4 ideas
The salaryman who hands his judgment to the company and the Aum member who hands his to the guru are doing the same thing: trading personal autonomy for the security of a closed system. Framing the attack as 'our' normal society against 'their' deviant cult hides this. The cult is a distorted mirror of the mainstream, not its opposite.
Asahara offered followers a complete, simple story that explained the world and told them their role in it. People who cannot build a meaningful narrative of their own will accept a borrowed one, however crude, because it removes the burden of self-authorship. A society that offers no sturdier counter-narrative leaves this demand to whoever supplies the most seductive story.
Many passengers felt dizzy, lost their vision and struggled to breathe, yet still got off the train and walked to the office because being on time felt obligatory. Station staff picked up the leaking sarin packets by hand, and some of them died. At the same time, emergency response and information flow broke down. Ingrained duty and routine overrode alarm, and the institutions were unprepared for a crisis outside the script.
Instead of aggregating people into 'the victims,' the interviewer asks each person about their background, work, family and ordinary morning routine before reaching the attack. He then largely steps aside and lets them speak. Accumulated mundane detail turns an abstract statistic into particular lives and exposes the texture of the society the attack struck.