Essay: Amorality, Immorality and Evil

 

Amorality, Immorality and Evil

 

In terms of the abrogation of human rights, immorality and amorality are both forms of evil.  It is sometimes thought that amorality--a lack of preference for a certain direction, ‘going with the tide of power’--is neutral, not evil.  But, say, if a government legalizes slavery, it doesn’t matter whether it is done strictly for power purposes or not.  Slavery is such a grossly evil condition that the choice to inflict it damns the inflictor, regardless of motive.

Consider an immoral government, one that is virulently racist.  Such rulership sees the world through a vizor of ignorance, hatred and fear, decreeing in rank demagoguery that a certain group is inferior and deserves slavery.  Now, someone might argue that such an immoral approach is more evil than a so-called netural government, one which does not believe a certain group of people is innately inferior and yet which legalizes slavery anyway, for some ruthless, machiavellian purpose. 

However, in both cases, immoral and amoral, an atrocity is committed, condoned, and enforced.  In the immoral government, the horrific crime is steeped in blind, vicious prejudice.  In the amoral government, there is a cold, callous calculation to enslave because it maximizes power.  In both cases, there is unspeakable cruelty of the most disgusting, unconscionable kind.

A distinction is often made between ‘neutral’  and 'evil.'  This distinction collapses when the supposedly neutral approach shatters human rights and inflicts utter misery, cruelty and condemnation. 

Similarly, politicians will often say that they are not prejudice themselves, but have to go along with prejudice policies for expediency.  In the past, in antebellum times, this concerned the legislation of slavery.  Politicians claimed they ‘had to’ endorse slavery, even though they themselves found it 'distasteful.'  

Now, such people are just as evil in action as those with warped, broken minds who believe slavery to be righteous.  In both cases, there is unspeakable cruelty of the most disgusting, unconscionable kind.

I don’t have time to shift this discussion to focus on the ubiquitous racism that infects the United States today.  But what I said above about slavery applies to those who would advance racism.  Racism is a scourge, a great evil.  The tactic today in the USA is to deny one is racist while, at the same time, advancing a fully racist agenda.  To praise a naked emperor's fancy clothes--to gaslight--has always been a brutal political tool.  It says 'I get to shape the social world you live in, even though truth, fairness and justice say I am wrong.'  

Whatever justification someone might give for promoting racist policies--such as denying that they are racist, or claiming they ‘have to’ go along, or outrightly saying a group is inferior--it all falls into the category of evil.  The effects are the same, the infliction of an abominable scourge.  

Claiming you are ‘neutral’ or ‘pragmatic’ does not lessen your culpability when it comes to fundamental rights and freedoms.  You are just as guilty, just as cruel and heartless, just as vicious, as the outright racist.

===================

 

6/26/25... changed a phrase

 6/10/25 ... some mods