Over the years I have developed this phrase and concept of an Evil Lie as a concise expression of my understanding of the specific aspects of our situation.
It seems to be a correct and appropriate response to many "why not?" questions asked us - questions on the lines of: What have you got against the trans-agenda? Why don't you want a birdemic peck? What have you got against MLB antiracism? Why are you not in favour of recycling/ bicycle lanes/ wind turbines?...
At a micro-level, the managerialist and materialistic take-over of my working life in medicine, academia, science (but also everybody's life) - preparatory to the 2020 Global unification into a single world bureaucracy - was pursued by multiple incremental Evil Lies.
These ELs were all known/ felt/ experienced as wrong, intuitively; yet were often small and could be presented as 'too trivial' to make a fuss about.
Managerialism proceeds through Evil Lying steps, each step apparently too trivial to oppose - yet simultaneously each step was important enough to make mandatory!
And thus we were led into the single, totalitarian, global bureaucracy. Yet at each step we could have known that what we were being asked to do was an Evil Lie.
Because it is an Evil Lie.
Evil because that is the motivation - this particular thing is an aspect of the overall strategy of damnation. It is part of the plans by evil Beings to induce Men into Evil rather than Good; to prefer Hell to Heaven; to choose damnation and to reject resurrected Heavenly life eternal.
'Lie' because all of these are deliberate untruths.
What species of untruth varies. Whether the untruth is based on legalistic/ linguistic intent to mislead, exaggeration and manipulation, misrepresentation, selection, inappropriate and non-sequitur statistics... or simply a Big Lie invented in whole - does not matter, because the ruling intent is to lie.
All lies are sins, all lies are evil - so it might be said that the phrase Evil Lie is a pleonasm - yet I am sure that the phrase including both words does some extra work compared with either component word alone.
The lie is a particular kind of evil - perhaps the single most prevalent evil of the modern world.
To call a lie intrinsically evil is correct - but 'Evil Lie' takes the particular and assigns it to a general category - when what is required is some response to that particular.
Our damnation in modernity is, it seems, being accomplished mainly by lies. So, from 2020 there are no gratuitous lies; all lies are purposive.
Every lie proposed and accepted adds to the apparatus of evil.
Just to say some-thing is a lie, without also mentioning evil; is inadequate. Indeed, it can be counter-productive for a Christian.
For instance the birdemic peck is a lie, built upon lies - everything about the birdemic is a lie (its identity, nature, origin, significance); everything about the birdemic response is a lie (that it is necessary, or useful, or the value of its components, and failure of cost-benefit consideration) - and the peck is a lie at every level from its necessity on down to embrace every substantive assertion and statement about it.
But to the modern mind, failure to go-along-with a web-of-lies itself requires justification; because, after all, the mainstream dominant political ideology of the world is leftism; which is itself a web-of-lies. To the modern mind, a web-of-lies is a 'good thing' whenever it is deployed to assist a leftist agenda (e.g. socialism, feminism, antiracism...).
So, it is in practice necessary to say Evil Lies to 'explain' to people why we oppose this particular lie from all the other lies which rule us.
Furthermore, we do not want to get the habit of opposing lies from expediency - even to our-selves. The fact that the birdemic peck is dangerous is an expedient reason to avoid it; but of itself expediency just sustains the narrative of fear: the idea that our responses are and should be fear-driven.
To avoid the peck because it is harmful (merely) is to sustain the evil ideology of 'healthism'.
So; we should not want to avoid the peck primarily because it is dangerous, but because it is an Evil Lie.
If we avoid it (only) because it is dangerous; then all that the Authorities would need to do to make the peck 'right', would be to ensure that it is more dangerous not to have the peck than to take it. A simple matter.
Sufficiently intense persecution of the non-pecked would then (apparently) make the peck 'right'; and expediency would make pecking the preferred option; and therefore the 'right' option. So much for principle...
The problem is therefore not primarily to avoid the peck, but to know that the peck is evil. And it is evil because it is a lie.
And knowing that it is evil; the problem is not primarily to avoid having the peck (after all, we might be overpowered and compelled to have it) - but to repent evil.
Man cannot always, or even usually, avoid evil; but Man can always repent evil.
And to be clear in the mind that X is an Evil Lie is a solid set-up for repentance.