top of page
  • publiusfederalist

Evil Defined

Updated: May 22, 2021

This Blog Post will be one of the most difficult Blog Posts for me to write, it has become apparent the issues that we face are that of a philosophical level more than a specific approach or best tactical strategy. Through this understanding, which Federalist 2.0 has advocated through the Federalist 2.0 principles and resulting Integrated Theory, we should be able to lay out the necessary components that will help keep a society knitted together in a fundamental way through a common understanding of what Evil really means.

The necessary realization and understanding at the most basic level, which many people struggle with, is to define the essence of Evil. The need to develop this notion is critical in communicating and swaying people to the un-natural method of thought as outlined in the Federalist 2.0 papers and on this site. The critical aspect is the realization that mankind has what we would call “Rational Thought” and through this “Rational Thought” we can understand the world in one of two ways, through the lens of Vice or through the lens of Virtue.

Whom shall decide this notion of Vice vs Virtue, whom should determine the notion that some aspect of society is not functioning properly and thus there is a need to make a change and how can those changes be made in a specific light? What is the nature of this type of change and how is the notion of Evil critical to this understanding? Let’s see if we can determine these things by working our way through the notion of Evil within a Secular Approach and then through the lens of a Spiritual Approach. From that we can extract the different perspectives and resolve the relevant insights.

Setting the Table for Evil - Secular Approach

Let’s determine what the notion of Evil is from a Secular Standpoint, at which point we should be able to move to a more Theological point of view and then come to some resolution that would bridge between these two directions and argue for a more sane and applicable approach that would benefit the Citizens of a Nation Overall. The point that the Federalist 2.0 philosophy is working to establish and take is that there is a notion of right mindedness in determining how a group of people (Citizens) should be treated over time and when does the negative treatment put a cause in front of the citizens to make a necessary change.

Let’s get started with the Secular Point of view, by searching google for the information on “Secular View of Evil”, the most interesting findings was the following that would seem to be a Secular View:

“… evil people almost always lack empathy and concern for others, and they are in no way motivated to help others or to do what is morally right.” From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

This view is what is referred to as the Consistency Thesis, this means that people have certain ways about them which makes them do Evil things more often than not. This seems to be consistent with what our discussion is about, so we have selected this approach. The other two options presented are the Fixity Thesis (Someone is Evil all the time and cannot do good) and the Mirror Thesis that an evil person is the opposite of those whom are saints (Someone is Evil if they can be determined to do the opposite of those whom are Saints), this is an interesting point, but required too much subjective reasoning to fully apply to the notion of Governance. So the The Consistency Thesis will be adopted as our “Secular View” of Evil for this Post.

Let’s also dive into the dictionary view:

evil adjective \ ˈē-vəl 1 a: morally reprehensible : SINFUL, WICKED an evil impulse b : arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct a person of evil reputation
2 a archaic : INFERIOR b: causing discomfort or repulsion : OFFENSIVE an evil odor c: DISAGREEABLE woke late and in an evil temper
3 a: causing harm : PERNICIOUS the evil institution of slavery b: marked by misfortune : UNLUCKY

Here is what is being written on Wikipedia:

Evil, in a general sense, is defined by what it is not—the opposite or absence of good. It can be an extremely broad concept, although in everyday usage it is often more narrowly used to talk about profound wickedness. It is generally seen as taking multiple possible forms, such as the form of personal moral evil commonly associated with the word, or impersonal natural evil (as in the case of natural disasters or illnesses), and in religious thought, the form of the demonic or supernatural/eternal.[1] While some religions, world views, and philosophies focus on "good versus evil", others deny evil's existence and usefulness in describing people.

Now let’s look as an approach that we could find from a Secular Publication, “The New Yorker” on the subject of Evil:

The danger of a word like “evil” is that it is absolute. The “intense semantic charge” of the word “evil,” Peter Dews writes, “lends itself to exploitation” by whoever uses it. To play the “evil” card is to cut off all debate, and to say that any effort toward rehabilitation or reintegration wouldn’t be worth the risk or heartache. The mark of “evil” demands permanent banishment or death, and we call perpetrators “evil” to relieve the guilt we might feel in applying such sanctions. And yet to try to explain evil, as with brain scans or social conditions, smacks intolerably of absolving it. It suggests that evil is part of the natural order of things, a conclusion that our sense of trust in the world yearns to reject.

