Awful truth #9: Hate is an honest emotion. It’s okay to have hate in one’s heart. What matters is how you act in spite of it.
“Is a man who chooses the bad perhaps in some way better than a man who has the good imposed upon him?”
Anthony Burgess, A Clockwork Orange
“We learn that we are neither devils nor divines.”
Maya Angelou, A Brave and Startling Truth
I would not eliminate hate if I had the power to do so. Does this make me a bad person? Perhaps. But I’m certainly a better person than those who want to eliminate hate.
There are pathological perfectionists among us who believe they can eliminate hate. Hate, as defined by them, and now dumbed down to include speech or notions they don’t like. And, boy, are they shrill as hell about it. This comes as zero surprise to those who recognize virtue-signaling for what it truly is: a patina of false piety accreted upon smug hypocrites, ones who fancies themselves saints among us sinners. Saints they sure as heck ain’t.
Initially, the delusional do-gooders fired up their anti-hate crusade to focus on a perpetrator’s supposed motive (hate) for committing a physical crime upon a victim of a certain identity (e.g., non-White race or gay). These were crimes, such as murder or assault, which decent people agree must have severe penalties, regardless of the victim’s identity—not especially because of it. In some cases, the death penalty is a morally appropriate penalty, though those who promote hate crime laws are typically anti-death penalty. There is no penalty more enhanced than death.
This anti-hate crusade was (and remains) a fool’s errand of the lowest order. If there are disparities in meting out punishment based on the victim’s taxonomy, the solution is obvious: Make sure all types of crimes are treated the same in regard to punishment, i.e., do not have a lesser punishment if the victim is perceived as less worthy of justice. This where the focus should’ve been. A focus on actual equality and fair treatment.
Our insufferable do-gooders do not like equality. Sure, they squawk about it, demand it, but they don’t really want it. Instead, they chose the deliberately divisive route. If hate is somehow determined as the criminal’s motive, this is justification to enhance penalties or create entirely new crimes. This led to the codification of so-called hate crime statutes. In effect, a multi-tiered justice system, not that far afield from Jim Crow, in which one’s skin color (or other classifier du jour) is germane, if not outright overarching, to the justice served. (Oh c’mon, bigot, are you not against hate!).
Henceforth, a lead pipe to the skull is treated differently if the attacker is motivated by hate and the victim a duly suitable, well, victim. Often the identity of the perpetrator, in addition to the victim’s race (or other classification), is sufficient proof by itself that hate is somehow involved, irrespective of other facts or whether it even matters. This surrealistic, and often childish, approach to justice is performative theater intended solely for cynical political purposes.
The media certainly gets amped up over a purported hate crime when compared to their uninterest in a similar crime committed sans hate. The phrase, “if it bleeds, it leads,” regarding a news story, is better described nowadays as, “if it involves skin [color] it’s in.” This results in the tragically comical situation in which heinous crimes are quickly forgotten if it is later found out that the attacker’s identity doesn’t fit the narrative promulgated by hate crime aficionados.
This nonsense results in predictable absurdities. A person motivated by hate who attacks another person of the same race is somehow not subject to hate crime laws; though I’m guessing the pain of a lead pipe hitting one’s head is not diminished if it’s swung by one’s “own kind.” In many cases, “hate crime” is screamed from the lungs of fools before a single fact is presented or the identity of the perpetrator known…or even proof that a crime of any sort actually occurred. Numerous reported hate crimes have been later found to be hoaxes. Such a revelation doesn’t matter. Even when proven a hoax, the fake crime is still used as an indictment of all of society and to dismiss the remarkable progress our country has made in regard to race relations.
We also see trivialities elevated to hate crime status, and often national news, if it those involved duly match up with the desired agenda of proving America an irredeemably bigoted society. These newly deemed exemplars of hate include speech or juvenile acts of vandalism; the classic being the swastika-in-the restroom hysteria, in which case some particularly deranged folks act as if these crude scribbles above the urinal are evidence that the Fourth Reich is upon us. The focus on “identities” rather than actions causes the farce in which non-White, non-Asian (i.e., Black) attackers of Asians are accused of White supremacy. Similarly, the do-gooders exclaimed that the five Black Memphis police officers accused of beating Tyree Nichols (also Black) were motivated by White supremacy. (Who knew the White supremacists had such a remarkably inclusive organization!)
And at last, we’ve finally reached the desired point of hate crime absurdity: The do-gooders mean for speech or notions they don’t like to result in both personal destruction and incarceration. Again, this should come as zero surprise. These do-gooders are fascists. They never intended to stop at mere physical crimes. They always meant to eventually crush dissident speech; they want to get at the very thoughts within our heads, whether or not we dare whisper these or write them down.
