throwaway03445

I'm not a native speaker, and I see that I may have been unclear.

I was thinking of the human consequences. In my language they are almost synonyms.

They of course care about the outcome, but not the effect it has on the target group

It's strange how one can normalize cruelty. Just think of how prison rapes are joked about in media and movies, as if it is an accepted consequence of committing a crime. It is a cruel and evil act that many choose to simply ignore because it is so common

Calling something "evil" is implying an external force (often linked to religion), that I don't think should be used. It reduces the responsibility of the person doing "evil" acts.

I think the missing ingredient is simply not caring about the outcome. It could be because they don't have empathy (sociopaths), or that the society has trained them into normalising obedience to the cause (facsism / communism) or inhumanized their targets (consentration camps).

Acts can certainly be described as "evil", but I don't agree that "evil" is some type of force that affects people.