• Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        I thought exactly that. Opened the post, upvoted this thread.

        However couldn’t not Google it, and it may be on purpose.

        evilness

        noun

        evil·​ness

        : the quality of being evil : badness

        https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evilness

        While it does sound better with just “evil”, I wonder if they wished to exactly convey that what is being created is the quality of being evil in some people. All in all, that goes under the umbrella of evil, sure. But if we replace “evilness” with “badness”, it no longer sounds worse than the alternative, just “inequality creates bad”. Ofc you can’t compare directly like that, I’m just trying to make the point that black civil activist haven’t historically been that bad at language use, so perhaps we’re just feeling the more colloquial version but that this may be prescriptively better, idk.

        I’m no languinolologist.

          • Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            That’s more of a neologism, whereas “evilness” veers more toward the archaic.

          • Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Yeah, but not worse than just “bad”, whereas “evilness” sounds worse compared to just “evil.”

            My point is that it might not the most colloquial of English use, but MLK Jr didn’t exactly speak vernacular either.

            So just because something sounds a tad off doesn’t necessarily mean it’s wrong. And in a lot of cases it’s the opposite, because languages just keep evolving.