Why do people tend to label entire sectors of society as evil?

[Lebombo]

Why do people tend to gripe about wallstreet is evil, government is evil, corporation is evil, welfare recipients are evil, rich people are evil, this industry is evil, that industry is evil?

Why do people clump an entire sector of society and call it evil?

Government (the legislative body for instance) is just people sitting in chairs who have been elected by other people to represent their interests. Are the people who elect the people they claim are evil? So are the only people who aren't evil are people who don't vote for anyone in government? Or are non-voters evil too?

The corporations are just people sitting in chairs offering a product/service that other people pay them for. Are you evil for continuing to buy these products and services and thus keeping this corporate tycoons in business? Maybe its the consumer who is evil for choosing to keep these evil entities in power. Maybe the only non evil people are the people who choose not to buy anything from the large corporations. Or are tree hugging hippies evil too?


The government is a body that only exists because there are people who choose to elect officials work there. I don't know what the number is, but it feels as though roughly half of american citizens are democrat and the other half are republican. Why is it so evenly divided? If government control was such a threat, why don't more people choose a more republican stance to thwart such a government threat? If the evil corporate hand were such a threat, then why don't more people choose a more democratic/socialist stance to counter the threat?

If one eco/political stance were truly worse than the other, then why, in a relatively educated society are people so evenly divided?

Why do people get mad that other people are gaming the welfare system when at the same time vote in favor of people who allow for individuals to game the private sector in such a way that it disrupts the economy and causes people to seek welfare in the first place.

Or why do people get mad that other people are gaming the private sector and getting rich off their backs, yet vote in favor of people who allow for individuals to game the welfare system in such a way that it disrupts the economy and causes people to continue having to seek welfare?

Why do people not realize that as our economy becomes more robotisized, automized, computerized..etc, that unemployment is inevitable regardless of how much or little government interferes with the economy? Or how big or small corporations become?

Why do people not realize that unemployment will continue to increase in the long run and it won't be the president's fault?

 

[Drakkith]

Because most people are extremely uneducated in such matters and find it much easier to follow someone that tells them they are right and that he/she will correct all these problems than to actually learn for themselves. Plus it's easy to call something "evil" and "wrong" instead of learning about it. I'm sure the issue is much more complicated than I have made it however.

 

[Evo]

People want to blame others for their failures.

 

[Jack21222]

For the same reason that Fox News thinks there is a "war" on Christmas, a "war" on rich people, a "war" on... you get the idea. People like to use hyperbole.

 

[lisab]

Because everything *is* evil:

All things are poison, and nothing is without poison; only the dose permits something not to be poisonous.

Paracelsus, ~16th century

 

[skippy1729]

Why do people not realize that unemployment will continue to increase in the long run and it won't be the president's fault?

You seem to take it as obvious and self evident that unemployment will increase in the long run. Why is that so?

 

[phylotree]

Doing business is like playing a chess game. Once you (not the OPer or anyone in particular) are checkmate'd and find no way out, you lose. Is this a real lesson to learn from a 'boy' ? I should not take this to heart at all and claim the 'boy' has performed an "evil" checkmate on me.

 

[Andre]

Maybe this thread is about the same in a different form.

Bottom line is, we need enemies, and if we don't have them, we invent them.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

A big part of it is ignorance and fallacious thinking, specifically phenomenon like confirmation bias. People may hold a belief that corporations, governments, welfare recipients etc are bad and whenever they perceive evidence of that they add it to their list of things that confirm their belief whilst ignoring things that don't.

To be honest though the premise of this thread is flawed, your basically asking us to clump entire sectors of society together and explain why they hold the beliefs they do. Some people may actually have more nuanced beliefs but express them/have them reported in a more simplistic manner. For example someone who says/is reported to have said "corporations are evil" may be referring to their dissatisfaction with the theory of corporatism and have legitimate reasons for holding their beliefs. Someone who says "the government is evil" may be referring to a plethora of actions that they believe have lead to evil results. They may not of course, but it's worth bearing in mind that when we're presented with groups of people in our media and their beliefs are outlined it's not necessarily as simple as presented.

Essentially, your question is borderline wicked.

 

[edward]

What would we call a company like Abbott labs. They were just fined $1.6 Billion, with a B, for illegal sales of an ineffective alzheimer's drug.

They had a special sales team that targeted; nursing homes, doctors, and facilities that treated alzheimers patients. The drug had never been approved for the use it was promising to improve.

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-05-07/justice/justice_abbott-fine-drug_1_abbott-laboratories-abbott-s-ceo-pfizer-settlement?_s=PM:JUSTICE

Abbott is still only in second place for the largest fine behind Pfizer who was fined $2.3 Billion.

