World religions build their theology based on a dichotomy of good and evil, light and darkness. One cannot exist without the other, unless of course (like in Christianity) the absolute good overpowers the absolute evil. And so, this is how many people have come to view the world as we know it.
However, this dichotomy, as you may know, is hardly productive and mostly a polarising force. Anyone in the United States during WWII and/or the Cold War will remember this - or anyone who happened to watch that old propaganda film "Why We Fight." But over and over again, I sense that a few of those lines have been drawn against "new" American enemies, such as al Qaida. The common line, one used even by the President in accepting his (ironic) Nobel Peace Prize, is that "there is evil in the world." The enemy is evil; we, on the other hand, are good.
But I've yet to wrap my head around this concept. Al Qaeda isn't "bad" or "evil," nor are its members. The Taliban isn't evil, nor Ahmedinejad; nor is the leader of the PRC, nor Kim Jong Il of North Korea. Hell, even the people on the American Wall Street aren't evil, because evil doesn't exist. There is no sliding scale of morality ranging from absolute good to absolute evil, because we've already established that there is no absolute good. Harmful? Yes, in their own way. I take the unusual stance of viewing each internationally troublesome figure as simply self-invested in their own action, despite those actions being least in the interests of the international majority.
So what is there?