All of these four examples fall into the Consistency Thesis, where people are performing the acts of “evil” with the New Yorker attempting to obfuscate the nature of Evil with a bunch of words to hide its importance and impact on others. The concept of Evil with all four of these constructs is a form of relativism, meaning that given one’s cultures and beliefs, something that does not set in alignment with your group’s perspective is what one would call Evil.

Setting the Table for Evil - Spiritual Approach

The Spiritual Aspect of Evil must now be considered and we must weigh with and against the Secular approach to best understand what role “Evil” plays within the context of the culture and the context of politics within the overall management of a set of citizens. In reviewing this concept and approach we really did not have to travel far to find the most right leaning perspective (though it be a purely Christian perspective), we found a solid sermon from John MacArthur (pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California).

From this Sermon how can we formulate a strategy about Evil that will best explain what has been occurring for centuries to the human condition and existence. The following will define Evil on several dimensions: Natural Evil, Moral Evil and Supernatural Evil, then the fourth group that is less understood, the “The Evil Dictated by God” through His will. For those whom are Secular, hold in with me and review this text and watch the video, as you and your group has your perspective on Evil, so does the religious citizens that live in this same community and nation as you.

John MacArther’s message called, “Why does Evil Dominate the World?”, does a great job laying the purist version I could find at this time:

“There is natural evil. That is, impersonal, external, physical, temporal evil, in the form of diseases, disasters, catastrophes; the kinds of things that come from the physical world, the cursed creation. From tiny bacteria to tidal waves, from viruses to volcanoes, the whole natural world is blighted by bad things; things that make you sick, things that injure you, things that kill you. And humans, since the fall, have lived at the mercy of the physical corruption.”
“Secondly, there’s moral evil. Moral evil is personal, as opposed to natural evil, which is impersonal. It is internal; it is spiritual. It is wickedness, sin, transgression, iniquity, whatever term you want to use for it. It is a bent, it is a disposition, it is an attitude, it is a course of thinking, speaking and conduct which dominates the human race, so that Scripture says, “No one is good, not even one.” Scripture says, “All the thoughts of the human heart are only evil continually.” Scripture says that “it is out of the heart that lust conceives and produces sin, and from that sin comes death.”
“Then thirdly, there is supernatural evil; supernatural evil. This is the evil that is basically perpetrated by demons - fallen angels, the associates of Satan, the number of the angels that fell from heaven with Satan - as indicated in Revelation 12 to be a third of the angels; leaving two-thirds remaining as holy angels, one third are fallen. Satan is one of those, and “the whole world” - 1 John 5:19 says – “lies in the lap of the evil one.” “
“This is critical: He (GOD) had a purpose for evil. What is that purpose that God had for evil? Before I answer that question - and that’s the fourth in our little outline - let me read the Westminster Confession from the 1700s; some great theologians and biblical scholars put this together. Listen carefully: “God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass:"
" "Yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second-hand causes taken away ... sinfulness proceeds not only from the creature; proceeds only from the creature and not from God, who, being most holy and righteous, neither ... can be the author and approver of sin.” But then, says the Westminster Confession, all that God decrees and all that God providentially brings to pass is all to the praise of His glory - and they got it right."

"The reason for God ordaining evil is for the praise of His glory. Let me ask you a simple question to help you answer the question - the bigger question: is God more glorious because of sin existing or less glorious? Pretty easy question to answer, isn’t it? That really is the ultimate question. Throughout all the eons of eternity, will God receive more glory from His creatures because sin existed or less? And, friends, that’s really all that matters, is the eternal glory of God.”

This philosophy leads then to the following proposition as FACT within the context of a religious perspective:

“Evil exists; God exists and this is the only God who exists; thirdly: God wills evil to exist; (So) It is inescapable.”