We can't say they made a mistake because they were aware of what they were doing.

This isn't an infrequent thing and it isn't confined to the pharmaceutical industry.

There are too many scams going on to call them bad boys or even criminals. If we did call them criminals and force the issue some large banks on Wall Street would have a police record, and executives would be in prison.

I think that the term evil came up when so many entities were walking away from so many dirty deeds that the definition of evil just seemed to fit.

Now with the help of mass media and hate radio talk shows "evil" is applied to just about anything any particular group is against.

Of course the term evil can always be spun through differing philosophies, but i think most of us know what it means and how at times it is misused. Miss use seems to primarily occur as an attention grabber to put emphasis on a much less than evil person , or concept.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/money-power-wall-street/

 

[Office_Shredder]

There are too many scams going on to call them bad boys or even criminals. If we did call them criminals and force the issue some large banks on Wall Street would have a police record, and executives would be in prison.

We can't criminalize something because executives would be in prison?

 

[D H]

What would we call a company like Abbott labs.

In general I would call them immoral rather than evil. But sometimes that immorality can verge on being evil.

They were just fined $1.6 Billion, with a B, for illegal sales of an ineffective alzheimer's drug.

And this might be such a case. IMO, the crime becomes a crime against humanity when the magnitude of the crime becomes that large. So treat it as such. Rather than a mere slap on the back of the hand fine that might offset the profit made from the illegal activity, dissolve the company and perhaps off with some heads.

 

[CAC1001]

For the same reason that Fox News thinks there is a "war" on Christmas, a "war" on rich people, a "war" on... you get the idea. People like to use hyperbole.

Haven't heard anyone on Fox claim a "war" on rich people. Bill O'Reilly claimed there was a "war" on Christmas some years back in the early 2000s, and for awhile it did seem like political correctness was getting a little excessive over the issue IMO. The Left right now claim there is a "war on women" going on.

 

[D H]

Haven't heard anyone on Fox claim a "war" on rich people.

Just as a starter,

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/10/04/obamas-class-warfare-strategy-is-working-with-americans/
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2012/04/16/hypocrisy-when-it-comes-taxes
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/2012/03/05/are-wealthy-americans-being-demonized

And there are thousands more. (I get 1630 hits just searching for the exact phrase "class warfare" at foxnews.com.)

 

[CAC1001]

Just as a starter,

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/10/04/obamas-class-warfare-strategy-is-working-with-americans/
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2012/04/16/hypocrisy-when-it-comes-taxes
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/2012/03/05/are-wealthy-americans-being-demonized

And there are thousands more. (I get 1630 hits just searching for the exact phrase "class warfare" at foxnews.com.)

Class warfare sure, but I meant I haven't heard the actual phrase "war on the rich" used. Class warfare I don't know if it is the same thing, as it is more about trying to make poorer people envious of well-off people (although if not the same it is related). A "War on the rich" as I see it would be actual policies being passed to seriously hurt the wealthy, which we likely won't be seeing.

 

[Jack21222]

Class warfare sure, but I meant I haven't heard the actual phrase "war on the rich" used. Class warfare I don't know if it is the same thing, as it is more about trying to make poorer people envious of well-off people (although if not the same it is related). A "War on the rich" as I see it would be actual policies being passed to seriously hurt the wealthy, which we likely won't be seeing.

A war on Christmas is claimed many times ever year. For a "war on the rich," here is a clip from Fox Business, which is the same company as Fox news.

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1556169543001/is-the-president-still-waging-war-against-the-rich

Here's a "war on success" which is an even crazier claim: http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201201250006

If you look around, you'll find similar examples. Jon Stewart did a bit a few weeks ago when he showed clips of Fox news proclaiming there is a war on virtually everything.

 

[D H]

Class warfare sure, but I meant I haven't heard the actual phrase "war on the rich" used.

The second link I provided does not use the actual phrase "war on the rich". The phrase it actually uses is "war against the rich".

 

[Tosh5457]

The people you see doing that aren't being rational, they just say those things to blame someone. Wall Street is evil, but they use their services. Walmart is evil, but they go there and buy.

The most important thing about those claims is the sentiment behind them. The sentiment is that Wall Street led US into a financial crisis (which it did, even though it's just a piece on a chain of causes).

There are a lot of problems concerning Wall Street, the government (and the political system in general) and the corporate world, that affect people. Better have people speaking out non-sense than doing nothing, at least those in power know people are getting angry and revolted.