Thanks, Pede.

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, the Screwtape Letters is the REALLY astute analysis--how damnation can grow out of habitually yielding to seemingly trivial temptations--cumulatively, not dramatically. It was written during WWII when we faced one kind of evil. The sequel (Screwtape Proposes a Toast) was written during the Cold War; with overt references to the USSR; by that time, of course, the Devil had taken off his Nazi mask and put on his Communist mask. Same Evil, different names.

Sorry if I'm responding with a run-on sentence of a comment, but in an attempt to get some sort of handle on the enormity of the evil we're seeing today, I've been reading Hannah Arendt's The Origins of Totalitarianism. She makes a distinction between the traditional (say, Roman or Ottoman) dictatorships and modern totalitarian dictatorships. Ancient tyrannies couldn't and didn't try to control every aspect of people's lives. Totalitarianism tries to do just that.

Examples are obvious. The Social Credit system, e.g. Contempt for human life is a hallmark. It's nothing if not CHEAP. The totalitarian State wants TOTAL control, absolute Power--for its OWN sake (as O'Brien admits to Winston in "1984"). People are guinea pigs for disastrous economic experiments like 5-year plans, or cattle to be herded into collectives at will. Promises of plenty are consistently and deliberately broken. The welfare of the People is an abstraction and a lie. REAL people are turned into slaves of the State. Tens of millions are tortured, imprisoned, murdered and starved to death. Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot--they all shrug their shoulders at the stunning atrocities they commit. ("Kill one and it's murder, kill millions and it's a statistic," Stalin is reputed to have said.) Worse, they take pleasure in degrading human dignity and inflicting pain. You could try to "medicalize" someone like Mao, try to fit him into a DSM profile: a malignant narcissist, let's say, with a sadistic psychopath co-morbidity, but these mealy-mouthed categories don't contain him. They're all circumlocutions for what he really was: evil.

Arendt puzzles over what to call such highly organized, far-reaching high-tech savagery, so different from the old barbarities. How do you explain such casual brutality, such deliberate cruelty? What makes it possible? Despite her secularist outlook she finds herself resorting to the the religious concept of evil--more than that: "RADICAL EVIL"--a term borrowed from Kant. For Kant (a Pietist). "radical" means defiance of the moral law, and hence God's universe--like Milton's Satan, who turns that law upside-down ("Evil, be thou my Good") as Satanists ritually do with the Crucifix. By selfishly rejecting the moral law, we make our selfishness the law. From this fundamental evil stem all the others.

Does this "explain" Evil, or just rationalize it? Despite all the theology and philosophy, the evil of totalitarianism simply defies comprehension, and perhaps the only ultimate truth about it is that it just IS. Satan's selfish pride got him kicked out of Heaven. But what made him so proudly selfish? For Kant, evil is something one freely chooses, though it is also a universal predisposition akin to St. Augustine's "innate depravity." We are also free to choose the Good. So Satan simply CHOSE to rebel against God--i.e., he chose evil. It is something chosen, which is to say, irreducible--as mysterious in its way as God's ways. The ancient problem of theodicy (why does God allow evil to exist?) has never been satisfactorily solved. On the other hand, soft-focusing Evil with the euphemisms of psychiatry is obfuscating and may even collaborate with it by letting it off the moral hook and refusing to call it by its proper name.

Thanks, Pede.

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, the Screwtape Letters is the REALLY astute analysis--how damnation can grow out of habitually yielding to seemingly trivial temptations--cumulatively, not dramatically. It was written during WWII when we faced one kind of evil. The sequel (Screwtape Proposes a Toast) was written during the Cold War; with overt references to the USSR; by that time, of course, the Devil had taken off his Fascist mask and put on his Communist mask. Same Evil, different names.

Sorry if I'm responding with a run-on sentence of a comment, but in an attempt to get some sort of handle on the enormity of the evil we're seeing today, I've been reading Hannah Arendt's The Origins of Totalitarianism. She makes a distinction between the traditional (say, Roman or Ottoman) dictatorships and modern totalitarian dictatorships. Ancient tyrannies couldn't and didn't try to control every aspect of people's lives. Totalitarianism tries to do just that.

Examples are obvious. The Social Credit system, e.g. Contempt for human life is a hallmark. The totalitarian State wants TOTAL control, absolute Power for its own sake (as O'Brien admits in 1984.) People are guinea pigs for usually disastrous economic experiments like 5-year plans. Promises of plenty are consistently and deliberately broken. The welfare of the People is an abstraction and a lie. REAL people are turned into slaves or serfs of the State. Tens of millions are tortured, murdered and starved. Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot--they all shrug their shoulders at the stunning atrocities they commit. Or worse, take pleasure in cheapening human life and inflicting pain. You could try to fit Mao into a DSM profile: a malignant narcissist with a sadistic psychopath co-morbidity, but these mealy-mouthed categories don't contain him. They're all circumlocutions for what he really was: evil.

