Love and Hate, Part III- Anger and Hate

When and what should make us angry? When and what should we hate?

I am defining anger and hate as the same emotion in different time frames- anger is an emotional response to an injury, insult or injustice. It makes a judgment that the thing is wrong and should be corrected. If the thing endures and the emotion is ongoing, then it is hate.

Anger and hate are powerful emotions and like all powerful emotions must be handled prudently. As Aristotle said- “Anybody can become angry – that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way – that is not within everybody’s power and is not easy.” Let it then be in our power to be angry, to hate, in the right way.

From Canto 3 of the Inferno, the inscription above the gates of Hell-

“Through me the way is to the city dolent;
Through me the way is to eternal dole;
Through me the way among the people lost.
Justice incited my sublime Creator;
Created me divine Omnipotence,
The highest Wisdom and the primal Love.
Before me there were no created things,
Only eterne, and I eternal last.
All hope abandon, ye who enter in!”

I apologize for the all caps, but to make my point clear- GOD HATES. God is love, but true love necessarily involves the hatred of the thing opposed to the thing loved. Hell is the pure, ultimate, final expression of God’s hate, and it was created by God’s HIGHEST WISDOM and PRIMAL LOVE.

Dante quails at this- it’s not just hard, it’s the ultimate hardness. Virgil tells him to face reality-

“Whence I: “Their sense is, Master, hard to me!”
And he to me, as one experienced:
“Here all suspicion needs must be abandoned,
All cowardice must needs be here extinct.
We to the place have come, where I have told thee
Thou shalt behold the people dolorous
Who have foregone the good of intellect.”

I haven’t read this in many years but this last part strikes me anew. Hell is for lazy people who have refused to use their minds to seek the good. As a classical intellectual, for Dante the pursuit of the truth and the pursuit of God were closely related. GOD IS NOT ONLY LOVE, HE IS THE TRUTH, BECAUSE LOVE CANNOT BE A LIE. NO GOOD CAN BE BASED ON UNTRUTH.

Coincidentally, as I was thinking about this post, Foseti took a break from his cool intellectual analysis of the passing scene to vent his anger, frustration, and confusion at what he sees, apparently after a couple glasses of whatever six-figure federal bureaucrats drink after a hard day at the office. He concludes with this telling statement-

“I’m not a hateful guy, nor do I get worked up about much. But I do hate hostility to the truth.

Or maybe, it’s just the booze talking.”

Foseti’s statement contains an internal logical error which must be resolved. Were it only he I might let it pass, but it is shared by countless people, those who want to take the red pill but can’t bring themselves to choke it down- it’s a huge motherfucking thing believe me, it would choke a horse- or who thought they swallowed it but actually got a counterfeit from China.

Foseti says 1) he is not a hateful guy and 2) he hates hostility to the truth. Sounds reasonable doesn’t it? I’m sure his friends, family, even his wife would describe him as an intelligent, rational, reasonable guy. Problem is, essentially everyone cooperating with the system is hostile to the truth. Our entire society is built on lies, grotesque, bald-faced lies glaringly obvious to any mentally competent individual. To hate hostility to the truth is to hate almost everything and everyone. To hate the TV, to hate the newspaper, to hate most people, to hate most things in writing, to hate most things spoken and most unspoken. To be a hateful person, in other words.

To break down his statement in its three parts- “I’m not a hateful guy”. This is an untruth, specifically a self-deception, as it directly contradicts its third part. “Nor do I get worked up about much”. He does not let the emotion of hate overwhelm him, which is good, healthy and necessary for survival. “But I do hate hostility to the truth.” He is a rational, discerning person and continually observes untruth in action, and so continually has emotional and intellectual stimulus to hate.

Europeans are lovers and not fighters- although as “not fighters” they are better fighters than anybody else- and prefer peace and harmony with all. The idea then that hate is bad, the opposite of love, not its necessary and unavoidable complement, can be foisted upon them without too much difficulty. But this is not a European idea or a Christian idea, it’s a Buddhist idea that probably worked its way into Western thought via Carl Jung and others of his time period, then other popular psychologists, Joseph Campbell and his numerous acolytes. Leftists hate hate. SPLC even has a “Hatewatch” with an all-seeing eye! (Link helpfully provided on sidebar, they haven’t linked me back, the bastards.) For a modern person to think of himself as hating, or hateful, is very disturbing. If you want to adhere to this belief, be a Buddhist or Hindu. Those people don’t hate anything. They don’t love anything either. It’s worked out real well for China and India, hasn’t it? But if you are going to be within the Western heritage, you are going to have to love and hate.

That sounds kind of dangerous and risky, doesn’t it? Maybe it’s better just to play it safe. And indeed that’s what most people do. Before Dante and Virgil even enter Hell, they encounter a strange and frightening crowd of souls-

And I: “O Master, what so grievous is
To these, that maketh them lament so sore?”
He answered: “I will tell thee very briefly.
These have no longer any hope of death;
And this blind life of theirs is so debased,
They envious are of every other fate.
No fame of them the world permits to be;
Misericord and Justice both disdain them.
Let us not speak of them, but look, and pass.”
And I, who looked again, beheld a banner,
Which, whirling round, ran on so rapidly,
That of all pause it seemed to me indignant;
And after it there came so long a train
Of people, that I ne’er would have believed
That ever Death so many had undone.
When some among them I had recognised,
I looked, and I beheld the shade of him
Who made through cowardice the great refusal.
Forthwith I comprehended, and was certain,
That this the sect was of the caitiff wretches
Hateful to God and to his enemies.
These miscreants, who never were alive,
Were naked, and were stung exceedingly
By gadflies and by hornets that were there.
These did their faces irrigate with blood,
Which, with their tears commingled, at their feet
By the disgusting worms was gathered up.

