Evil as a Crime Against Humanity

Human Rights Quarterly, 2004

This article, while rooted in critical literature, is interdisciplinary, drawing upon political and social theory, history, law, and social sciences to address the problem of evil in an environment dominated by crimes against humanity: the Congo during the reign of the Belgian King Leopold. Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, published in 1899, is based in part on the author's experiences aboard the steamship Roi des Belges on the Congo River in 1890. The narrative contains three representations of evil: the base, primitive, perverse allure of lust and greed in the deepest recesses of the human psyche; evil at the heart of civilization and modernity; and the banal complicity of ordinary people whose silence and denial allows evil to prosper. Without impugning the quality or importance of Heart of Darkness, either as literature or as part of the global discourse on human rights, it is nevertheless argued that the primitive allure of evil is emphasized in the narrative to the detriment of representations of more subtle and civilized

Contemporary Political Theory, 2008

2009

These key questions so eloquently put by Dick also underpin the aims of ‘Evil and Human Wickedness.’ Rob uses similar words in his words on themain aim of the project: “I was - and remain - convinced that the problems of evil are inseparably and intimately tied to the problems of what it is to behuman.” 4 The project had, and still has, three mains aims. Firstly, to start adiscourse on the nature of evil and human wickedness, questions which arerelevant to our very being-in-the world. Secondly in order to do this, it isnecessary to open up a dialogue across disciplines and beyond our own areasof interest and/or specialism in order to bring a wider understanding to suchcrucial issues beyond personal interpretations and pre-existing intellectualinvestment. Lastly, while we may not come up with answers to questionssurrounding the continuing problem of evil and human wickedness in theworld, it is necessary to wrestle with the question of evil in its manifoldforms, as this is not a mere ...

Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 2003

Human beings do terrible, terrible things to each other. Rape, torture, mutilation, murder, at times done while loved ones are forced to watch or while displayed before a crowd, and done intentionally, brutally, for long stretches of time, and with words to amplify the pain. Then there are the great wasting plagues that are set upon others: the want and humiliation and hopelessness that come from poverty, racism, sexual exploitation, and other forms of distributed violence; and these are compounded by the neglect and indifference and condescension and overt rationalizations that add insult to injury. The list could go on, and it does. How should one speak of these things? What words will do? Evil, sin, horror, cruelty, viciousness, an assault on human dignity—perhaps one can construct a sliding scale, but such consensus is unlikely. In public discourse, which is known for both euphemism and hyperbole, there are differences in and disagreement about appropriate usage when marking extremes of harmfulness. Most recently, President George W. Bush has used the term “evil” while setting out an aggressive foreign policy, while more liberal commentators have been quick to point out the arbitrary and dangerous features of that attribution. These retorts are also partisan, of course, but more than that, for they reflect (and enforce) the fact that the term “evil” is almost unintelligible within the standard lexicon of liberal-democratic political thought. (And with reason, for the development of modern political discourse was influenced by revulsion over the religious wars of the seventeenth century.) Thus, one can ask, is the term ever justified? Despite its obvious faults, I think that it remains a resource for public thought. As a preliminary step toward that end, this essay will outline four levels of analysis. The first of these demarcates the use of the term in presidential discourse. President Reagan’s “Evil Empire” and its reprise as President Bush’s “axis of evil” are the most telling examples, although the term has been used more widely and now is used emphatically to denounce terrorism. It is hard for some of us to take these claims seriously, however, regardless of the fact that the specific regimes are tyrannical and that terrorism is a crime against humanity. One problem is that the attribution is so arbitrary. The evil to be found in those regimes is much more widely available, not least among American client states who practice state terrorism. Thus, such usage, and certainly the “axis of evil,” qualifies as demagoguery. The phrase is a distorted representation that appeals to ignorance and arrogance in order to expand the speaker’s political power while reducing public accountability. Evil must FORUM 511

2009

This paper delves into an in- depth exploration of the nature of evil from personal experiences, clinical experiences, to evil as seen in films and as understood through religions and mythology. It examines C. G. Jung's viewpoint on this subject, which was a life-long concern of his.

The revolt commanded by Lucifer in the heaven marked a start in the cosmology of Christianity. Although scholars agree the problem of evilness as one of the most vivid contradictions of Catholic Church, it is clear that God forgives its life. Unlike other traditions or mythologies where the Gods kill the dissidents or inflict unbearable torments, Judaism and Christianity continue the dialectic relations between goodness and evilness by the introduction of forgiveness. That way, these cosmologies neglect the possibility of dying, creating the desire to embrace the life. The riot of Lucifer exhibits our ancient panic to the offspring death.

NoFo. An Interdisciplinary Journal of Law and Justice., No. 4, 2007.