Hate

Hate

Samuel Bird

Everything is so much more to me than it is. I can’t just go the store to acquire food. I have to be in the midst of ideas and souls swirling around in their striving. In every action, gesture, and artifact, I see a reference to the concepts that make up the invisible portions of man. Man is his own art endeavor to live out the beauty he finds in concepts, via symbol, sound, and shape. To see me is to see the work boots of my heritage, the beard of my culture, and the cross of my God. By witnessing me in moment or across time, you can approximate my soul by where my body moves and is drawn to. In this, we have the chance to love. We can see the soul of someone deeply via their art and efforts, and value this deep seeing. However, man is much. We are comprised of confliction and portionality that makes one man many things. We are then not easily available for the reduction of systematization, let alone to value such a thing according to our will. Let us explore this by what a man gestures to in heaven via his actions on earth. I struggle to go in public anymore. It pains me to see crowds and look over the embryo of divinity that is man, and see what he has instead made of himself. Of course, unlike the angels, man receives grace because though he has much he can be, his nature is troubled. I can offer grace for the same, but as this same troubled sort, I am left to resent the darker portions of our soul. I have sought to see us deeply and to love such, but sometimes there isn’t something to overthink and someone is simply a waste of their own mankind. Man is his sculptor and marble, and some didn’t chisel. They instead sarcophagus themselves within their glut. I see themselves as a waste of what they could be. I then resent them for what little they offer and how much they take. Of course, modernity has blame to what it did to the soul and body of man, but I can still hold a man accountable for falling for its lies. Where was our promised meritocracy? I should at least ask you provide the value to be in the world, even if it is potentiality like children or or in pathos like a widow. But to take and hate from your giver, unforgivable. I love deeply as I see deeply the person. However, as values have their posited towardness, they have their negated refusal. To have a person in your seemingness as a value will in its positive force be love, in its indifference be no concern, and in their refusal, hate. Hate is not to have no concern as to leave someone, but to value their being so little as to seek out and alter or dispermit aspects of that being. This is why the hater finds the object of his rejection and seeks to hurt it. I hate as not the lack but the obverse of my life. I hate to disgust and contempt. I refuse them. I reject them.

This hatred of mine seemed important to inform you of. When you address being in infancy using what we have discussed together, you would would amiss to not know what contextualized the extreme love. Everything has its obverse and every trade its sacrifice. To love the human soul so deeply, is to value and witness. That same witnessing and same values can lead to a deep hatred for what betrayed its availability for you love. Where would you break the negation. As moderns do, we can say we hate the outcome of something, like hatred, and then from their remove the antecedent. However, this may inform but does not necessitate the reception of the consequent. You can choose to never love to never risk hate, but you may still hate that you have no love. We can forgo our values, but those values however manifest spring forth from the will we are. We are then left to value, and disvalue every category of fact, including personhood. We now see how a good God can make a hell and have this work within his perfect being. Does this mean we can’t love our enemies? To see them as admirable enemies opposed to us by committed fate? Yes, we can still admire those that stand opposed. However, what of those that stand for nothing and bloweth where it listeth to ease? What of sick perverts who prey on the good nature of the innocent for their insatiable ravaging? What of those that join the cult of the secret lie and steal away the materials of making goodness from the architects of such? What can you say of them to stay my hatred? I don’t think I should stay my hatred if I am going to mount inviting love from their current state. In the world of finance, we can shuffle around a coin and pretend that a substantive change was wrought as to change expectations. So is the same with my hatred in the social world. You can tell me to withhold my hatred, but then theirs will perpetuate with no opposing force. There is a reason that God’s will was a call for war. If they are opposed to my values and even valuing itself, let me choose mercy in the final chapter of our warring, but let it be after conflict I do not second guess. If I am gentle to my enemy, they will not be so gentle with the innocent. I have an obligation to what I do, and that pits me against my inevitable enemy. 

Can one love or hate themselves? While one is a subject ripe for their one evaluation, I wonder if we can possibly “other” ourselves enough for this communal words to have internal effect. Could I, in some sense, hate portions or the whole of myself? Certainly. However, to hate the whole is a waste. That is to remove the potential nature of something, by removing the constructive faith. You can pray in repetition admitting you are a sinner, but implicit in such is that you don’t want to be, and in such a fertile soil God can work miracles with eventual faith leading to better fruits. It is more reasonable to hate portions of yourself from the faith and love of other portions and in the light of a perfect God. As you do, hold your given self and thrust ontology in one hand, and the idea that you are a mystery that is impermanent between moments. You are not all the things you have been, you will not be all the things you now are. How then can we guide this natural process of man across time to shed from us those things we disvalue? Such is for us to embark with God on. Such an internal hate is vital. There is no law you could ad hoc carve into stone that man already meets in all criteria. We are then always left to not be what we ought, and to be what we are. Gracious and decisive refusal of the difference is our means. I am not a proponent of infinite ascent. I think the work God does in us will have a finality. However, I know not one instance of such in this life and we are left to slice from us what we hate to find in us what we can love. What of when you hate yourself and are helpless to do otherwise? Revel in their exactness you hold yourself to whatever law. Is this a redemptive quality that can infer later qualities to live out that law? The irredeemable don’t mind they are so. Man is not final in life and can change the context of his whole life with his dying breath. It is then the holy try that tells God in your minuscule potency, what your heart really and truly aims for. It is then through His infinite love and grace such an object is gifted to us, and we are left to then find out if our object was as sound as we supposed. I can’t say I will ever warrant anything less than hell. However, I can show God how much heaven matters to me because that is where He is. This is the extent of my suggestion to Him, and beginning of His great work to gift what He will. In gentle return to my usual tone, I remind you that a life lived hating yourself is not a life lived for its own sake. On one’s deathbed it will seem a waste to use self critique as anything more than opportunity. In short moments of clarity one can have repeated reminders of large swathes of existence misunderstood. If you were to hate yourself for any reason other than to build what you love, you likely step out of yourself to see a little faith in yourself may not be unwise.