The Full Sermon is located here:

Some of you that may be religious might find these statements more than you are willing to accept, but I want to put in contrast the notions and dichotomies that we live with and live among our fellow citizens. There is the notion of Evil from A Secular view that is relative and there is a notion of Evil that is set in stone from the spiritual perspective. One side sets to free mankind of the burden by some how accepting the notion that Evil is not solid and is a matter of perception. The other side, the Christian side, though aligned to the most stringent interpretation off the Bible, sees the world of Evil as multi-dimensional (Natural, Moral, Supernatural, God Given) while then using this existence of Evil to impose a most straight forward proposition of the existence of God, Evil Exists, God Exists as only one God and God has a direct influence in Evil for his own glory. This is important, one side sees Evil as a floating concept, the other side sees it set into a “Mooring” with no way to release it from that “Mooring”.

Evaluating the Table set for Evil

Now, we might say, there are issues on both sides of this argument for evil from the secular perspective and from the religious perspective. To keep this post to something of reasonable length we will simplify this discussion to that which will allow us to find the kernel of truth. The use of the secular perspective for Evil, interprets the notion of Evil as subjective (Relative), what ever a specific group would declare would be Evil, would for that group be Evil. We can take that concept as face value. The religious side, could be argued to be more objective, though a large chasm of directions exist, we as the Federalist 2.0, for this blog’s sake will directly focus on the Evil of Morality, and leave at the door open to the notion that God is all knowing and all powerful and has a hand in evil.

Within these thoughts then we can hone in on the Kernels of Truth:

  1. Secular - Evil is Relative (Subjective)

  2. Religious - Evil is Not Relative but constant within a Moral Direction (A Mooring) - Federalist 2.0 calls it True North (Objective Goal)

Through this process, I am leading you to better understand your other side, better set in your mind that this problem of Evil is REAL and that it is complicated and very divisive from a Political Standpoint. So let’s use an example, we will use the notion of Bats, yes those animals that are to fault for the Corona Virus (COVID-19). We will define Evil from a Secular Perspective and from a Religious Perspective:

  1. Secular Group - Bats are to be eliminated at all cost, our group has 500,000 members - This Group is called “Save the Insects”

  2. Religious Group - Bats are a Religious Symbol for this group, same number of people 500,000 - This Group is called “Save the Bats”

Now which is evil? Which is the one that “should” prevail? It is a hard one is it not? There is so much good that Bats can do for a community to reduce the population of Insects and there is so much bad that the Bat community can do through transmission of Disease. If we play this out in full view, the successful elimination of BATs might cause harm to humans as insects also carry disease and can have a significant impact on the eco-system. The full embrace of Bats and not managing their possible disease also can negative impact on the community, through variations of COVID for example. Regardless of what SHOULD be done, we have two voting blocks of equal strength. One group for Saving Insects the other for Saving Bats.

Can one group get a leg up over the other group politically to champion their goals? Yes, of course they can. One group could devise methods to game the system, get their Senators and Representatives into office, take over School Boards and local elections. They could peddle lies and convince the population of one group to join them in their efforts to achieve their goals. Would it be not true then, from a secular point of view that anything that does not align with their agenda could be called “EVIL”? Where this notion of Evil could best stick if you have a multitude of voices from news, media and movies, etc claiming the needs of our group above the other group to the Point of calling it “Evil”?

In so doing as one group gains the favor of most all of the other group, let’s say through their efforts they have moved some 800,000 people to their side. And only 200,000 reside in the shadows and don’t say what they believe. And when questioned vouch for the other side in fear of their recourse. What would happen? That wining side would either eliminate all BATs or embrace all Bats to the detriment of Society as a whole, would they not?

Either way, when the system of people, the society, begins to realize the side they have been pulling for or hiding from was or has creating a real train wreck, the desire of that society to stabilize will be high, and in some cases sway to far the other way, such that one group (Save the Insects) sets its demise on another group (Save the Bats). What should the winning group (Save the Insects) do? Should they engage in activity that would demoralize the other group? Should they (Save the Insects) enforce new methods and laws that would ensure their group remains in power?

From a Federalist Point of view, the answer is a resulting "Yes" they will set in play those things to maintain their power. NOT THAT THEY SHOULD. Through this dynamic we can see what ever means necessary could be deployed to ensure the other group (Save the Bats) does not obtain the power in which the "Save the Insects" hold. The fate of the Bats are now secondary. The pull to implement activities that depress and harm the citizens are now in play. What happens when that concept or desire is set to it’s extreme? Let's look at what people can and might resort to accomplish their goals against another group of people.

