A Hobbit's Sense of Violence, Part II -
The Ruling Ring of Sauron: An Ethical Application

We learn 2 fundamental things about the One Ring as J.R.R. Tolkein's The Lord of the Rings unfolds: it is an object of absolute power, and as Lord Acton told us long ago, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Particularly in The Fellowship of the Ring we are told this truth over and over: Saruman the great wizard is corrupted by desire for the Ring and its power; he falls victim to this lust. Boromir teeters on the brink of the same desire, as he wishes for anything that can help his nation of Gondor to repel the attacks of the Dark Lord, Sauron. Smeagol/Gollum, the revolting and shadowy creature possessed the Ring (his ‘Precious') for so long, like the Rhinegold of Wagner's The Ring of the Niebelungen. He is now a mockery of the Hobbit-like life he once led before craving for the Ring consumed him. The power to corrupt is revealed even in Bilbo, who found and ‘won' the Ring from Gollum, and Frodo, to whom it has now been entrusted.

Others were even more deeply tempted to desire the Ring and wield it against Sauron. Gandalf the good wizard, and Galadriel, Queen of the Elves, were both offered the Ring by Frodo. Both desired it more deeply than most of us can understand, unless perhaps we are in the throes of an addictive craving like cocaine. Unlike most addicts, they resisted. They understand what others (like Boromir, or Saruman) do not see, as the Elf-Lord Elrond explains:

...[it] is altogether evil....[And for] those who have already a great power of their own...it holds an even deadlier peril. The very desire of it corrupts the heart....If any of the Wise should with this Ring overthrow the Lord of Mordor, using his own arts, he would then set himself on Sauron's throne, and yet another Dark Lord would appear. (The Fellowship of the Ring, Ballantine paperbacks edition, pp. 320f.)

We need to learn the ethical/moral lesson of the One Ring, that there is no way of using raw power that is not ultimately evil, and which would not ultimately corrupt the user. Surely the path of coercion and revenge is exactly this Ring: it reduces those who desire to be righteous to the level of those whose evil is being resisted or avenged.

Some reports indicate that thousands of civilian Afghan people have been accidentally killed in course of the air strikes of the US against Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. If this is true, then the conclusion is the need to ask the shocking question: how does that make us different from those who also destroyed innocent civilian lives in the terrorist attacks of September 11?

When we declare that we can experience no peace unless Osama bin Laden (or Timothy McVeigh, or anyone else who is a ‘public enemy') is killed, how then do we differentiate our attitude from their behavior?

There is no way the One Ring of revenge and hatred can be used that is not evil. All it can do is produce a new Dark Lord (or ‘Evil Empire'). It would take a great deal of courage to destroy this One Ring and build a world of respect and forgiveness instead. But do we have less courage than a Hobbit?