Anyway, in a desperate attempt to cut this short: Arendt puzzles over what to call such highly organized, high-tech savagery, so different from the old barbarities. How do you explain it, what makes it possible? Despite her secularist outlook she finds herself resorting to the the religious concept of evil--more than that: "RADICAL EVIL"--a term borrowed from Kant. For Kant (a Pietist). "radical" means defiance of the moral law, and hence God's universe--like Milton's Satan, who turns that law upside-down ("Evil, be thou my Good") as Satanists ritually do with the Crucifix. By selfishly rejecting the moral law, we make our own selfishness the law. From this fundamental evil stem all the others.

Does this "explain" Evil, or just rationalize it? Despite all the theology and philosophy, the evil of totalitarianism simply defies comprehension, and perhaps the only ultimate truth about it is that it just IS. The Devil's selfish pride got him kicked out of Heaven. But what made him so proudly selfish? For Kant, evil is something one freely chooses, though it is also a universal predisposition akin to St. Augustine's "innate depravity." We are also free to choose the Good. So Satan simply CHOSE to rebel against God--i.e., he chose evil. It is something chosen, but is also a GIVEN--finally as mysterious in its way as God's ways. The ancient problem of theodicy (why does God allow evil to exist?) has never been satisfactorily solved. On the other hand, air-brushing Evil with the medical euphemisms of psychology is obfuscating and may even collaborate with it by letting it off the moral hook and refusing to call it by its proper name.

Thanks, Pede.

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, the Screwtape Letters is the REALLY astute analysis--how damnation can grow out of habitually yielding to seemingly trivial temptations--cumulatively, not dramatically. It was written during WWII when we faced one kind of evil. The sequel (Screwtape Proposes a Toast) was written during the Cold War; with overt references to the USSR; by that time, of course, the Devil had taken off his Fascist mask and put on his Communist mask. Same Evil, different names.

Sorry if I'm responding with a run-on sentence of a comment, but in an attempt to get some sort of handle on the enormity of the evil we're seeing today, I've been reading Hannah Arendt's The Origins of Totalitarianism. She makes a distinction between the traditional (say, Roman or Ottoman) dictatorships and modern totalitarian dictatorships. Ancient tyrannies couldn't and didn't try to control every aspect of people's lives. Totalitarianism tries to do just that.

Examples are obvious. The Social Credit system, e.g. Contempt for human life is a hallmark. The totalitarian State wants TOTAL control, absolute Power for its own sake (as O'Brien admits in 1984.) People are guinea pigs for usually disastrous economic experiments like 5-year plans. Promises of plenty are consistently and deliberately broken. The welfare of the People is an abstraction and a lie. REAL people are turned into slaves or serfs of the State. Tens of millions are tortured, murdered and starved. Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot--they all shrug their shoulders at the stunning atrocities they commit. Or worse, take pleasure in cheapening human life and inflicting pain. What I've read of Mao perfectly fits the profile of a malignant narcissist with strong sadistic tendencies. But that's just a weaker way of saying he was evil.

Anyway, in a desperate attempt to cut this short: Arendt puzzles over what to call such highly organized, high-tech savagery, so different from the old barbarities. How do you explain it, what makes it possible? Despite her secularist outlook she finds herself resorting to the the religious concept of evil--more than that: "RADICAL EVIL"--a term borrowed from Kant. For Kant (a Pietist). "radical" means defiance of the moral law (and hence God's universe--like Milton's Satan)--replacing it with the selfish (ultimately satanic) ego, making selfishness itself the law. From this fundamental evil stem all the others.

Does this "explain" Evil, or just rationalize it? Despite all the theology and philosophy, the evil of totalitarianism simply defies comprehension, and perhaps the only ultimate truth about it is that it just IS. The Devil's selfish pride got him kicked out of Heaven. But what made him so proudly selfish? For Kant, evil is something one freely chooses, though it is also a universal predisposition akin to St. Augustine's "innate depravity." We are also free to choose the Good. So Satan simply CHOSE to rebel against God--i.e., he chose evil. It is something chosen, but is also a GIVEN--finally as mysterious in its way as God's ways. The ancient problem of theodicy (why does God allow evil to exist?) has never been satisfactorily solved. On the other hand, air-brushing Evil with the medical euphemisms of psychology is obfuscating and may even collaborate with it by letting it off the moral hook and refusing to call it by its proper name.

Sorry. I've gone on way too long. I'll stop now.

Thanks, Pede.

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, the Screwtape Letters is the REALLY astute analysis--how damnation can grow out of habitually yielding to seemingly trivial temptations--cumulatively, not dramatically. It was written during WWII when we faced one kind of evil. The sequel (Screwtape Proposes a Toast) was written during the Cold War; with overt references to the USSR; by that time, of course, the Devil had taken off his Fascist mask and put on his Communist mask. Same Evil, different names.

