example.
Now no matter how horrible these person’s actions were, no matter how many innocents they’ve killed before joining Team Justice, they’re exonerated for all their crimes. Hell… sometimes they become a lover for the heroic Chosen One.
Has anyone ever put any thought into the ramifications of these resolutions?
Why should such people be forgiven? True… it’s only a story and what have you… but shouldn’t these individuals STILL be held accountable for the evils they committed? Aren’t there crimes that can’t be atoned for? What does this say about the heroes? Is it really a case that they’re so good, they’ll forgive anything? Of course historically, real life has the same. The British and America joining forces with the Soviets to defeat NAZI Germany for example… yet history looks back and stills sees it as an act of evil. Not to mention the Soviets still “paid” for their actions following WW2 (the whole Cold War deal).
Does anyone ever see this as a device of poor storytelling? Now I’m not saying that all evil that joins good, has to be in a situation like Alucard of Hellsing or Chrono of Chrono Crusade – but if evil isn’t held accountable for being evil, and certain degrees of evil are tolerable, when does crossing the line of no return happen?