The Coming Mass Psychosis

The following three videos, take a secular approach to this way of handling these events, without a real religious perspective, the desire to destroy the Minds of the citizens can be very strong and can impact and harm generations of people as they try to make sense of their world, turning a specific group into a Mass Psychotic Event, some quotes are provided for context:

“Indeed, it is becoming ever more obvious” he writes “that it is not famine, not earthquakes, not microbes, not cancer but man himself who is man’s greatest danger to man, for the simple reason that there is no adequate protection against psychic epidemics, which are infinitely more devastating than the worst of natural catastrophes.” Carl Jung, The Symbolic Life
“. . .the totalitarian systems of the 20th century represent a kind of collective psychosis. Whether gradually or suddenly, reason and common human decency are no longer possible in such a system: there is only a pervasive atmosphere of terror, and a projection of “the enemy,” imagined to be “in our midst.” Thus society turns on itself, urged on by the ruling authorities.” Joost Meerloo, The Rape of the Mind

Who is Joost Meerlo? He was a Dr. or Medicine and Psychoanalysis in 50's and 60's that looked at the tools totalitarian states used to control their citizens. Check his bio here:

Is a Mass Psychosis the Greatest Threat to Humanity?

Further, learnings that should be considered along this vain of thought in the second Video include the following:

“Just when people were congratulating themselves on having abolished [the belief in demons], it turned out that instead of haunting the attic or old ruins the [demons] were flitting about in the heads of apparently normal Europeans. Tyrannical, obsessive, intoxicating ideas and delusions were abroad everywhere, and people began to believe the most absurd things, just as the possessed do.” Carl Jung, After the Catastophe
“…the possibility of an evil or alien idea coming to inhabit a person, misleading him, perverting him ontologically, driving him to crime or insanity. . .The person born of the idea may be distorted and even destroyed by it.” Richard Pevear, Foreword to Demons

The video continues with some enlightening ideas:

"Sometimes this passive conformity in the realm of ideas promotes our well-being and contributes to a prosperous society, but at other times the ideas that make up the spirit of our age do the opposite. Certain ideas weaken us, make us prone to fear and anxiety, disconnect us from reality, drive us to excessive hate, cause us to regress psychologically and distort our view of human nature and the human potential. Ideas of this variety the Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky labeled as demons, and as Richard Pevear wrote in the preface to Dostoevsky’s novel Demons, throughout Dostoevsky’s work exists “

The Series continues to make the case:

“If he controls your ideas he will soon control your actions, because every action is preceded by an idea. (The Will to Be Human) “ Silvano Arieti, The Will to Be Human

“We can never be sure that a new idea will not seize either upon ourselves or upon our neighbours. We know from modern as well as from ancient history that such ideas are often so strange, indeed so bizarre, that they fly in the face of reason. The fascination which is almost invariably connected with ideas of this sort produces a fanatical obsession, with the result that all dissenters no matter how well-meaning or reasonable they are, get burnt alive . . .or are disposed of in masses.” Carl Jung, Psychology and Religion
“. . . it is delusional. . .to think of man as an obedient machine. It is delusional to deny his dynamic nature and to try to arrest all his thinking and acting at the infantile stage of submission to authority. . .” Joost Meerloo, Rape of the Mind

The Mass Psychosis and the Demons of Dostoevsky

Finally, we have the third video in the series of three that should be noted with the following quote:

“The masses have never thirsted after truth. They turn aside from evidence that is not to their taste, preferring to deify error, if error seduce them. Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim.” Gustav Le Bon, The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind
“Totalitarianism is the modern phenomenon of total centralized state power coupled with the obliteration of individual human rights: in the totalized state, there are those in power, and there are the objectified masses, the victims.” Arthur Versluis, The New Inquisitions
“… there is in fact much that is comparable between the strange reactions of the citizens of [totalitarianism] and their culture as a whole on the one hand and the reactions of the…sick schizophrenic on the other.” Joost Meerloo, The Rape of the Mind