Do not be fooled by mindless platitudes, vapid signage, or colorful flags. The proponents of hate crime statutes are not nice people. They are not compassionate or caring or well-meaning. They only care about race when it can be weaponized against others. They are racists. Such perfectionists are evil fools. Evil? Yes, evil, because their goal of eliminating hate requires a ruthless totalitarian state and its obsessive intrusiveness in order to achieve this end. It intends to stratify society and keep us divided among ourselves. Modern surveillance technology and a surfeit of sanctimonious fools are the perfect witches’ brew that can impose upon us their desired dystopia. A dystopia certainly not free of hate, but one of fear, oppression, and miserable sameness. Their own hate expressed in terrible ways. In Orwellian fashion, our saintly overlords shall convince themselves—and insist like hell—that the hatred within their own hears is actually love, sweet love. They will say this with straight faces and sinister smiles. My advice in this matter is simple: Don’t let it happen.
How far will these do-gooders go? There is no limit. Compelled sensitivity training. Coerced diversity statements from those applying for a job or college admission. Censorship, lots of censorship. Lost livelihoods. Reeducation camps. A social credit system. Medical intervention. Medical intervention? Yes, these fascists would rhapsodize if a vaccine against hate were developed. But why stop there? How about a vaccine against greed, rudeness, sadness, jealousy, etc.?
I preemptively oppose any efforts to find a vaccine against hate. Such a treatment is the pharmaceutical equivalent of a lobotomy, and no less immoral. If a modern-day Dr. Salk concocted a vaccine against hate, I would not take it nor would I mandate that others do. There are demented monsters among us who would support such research and, if successful, the forcible inoculation of the populace. Never forget, that these are the same people who wrenched away our bodily autonomy during COVID. They know far better than you do how you should live your life—or think. They have no qualms about overseeing every aspect of our lives, everything from the type of drinking straws we use, to how many genders our children can choose from.
An intravenous intervention done to change our basic human nature is a horrific idea. But what if they go even further, e.g., invent a chip to implant in the brain which would eliminate hateful thoughts? A vaccine or chip, whether or not you consented of your own free will, would not make you a better person or the world a better place. Quite the contrary. These mental concentration camps would extirpate your free will and are a natural extension of a fascist compulsion to censor speech and thought. Consider such vile measures as comparable in some ways to those who seek physical perfection but end up with grotesquely engorged lips or wildly out-of-proportion boobs. The body builders who destroy themselves with drugs also comes to mind—they, too, seek glorious perfection.
It should frighten us that there are do-gooders who gleefully support efforts to eliminate hate. The World Economic Forum is a particularly terrifying example of our betters desiring total control over our lives. These self-anointed saviors of us proles, at their 2023 conference in Davos, unabashedly discussed brainwave monitoring. One of the supposed “benefits” of this wondrous technology—asserted with a smug evil smile—is to improve worker productivity. The WEF is better described as the World Evil Forum. In addition to micromanaging the shit out of us, these goblins of goodness also want far fewer of us.
Another example are the transfascist do-gooders who swear they want a loving world free of hate, but who then rain vileness upon those, including reasonable transpeople, who challenge their odious ideology. They desire the criminalization of both “misgendering” and any counseling that might get a troubled youth to accept his or her gender in lieu of medical mutilation. These are hate crimes per the enlightened fascists. Confused children and vulnerable adults are thus cruelly sacrificed. Those who dare protest are hateful bigots.
In the beginning, the concept of “hate crimes” was codified so that crimes (e.g., murder, assault) committed against people of certain identity groups faced enhanced penalties. People who actually believed in punishing serious crimes had justifiable misgivings about the concept of hate crimes because they believe justice must be impartial and perpetrators severely punished regardless of the victim’s identity. It was hard to have sympathy for a murderer or other criminal who did his deed allegedly motivated by “hate.” But it is obvious that those championing hate crime statutes do so out of narcissism, and not compassion. “We’ll show you bigots just how much we care!” It’s histrionics done for their own aggrandizement, regardless of the harm it causes society.
The fully predictable extension of this phony-baloney goodness is that it would eventually apply to more and more things, eventually speech, and finally thoughts. And here we are today, where words are now violence and must be treated as a crime. Hell, silence is violence according to the retarded signs you see waived at protests.
