It's hard to pin down but the components that I was able to come up with and still believe have some value:
1) The lesser consuming the better, not in a social status sense but ranging anywhere from the moral sense (like needing to become a worse person to survive other people - ie. forced regress) to watching needed institutions shut down or watching a country go from prosperous to starving or in states of perpetual riot. There are a lot of different ways you can apply 'the lesser consuming the better' or 'the lesser consuming the greater' but it centers around both individual and collective regress.
2) A complete lack of imagination in the face of problems which goes right for the worst path. It's lazy, it's prioritized defection or first-defector advantage. This part is more a game theory which itself is evil (Scott Alexander / Slate Star Codex wrote an essay back in the early 2010's called 'Meditations on Moloch' which gets into just how bad game theory, specifically Darwinian game theory, can get).
I do think the evidence against free will makes it increasingly difficult to call people themselves evil but dynamics, actions, outcomes, behaviors, etc. can be or bring evil - not in a theological sense but in the needless amplification of human suffering or even moral destruction of people who came in contact with certain dynamics that otherwise wouldn't have been trauma-fried in that manner.
_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.