The video continues to narrate:

“But what triggers the psychosis of totalitarianism? As was explored in the previous video of this series, the mass psychosis of totalitarianism begins in a society’s ruling class. The individuals that make up this class, be it politicians, bureaucrats, or crony capitalists, are very prone to delusions that augment their power, and no delusion is more attractive to the power-hungry, than the delusion that they can, and should, control and dominate a society. When a ruling elite becomes possessed by a political ideology of this sort, be it communism, fascism or technocracy, the next step is to induce a population into accepting their rule by infecting them with the mass psychosis of totalitarianism. This psychosis has been induced many times throughout history, and as Meerloo explains:”
“It is simply a question of reorganizing and manipulating collective feelings in the proper way.” Joost Meerloo, The Rape of the Mind

The general method by which the members of a ruling elite can accomplish this end is called menticide, with the etymology of this word being ‘a killing of the mind’, and as Meerloo further explains:
“Menticide is an old crime against the human mind and spirit but systematized anew. It is an organized system of psychological intervention and judicial perversion through which a [ruling class] can imprint [their] own opportunistic thoughts upon the minds of those [they] plan to use and destroy.” Joost Meerloo, The Rape of the Mind
“Each wave of terrorizing . . . creates its effects more easily – after a breathing spell – than the one that preceded it because people are still disturbed by their previous experience. Morality becomes lower and lower, and the psychological effects of each new propaganda campaign become stronger; it reaches a public already softened up.” Joost Meerloo, The Rape of the Mind
“Modern technology teaches man to take for granted the world he is looking at; he takes no time to retreat and reflect. Technology lures him on, dropping him into its wheels and movements. No rest, no meditation, no reflection, no conversation – the senses are continually overloaded with stimuli. [Man] doesn’t learn to question his world anymore; the screen offers him answers-ready-made.” Joost Meerloo, The Rape of the Mind
“Pavlov made another significant discovery: the conditioned reflex could be developed most easily in a quiet laboratory with a minimum of disturbing stimuli. Every trainer of animals knows this from his own experience; isolation and the patient repetition of stimuli are required to tame wild animals. . . .The totalitarians have followed this rule. They know that they can condition their political victims most quickly if they are kept in isolation.”
“Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph.” Thomas Paine, American Crisis

The Manufacturing of a Mass Psychosis - Can Sanity Return to an Insane World?

So we have weaved our way though the notion of Evil, provided an example of what Evil can be from a Secular point of view and a Theological point of view by using the notion to support of Bats or the elimination of Bats, we then discovered that this issue of Bats becomes diluted, once we have achieved our goals Politically using the Bat’s Cause as the mechanism for that political Achievement, the temptation to use our position to implement Mass Psychosis can be a Real Emotional Draw. Now comes the real twist…

…. Why does it have to be Bats? Why could it not be COVID and the Lockdowns, Race Battles, Transexual Sports, Climate Change, etc, etc, etc?

And this is where we have the critical moment of revelation, the moments that societies lose their minds are moments where the Ruling Class is most focused on maintaining and expanding their power at any cost. This motivation, when formulated in the constructs of a Secular Mind, becomes ever more malleable. But a Mind that is committed to the Higher Power, a religious mind, will not and cannot succumb to the ravages of the Menticide efforts. Please note there are times in history that Religions have been used as an excuse to apply Evil intent, we would argue those times were driven by a Secular interpretation of religious leanings.

From a Religious perspective, there is a level of inoculation that happens when there is a commitment to a “do no harm” philosophy, there is NO honor in the notion that if we are so focused on obtaining our political goals that we should and will pay the price in the political arena to succeed by making the citizens crazy. Keep in mind, no matter how wonderful our ideas are or how “Right” we might be, our desires and goals could be tainted with our own vice and that vice clouds our judgement.

The conservative philosophy is not aligned with the notions of Secular Faith but that of Religious Faith, and in doing so, we have an automatic inoculation to psychotic beliefs and thoughts since the essence of the core beliefs reside in the “Do no Harm” to your human brothers and sisters.

