Thoughts on Hate and "Hate Speech" — Part 2

[NOTE: This is a continuation of the series of thoughts and reflections on hate and "hate speech". This part was loosely inspired by this article by David French at the National Review. Part 1 of my series can be found here.]

In the last installment, I talked about the failed jihadi attack on a free speech event in Garland, Texas, on May 4, and the American media's meltdown and cognitive dissonance in using their First Amendment free speech rights to attack event organizer Pamela Geller's First Amendment free speech, free association, and free assembly rights.

This time, I'm going to talk about hate itself. It won't be politically-correct, but as I put it last time, I think some things just need to be said.

So if you get nothing else out of this, take this one concept: Some things in this world are worthy of hate. Some things in this world deserve to be hated. Some things in this world are so vile, so evil, and so despicable, that hating them is not a bad thing; it's a virtue.

Like I said, it's not politically-correct, but it's true.

More below the break…


The politically-correct opinion, of course, is that hate is bad. Hate is evil. Hate is the opposite of love, and love is good, therefore hate — and by extension, any person or culture who hates — must by definition be bad.

Yoda
(source: Icon Archive)

This opinion is, to put it bluntly (because let's face it: pretty, flowery words will only make this post longer), idiotic. The Star Wars character Yoda was portrayed as a smart guy, for a puppet. He said, "Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering." But Yoda was a fictional character in an equally-fictional universe — not exactly an authority figure or expert in real-life problems — and though he mentions hate, he was referring primarily to fear*, so taking his advice in the context of hate is short-sighted, at best.

Not my Bible
(source: Praise-and-Worship.com)

I prefer to appeal to a higher authority.

Proverbs 6:12-19 describes "The Wicked Man":

The Wicked Man
¹² A worthless person, a wicked man,
    Walks with a perverse mouth;
¹³ He winks with his eyes,
    He shuffles his feet,
    He points with his fingers;
¹⁴ Perversity is in his heart,
    He devises evil continually,
    He sows discord.
¹⁵ Therefore his calamity shall come suddenly;
    Suddenly he shall be broken without remedy.

¹⁶ These six things the LORD hates,
    Yes, seven are an abomination to Him:
¹⁷ A proud look,
    A lying tongue,
    Hands that shed innocent blood,
¹⁸ A heart that devises wicked plans,
    Feet that are swift in running to evil,
¹⁹ A false witness who speaks lies,
    And one who sows discord among brethren. [NKJV]

Note verse 16 again: "These six things the LORD hates…" (emphasis mine). God is perfect. He is infallible, and He has no sin. And yet some things, even He hates. Therefore, hate — in and of itself — cannot be evil. If there are things the Lord hates, and He is perfect and good, then it would behoove us to hate those things as well; to follow in His divine example.

Also note that many of those attributes God hates are evident in the media's talking heads. Proud looks and lying tongues abound. False witnesses who speak lies and sowers of discord are speaking out against cartoons and the people who draw them. And it's not a stretch to say the talking heads "point with [their] fingers" (i.e. make baseless accusations), or that "perversity is in [their] heart[s]", defending their own rights as they do while decrying and denying the same for others.**

And that's not even getting into the self-proclaimed "jihadis", to whom we can add the "hands that shed innocent blood," the "heart that devises wicked plans," and the "feet that are swift in running to evil". Clearly, these are things worthy our hatred.***

Now, I'm not saying that we should hate the people who do these things. I'm absolutely not saying that. I'm saying we should follow in God's flawless example: He loves all His creations, but He abhors the evil things they do. God hates sinful actions, but continues to love the sinner. This is a subtle but vitally important distinction that is lost on a lot of people, but we'd do well to keep it in mind.

Winston C. Churchill
(source: Good Reads)

And as for being hated yourself … don't let it bother you. To quote Winston Churchill, "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life."

Or we can quote Kurt Hofmann, St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner, who also blogs at Armed and Safe and JPFO.org, who pointed out, "I believe that being despised by the despicable is as good as being admired by the admirable."

Getting back to the politically-correct opinion, hate is not the opposite of love, as the "Progressives" like to claim; it's a small step to the left of love. Love and hate are more similar than most people realize: both are very strong emotions, strong enough to make normally-rational people do irrational things, and irrational people into downright lunatics; both produce a similar physiological response, including increased heart rate, adrenaline surges, tunnel vision (so as to focus on the object of the emotion), thoughts and behaviors bordering on obsession. Very similar, except that love is symbolized by affection and creation, while hate is symbolized by derision and destruction.

Elie Wiesel
(source: Good Reads)

So what's the opposite of love? Let's quote Elie Wiesel: "The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference. The opposite of art is not ugliness, it's indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy, it's indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, it's indifference."

And therein lies the real issue. The bigger problem is not love or hate; it's indifference. Distilled down, the real problem is not giving a $#!+ what happens in the world around you or to the people around you. In the case of the media, it's not caring whether the object they're attacking is actually guilty of their accusations (i.e. claiming Pam Geller is anti-Muslim, when in truth she's anti-free-speech-suppression, even if it's by Muslims). In the case of the "jihadis", it's not giving a rip about the collateral victims of their violent actions; the use of human shields is not forbidden, nor is the use of "non-selective munitions" (read: bombs) that kill or injure everyone in the area and not just the target.

It's caring more about one's own fragile ego and feelings than the lives of the people who get hurt or killed in the endless quest for retribution for that bruised ego and hurt feelings.

I'll close with this thought: There's a reason "depraved indifference" is a prosecutable offense in most states — though possibly under different verbiage — and it has little (if anything) in common with "hate" or "hate speech".

Part 3 is coming. Stay safe. [UPDATE: Part 3 is up.]
------------
* - Specifically, Yoda was addressing irrational fear; that is, generalized fear with no source, object, or basis in reality, and/or disproportionate to any real threat or danger. Rational fear — appropriate fear of a real, articulable threat or danger — is a different concept altogether.
** - It's also not a stretch to say that the politicians and authority figures who receive the endorsements of corrupt individuals such as these also deserve a healthy dose of skepticism and suspicion, but that's beside the point.
*** - As an aside, given how the incident in Garland ended, this Bible passage is almost prophetic. Read verse 15 again. I assure you, that was not the ending the "jihadis" had in mind!