Talk:Avatar/@comment-79.177.105.83-20120718163403/@comment-79.204.71.247-20120723230321

I support the evil avatar idea. To keep balance on the world, you could simply crush everybody who oppose the "system". Example: The fire nation colonies and the multi-racial people; they threatened the balance - Aang first idea was to simply remove them. But he wanted that nobody should be violated, so there was no other choice but creating and "new" nation. However, I think if there would be a more brutish avatar like Yangchen, all the colonies would be simply destroyed and those who oppose this would be killed (perhaps even all multi-racial people would be killed - a genocide). Both of these procedure would restore balance and it was the personality of the current avatar who choose the first one.

Evil is a idea, not something which is really existing. It is part of the point of view of a person. A "evil" Avatar could have existed, but he/she could be a "good" from point of view of the spirits/the balance. Kuruk was a "bad" avatar; however, he never hurt somebody (ok, he defeated some firebenders during random agni kais, but in his time the looser was always spared).