Then, as now, I do not want a so-called “hate crime” criminalized as anything other than as a crime—assuming there’s a physical manifestation which results in demonstrable physical harm or a property crime of some sort. Perhaps hate is indeed the motivation for the crime—and this may come into play where premeditation is germane to a criminal case. But add it to the long list of other factors that may play a role: greed, anger, jealousy, recklessness, cowardice, revenge, impulsiveness, shiftlessness, desperation, stupidity, incompetence, mental illness, negligence, malfeasance, perversion. A thesaurus is needed to fully flesh out the possible reasons for a miscreant’s unlawful actions or inactions.
Attaching the word “hate” to a crime does not improve the world. It makes it far worse. It brings the government to a place it has no business: our mind and hearts. It indulges those who believe we can divine what is in another person’s heart. They are deluding themselves when our own hearts are barely known to ourselves. Attributing this self-righteously imposed adjective to a crime is always born of identity politics and gives proponents of such laws the smugness of faux virtue. Identity politics are meant to divide us and keep us divided. Remember this: Our betters cannot have us united.
These laws are promulgated by the same phony-baloney crusaders whose actions undermine public safety—disproportionately harming people of color. They hamstring law enforcement and laud criminals. They want you disarmed and unprotected, but make excuses for the criminals who use weapons. They foolishly believe if hate is erased from the world—with hate defined as they see fit—the world is then made a paradise. Worst of all is when they hysterically attach this adjective to speech and ideas, and these are then made crimes.
What’s in our hearts and minds is not the purview or responsibility of our fellows. It’s certainly not the business of our government. Hate crime statutes must be repealed if our thoughts are to be free and real crimes treated with comparable seriousness for all victims. This is the goal of decent people. A swastika on a restroom wall is vandalism. A baseball bat to the head is attempted murder. A murder is murder.
As you can see, I do not want a perfect world. Hate is an honest emotion, whether its source be petty or profound. What an uninteresting world it would be if each of us is compelled to comply with some fool’s definition of perfect. I do not expect perfection of my fellow man. Neither should you.
People do terrible things in pursuit of perfection, especially when they insist others be perfect, as well. Humans have yet to learn from past examples of this fool’s quest, despite the tens of millions of people who’ve died at the hands of evildoers who believed they offered the world a perfect ideology, one so perfect that any level of violence and other harm was justified in its implementation. Again and again people return to this flimflam fantasy that heaven on Earth is possible if only…if only this or that…or that or this…were done…or not done…infallibly.
I do not offer a path to perfection. Such a path does not exist. I believe we must recognize our flaws, accept these as inherently human, and make the best of life despite them. Therefore, were a vaccine discovered that eradicated hate, I would not take it. I would not force others to take it. This vaccine would be as if Aldous Huxley’s soma were a date rape drug distributed on a worldwide scale, leaving us intellectually and emotionally anesthetized and vulnerable to exploitation.
It’s only the physical manifestations of hate that we must concern ourselves with, and perhaps act or not act. We must accept that what makes us the person we are, is our actions despite the myriad flaws, including hate, which reside in our heart. These flaws are in each of us. We humans struggle against the harmful manifestations of our human imperfections—that is what being human means. We must resist with every atom of our wearied strength those who promise a road toward perfection. Such a promise is a terribly false one, which leads to a damnation in the here-and-now rather than we wait for a chance at perdition or paradise in the afterlife.
Every day the Internet and “regular” news is flooded with stories of outrage over the pettiest of things, these crimes against perfectness. The perfection seekers are angry that someone dared be human. Contrary opinions. Bad words. Indecorous comments. Irreverence. Blasphemy. Snark. Crude humor. Hate speech. Words are violence. Silence is violence. Wrongspeak. Wrongthought. Innocent errors of no consequence. Deliberate sins of no consequence. All of it trivial, worthy of a tsk or two, if that.
The outragees believe scrubbing the world of these human things is that golden road to utopia. They goosestep along it imbibed with self-imposed ignorance and self-assured piety. A devoutness fermented from the acrid grapes of the Inquisition and totalitarianism and modern-day asshattery.
Do they not see, off in the approaching distance, the flames? The soul-consuming fire that greedily awaits them.
I see it—feel its heat, smell its foul smoke. Perhaps, you do, too. It’s a frightening doom, made more so because it’s an unnecessary fate. Yet towards it we march. Some gaily and smugly. Inexorably. Many at the point of a bayonet or the tip of the lash. Wielded mercilessly by those self-assured of their own benevolence and enlightenment.
Terribly mistaken, these poor fools, unaware that the light of the flames is that from the combustion of their own souls, their own freedoms. I would not eliminate hate if I had the power to do so. And neither should you.
Be First to Comment