Additionally, from the Federalist 2.0 Point of view, we understand these thoughts and Psychotic Actions are rooted in the embrace of Vice, in the actions and character of the community where those that engage in such behavior have accepted and embraced their Vice of choice that they can no longer see TRUTH and are afraid of the TRUTH, as it will require them to do something about their Vice.

In the end, we come to this conclusion about Evil:

  1. Bats should be left alone - God will take care of them as He wishes - To involve oneself in the day to day activities of Bats is EVIL

  2. The Diseases that Bats Carry should not be manipulated to be released to reduce population or impose them on one’s enemy - Doing so is EVIL

  3. Using the Illness that Bats have brought as a way to lock down a population in the name of their own health is EVIL

  4. Expanding the Government to do more for the people when they can do things themselves is EVIL

  5. Using the mechanisms of FEAR (Through Bat Diseases) for preparing the population to accept some other form of Socialist Government is EVIL

  6. Using the Lock Down to Release Criminals and then Using them to March in the Street and Destroy Property is EVIL

  7. Teaching people to hate others or themselves because they are white is EVIL

  8. Allowing people born male to compete as women, instead of in a different category, is EVIL

  9. Asking cities to defund police is EVIL, people lose their minds and need police to protect themselves and others. Extreme force must be met with force

  10. De-platforming people in the name of one of the above is EVIL

From a purely secular standpoint we can find reasons to justify the 10 concepts or actions mentioned above. But from a religious perspective they are purely EVIL actions that in it’s entirety can make the citizens crazy or psychotic.

So have we defined the impact of Vice vs Virtue, have we decided whom should determine the notion that some aspect of society is not functioning properly and thus there is a need to make a change and how can those changes be made in a specific light through the lens of EVIL? Some people may find this unsavory, but from the Federalist 2.0 perspective, the answer is YES we did determine the best course of action. From the Federalist 2.0 perspective the notion of EVIL from a Religious Perspective is the only approach for Societies to ensure their long term survival.

Additionally, did we answer this notion that this type of RADICAL POLITICAL change and how the notion of Evil is critical to understanding how this type of change happens? Again, the answer is YES. As noted above, the inability to Anchor the Culture and Social systems to a religious morning, you give the Political Elite the tools to make the population CRAZY, and giving the Politicians this type of power is not wise. So we have to look at ourselves...

So have you felt crazy? Did you lose loved ones from the pandemic? Were you prevented from seeing them in their last dying moments? Did you feel that something was not right with the election in November 2020? Did you lose your job, your marriage, your sanity? Did you see others lose their own sanity to some extent? If you have become so over powered with emotions and hatred for what ever side... you have successfully succumbed to their efforts to have you experience a cognitive collapse in the political elite's pursuit of their Menticide to usher in a “better and more civil world”.

Now you know, these 10 items listed above, and more items can be added for sure, are all part of an overall effort to prepare you for the next Government Efforts to Save you from yourself and the pandemic. The Great Reset they call it, or just the introduction of the rolling pandemics that may be coming, is it not enough to see that your sovereignty and your Freedom is at stake? If you have any doubts check out this Event that was held in October 2019.

From a Federalist 2.0 point of view, these actions are NOT rooted in a True North set of concepts and are NOT anchored in a religion perspective. They are rooted in efforts to change this country to some form of Socialism that will ensure the political elite stay in power and amass great wealth, at the expense of the American Mind. Still not convinced? See the Video from "Man in America" as posted below about what is happening around the world and how this all works.

In the creation of the Federalist 2.0, it is our goal and commitment to you the reader, to share with you the pieces of the original intent of the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence and why it is critical that we claim this moral imperative to ensure the health and safety of our future generations and our capacity to continue as the Originally Planned United States of America.

Come join the Federalist 2.0 effort, help us resurrect the beliefs and understandings that made this United States of America the greatest nation on the planet to date. Let's make America great once more!

In the end, what do you have to lose?.... Maybe you can be Publius too?

- Publius

(C) 2021

(TM) Federalist 2.0

Man in America - WW3, WHO & The Great Reset - The Plot Revealed

A plot to unleash a bioweapon and cause mass terror has been uncovered. The goal? To start a domino effect of lockdowns leading to Chinese-style tyranny worldwide.

Now live on Rumble:

Follow on Telegram:


Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page