Love and Hate, in Degrees

LOVE–strong feeling of affection, fond and tender attachment, passionate devotion to someone, a strong liking, the state of feeling kindly toward others, desiring the welfare of all, also a strong feeling of liking something such as art, music, skiing, learning, independence. syn. fondness, tenderness, friendship, liking, affection.

HATE–abhor, abominate, detest, dislike, regard with displeasure, HATEFUL–exhibiting hatred, hateful spirit, hateful words, causing hatred, odious, loathing. syn. odious, detestable, loathsome, abhorrent, offensive, obnoxious, repulsive, intense dislike or aversion to, repugnant, odious remarks, legislation, behavior, contempt, regarded with disgust, officious, ill mannered.

The two words are well understood in meaning even though they are usually confused and ignored when dealing with faceless strangers. It is this great misfortune that causes the divide between philosophies regarding government people, government power and government actions, actions which are foreign to the society that wants to get along with each other. And it is this anti-social action that brings about the difference between how Americans act and treat people on a face to face basis and how they act and treat people on an impersonal, faceless basis. There are many types of love and many types of hate. And there are many degrees of each. But the main distinction is that love is definitely on one side of the line and hate is definitely on the other side of the line regardless of how one rationalizes it. If one wants to live in peace and harmony with his or her fellow man, he or she will tend to avoid conflict, voluntarily. If one wants to force his or her fellow man to do that which he or she does not want to do there will be conflict and that conflict is the fault of the aggressor on the other’s Freedom. In addition, that conflict will continue and not cease until the aggressor stops the aggression, voluntarily or involuntarily. Is there anything confusing or questionable about this? It’s common sense, isn’t it?

Politics is personal, very personal, and not the least bit impersonal, as most Americans like to treat it. It would not be a surprise what the answer would be to "would you personally go to your neighbor to demand and force him or her to give you a certain amount of money because you want to give it to a friend who needs it, or to demand that he or she give you their guns because you don’t like guns, or that he or she must give up a car because it uses too much gas, or...?" On a personal basis this is ridiculous but on an impersonal basis there are no qualms about doing just that to each other. Does that make sense? Politics seems to make this abomination perfectly OK. However, the person on the receiving end of this evil takes it very personally, and will remember it every day of his or her life, because these abominations affect him or her every day of his or her life. If the person takes personal responsibility for supporting any of the thousands of abominations that are forced on fellow Americans, and sees the harm that is done to the millions of innocents, it would be a hard hearted person who would continue the abominations..., or would it? On which side of the Love/Hate line would that person stand?

Because human beings are social animals there is no question that some degree of Love is the stronger of the two emotions and will eventually carry the day. People want to get along, trade with each other, enjoy each other’s company and live together in peace and harmony, even if their opinions differ greatly. Peace is much more pleasant than animosity towards each other. It is also true that there will always be those who feel a need to control or force others to their will. This is true whether for good or evil. The reason for the force may not be evil but forcing one against one’s will is always evil, no matter to what degree. If some want to break the peace by forcing some ill conceived demands on some other people, it is the responsibility and duty of the intended victims to stop the oppression before it gets started, not afterward. It should never start, because it will be much more difficult and sometimes impossible to stop oppression once it is in effect.

Whether one calls it love, like, admiration or toleration, if one loves, likes or respects a friend, family member, acquaintance or even a stranger, why would he or she support anything that would, in the opinion of that other person, do harm and create problems for that friend, family member or acquaintance? This moral question goes frivolously unanswered in today’s America. It is never justified to restrict, punish or refuse to allow another person’s actions if that person’s actions has done no harm and is not likely to do harm. The harm that should be punished or at least stopped, in its tracks, is that of the perpetrator of the unjustified action. Love of every human, to whatever degree or type of love, will put mankind on the more comfortable, more pleasant, more justice and more peaceful side of the line. The FOCUS ON FREEDOM, that is ABSOLUTE FREEDOM for every individual American is the manifestation of which side of the line one will stand. Choosing the Love side is the only opportunity to enjoy peace.

FOCUS ON FREEDOM

18Dec2013