Sorry if I'm responding with a run-on sentence of a comment, but in an attempt to get some sort of handle on the enormity of the evil we're seeing today, I've been reading Hannah Arendt's The Origins of Totalitarianism. She makes a distinction between the traditional (say, Roman or Ottoman) dictatorships and modern totalitarian dictatorships. Ancient tyrannies couldn't and didn't try to control every aspect of people's lives. Totalitarianism tries to do just that.

Examples are obvious. The Social Credit system, e.g. Contempt for human life is a hallmark. The totalitarian State wants TOTAL control, absolute Power for its own sake (as O'Brien admits in 1984.) People are guinea pigs for usually disastrous economic experiments like 5-year plans. Promises of plenty are consistently and deliberately broken. The welfare of the People is an abstraction and a lie. REAL people are turned into slaves or serfs of the State. Tens of millions are tortured, murdered and starved. Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot--they all shrug their shoulders at the stunning atrocities they commit. Or worse, take pleasure in cheapening human life and inflicting pain. What I've read of Mao perfectly fits the profile of a malignant narcissist with strong sadistic tendencies. But that's just a weaker way of saying he was evil.

Anyway, in a desperate attempt to cut this short: Arendt puzzles over what to call such highly organized, high-tech savagery, so different from the old barbarities. How do you explain it, what makes it possible? Despite her secularist outlook she finds herself resorting to the term "RADICAL EVIL"--a concept borrowed from Kant. For Kant (a Pietist). "radical" means defiance of the fundamental moral law (and hence God's universe--like Milton's Satan)--replacing it with the selfish (ultimately satanic) ego, making selfishness itself the law. From this evil stem all the others.

Does this "explain" Evil, or just rationalize it? Despite all the theology and philosophy, the evil of totalitarianism simply defies comprehension, and the ultimate truth about it is that it IS. The Devil's selfish pride got him kicked out of Heaven. But what made him so proudly selfish? For Kant, evil is a choice, a willed giving in to a universal predisposition. One has to accept it as a given--horrible and horrifying and to be defeated at all costs, but finally as mysterious in its way as God's ways. The ancient problem of theodicy (why does God allow evil to exist?) only takes us so far. Air-brushing Evil with the medical euphemisms of psychology only collaborates with it by letting it off the moral hook and refusing to call it by its proper name.

Sorry. I've gone on way too long. I'll stop now.

Thanks, Pede.

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, the Screwtape Letters is the REALLY astute analysis--how damnation can grow out of habitually yielding to seemingly trivial temptations--cumulatively, not dramatically. It was written during WWII when we faced one kind of evil. The sequel (Screwtape Proposes a Toast) was written during the Cold War; with overt references to the USSR; by that time, of course, the Devil had taken off his Fascist mask and put on his Communist mask. Same Evil, different names.

Sorry if I'm responding with a run-on sentence of a comment, but in an attempt to get some sort of handle on the enormity of the evil we're seeing today, I've been reading Hannah Arendt's The Origins of Totalitarianism. She makes a distinction between the traditional (say, Roman or Ottoman) dictatorships and modern totalitarian dictatorships. Ancient tyrannies couldn't and didn't try to control every aspect of people's lives. Totalitarianism tries to do just that.

Examples are obvious. The Social Credit system, e.g. Contempt for human life is a hallmark. The totalitarian State wants TOTAL control, absolute Power for its own sake (as O'Brien admits in 1984.) People are guinea pigs for usually disastrous economic experiments like 5-year plans. Promises of plenty are consistently and deliberately broken. The welfare of the People is an abstraction and a lie. REAL people are turned into slaves or serfs of the State. Tens of millions are tortured, murdered and starved. Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot--they all shrug their shoulders at the stunning atrocities they commit. Or worse, take pleasure in cheapening human life and inflicting pain. What I've read of Mao perfectly fits the profile of a malignant narcissist with strong sadistic tendencies. But that's just a weaker way of saying he was evil.

Anyway, in a desperate attempt to cut this short: Arendt puzzles over what to call such highly organized, high-tech savagery, so different from the old barbarities. How do you explain it, what makes it possible? She resorts to the term "radical evil"--a concept borrowed from Kant. For Kant (a Pietist). "radical" means defiance of the moral law (and hence God's universe--like Milton's Satan); it means replacing it with the selfish (ultimately satanic) ego, making selfishness itself the law. From this basic evil stem all the others.

Does this "explain" Evil, or just rationalize it? Despite all the theology and philosophy, the evil of totalitarianism simply defies comprehension, and the ultimate truth about it is that it IS. The Devil's selfish pride got him kicked out of Heaven. But what made him so proudly selfish? For Kant, evil is a choice, a willed giving in to a universal predisposition. One has to accept it as a given--horrible and horrifying and to be defeated at all costs, but finally as mysterious in its way as God's ways. The ancient problem of theodicy (why does God allow evil to exist?) only takes us so far. Air-brushing Evil with the medical euphemisms of psychology only collaborates with it by letting it off the moral hook and refusing to call it by its proper name.

Sorry. I've gone on way too long. I'll stop now.