If you are only for yourself, Hell won’t even have you, but you will be desperate to get in.

So, to answer my opening questions- When and what should make us angry? When and what should we hate?

Since first of all we must love truth, we must also hate lies and untruth. To hate evil follows quite simply from this. Since negative emotions are intended to be temporary, to motivate us to take action to change something, we must learn to primarily hate intellectually. If we can’t hate intellectually, the cognitions that create emotional hate will come to the surface again and again, and we won’t be able to cope with them.

Seek the truth, with humility, knowing only God has the ultimate truth, but with confidence in the rational mind he gave you and expects you to use. Love and hate wisely.

Advertisements

About thrasymachus33308

I like fast cars, fast women and southern-fried rock. I have an ongoing beef with George Orwell. I take my name from a character in Plato's "Republic" who was exasperated with the kind of turgid BS that passed for deep thought and political discourse in that time and place, just as I am today. The character, whose name means "fierce fighter" was based on a real person but nobody knows for sure what his actual political beliefs were. I take my pseudonym from a character in an Adam Sandler song who was a obnoxious jerk who pissed off everybody.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Love and Hate, Part III- Anger and Hate

  1. Ryu says:

    You sneaky dog. You’re trying to push back against the wave of anti-Christianity that was swept through WN.

    Who is Fuzzy? I don’t read him much/often. Is he a Christian conservative?

    • I’m a pretty piss-poor Christian, but I take inspiration where I find it. Funny thing is an evangelical pastor named Rob Bell published a book a couple years ago titled “Love Wins” the thesis of which was that hell is not eternal, it’s only for purification- the Zoroastrian concept. People have a lot of trouble with hate, and the idea of God’s eternal hate is terrifying, as it should be. Dante was an intellectual medieval Catholic. He’s studied as literature, but what he says stands up to reason even for an atheist.

      For the record most of what is called “Christianity” today is nothing of the sort. Liberals selectively quote Jesus and misrepresent his nature for their own purposes. I was raised with a false and frankly really evil version of Christianity that I rejected. I went back to the source myself as an adult and found what you are told it says, is not what it says.

      Foseti is non-religious as far as I can tell and not conservative particularly, he just sees how screwed up things are.

      • Ryu says:

        Hmmm. Well, I’m probably just lazy. I could never understand how to read the bible and how different people get a different message from the same book.

        I find it more useful to return to paganism. I completely avoid the issue of was Jesus a jew. We avoid the issue of are all races allowed in heaven. We avoid the Zionist tendancies in the modern church. And, their little forays into Africa, Asia and Central America.

        I’m not dogmatic about it; I’ll build a temple to whatever deity brings WN victory.

  2. Foseti says:

    You’re missing my point – that’s what you get for reading so much into a post titled “<drunken rant"

    It's one thing to hate people, which I'm almost constitutionally incapable of doing. It's a completely different thing to hate an idea. I could easily sit down and have a beer and a decent time with almost anyone. What can I say, I'm still a Minnesotan at heart?

    • In vino veritas. Would you be punished any less for making politically incorrect statements under the influence? I think not.

      Your faith in the power of the friendly, open-minded discussion is touching and quite liberal, in the old sense of the word, not at all reactionary. If Moldbug were to take a swing at it, I think he would say liberals have always been in favor of the open exchange of ideas when they weren’t in power and then crushed it when they gained power. From the 19th century to today, free speech is great as long as liberals get most of the debate time and win in the end.

      Your DFL neighbors in Minnesota and your Obamanoid neighbors in DC would love to have a beer with you and have you listen to their ideas and agree with them. Would they extend you the same courtesy? My name isn’t Thrasymachus and I’m pretty sure yours isn’t Foseti, that tells us all we need to know about open, courteous and civilized debate in our society.

      Your liberal friends certainly make no distinction between the idea and the man holding it. Ideas are abstract entities and only become real when humans believe and act on them. Liberal ideas are evil, and produce evil results. Thus liberals are evil and should be hated. To do this emotionally is draining, but to do it intellectually- to make a cognition, which includes a moral judgement- is necessary for sanity.

      • Ryu says:

        Wow. Good response, Thrashy. No, I believe the liberals would slash his tires or get him fired from his job.

      • Brandon says:

        Your last paragraph from Mar6 @ 3:01 am is excellent. The person becomes the character/nature of the idea he holds -“liberalism”, therefore is deserving of RIGHTEOUS hate.

  3. BIGDOUG says:

    have you read this essay on Chechar’s site in regards to religion? its pretty good.

    http://chechar.wordpress.com/2012/02/21/red-giant/

  4. Pingback: Love and Hate, Part IV- the Psychology of Anger and Hate | Deconstructing Leftism

  5. Pingback: A Theology Rundown from My Nationalist Pony | A Cry In The Dark

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s