This is a harsh chapter. I write not from the experience of hate, but duty to love. I am once again providing a chapter that is ripe for intentional and uncharitable misunderstanding. I am not trying to rationalize hate, but to see the delicate system we find it in, and see the wisdom in it. However and as always, one drop of scripture or revelation pushes against a sea of my ideas. I am not calling for specific actions in a given circumstance, but for one not to betray their honest and good faith detraction. The world needs changing. Our world is dying and a new one needs to take its place to care for humanity. However, whenever I attempt such, I get accused of not upholding the old world. Yes... That is kind of the point. One of the biggest problems with our world is the spinelessness we stand up for what is ours. Yes, we possibly have less conflict (or maybe not), but it is at the cost of having meaningless lives. Yes, having something to fight for requires fighting, but then you have something worth the fight you were already going to need to be fighting to survive. We negate this by having nothing worth living for in the first. I then get chastized for wondering if man ought to have something to live for. I am also attacked from some moral consensus that is actively failing our world. Yes, I am hyperbolic, but this is intentional and requires a good faith read. There are questions of proportionality and what criteria are needed for what extent of actualizing value-detraction from another party. These are important considerations, but not one I am going to make today. I will for today say that when it comes to the againstness of those things we refuse, our refusal for them should be void of the emotional experience of hatred. In fact, to offend, critique, and oppose your foe, even when seriously considered, ought to come from a position of stoicism for the sake of our soul and effectiveness. We take no pleasure in war. Every conflict ought to be closed in prayer and consideration of support for those you had to oppose. We then live our hate not as an emotion, but as a duty of refusal from the opposite of that which we reach. I surrender what I think to what God does, but I am curious if refusal is not something we see in God. For it’s inappropriate application, let me be changed. 

It felt honest and necessary to inform you of how much hatred I have. I always wonder how emblematic someone’s life is of their ideas, especially in terms of hours spent in types of activities. I spend more hours than you would suppose, plotting out detailed revolution against powers and concepts I detest. Whether I am in error or not, at the least it seemed vital you know that my life has its commiserate antithesis. Am I evil to hate? Well, of course. I only hope its effortful direction allows it to work for something more than itself. You will no doubt be hurt to know someone that loves you can be capable of such hate, but that hate is only for the benefaction of that which I love. You may still further ask if I really and truly saw your soul, would I love or hate it? Certainly both. The real question is what takes supremacy? What do I hate? I hate refusal to engage with existence. If you read this, you likely engage. I then have confidence in manifest love. You will likely have peripheral values I hate, but in my love I call you from them. You may even then have more tertiary opinions and facts I hate, but then it is in my duty to turn the overwhelming love into grace sufficient to participation in the presence of that hatred. Can we still love those we hate? Human values, especially from characters like me self, find absolution in their totalizing. We get carried away in our evaluation and over assess our valuation in one sphere to be an evaluation of another. We always assume our friends are more talented at something we have never seen them do than our enemies. We need to temper this with humble question for the person in itself, at least as a thought experiment. How is this person outside of your judgement and experience for that judgment? How would a privileged eye and valuation such as God find them. He loves them. How is this so? He values their being over not. This is not to say there is any limit to his disvalue of aspects of their being, but something in the net net total of their value or at least their emergent totality, is of sufficient value to be worth the towardness of the primal conscious Entity. What can we learn from this? In our hatred, we need to carry it with love and skepticism. We do not know the heart of our enemies. We only know the experience of their actions. If our experience is of a certain nature, it warrants a commiserate degree of retaliation. Even then, we can’t abandon addressing our existence on a case by case basis by having one side of a gradient to always lazily lean to. If we were to say we can’t know them, and every event has a sufficient cause, therefore they are sufficiently justified, we approximate reasonableness with failure. Of course, they have reason to believe and do what they do. However, what did you have reason to do that your values pulled you from? We have to be careful in the gentle permissiveness of our enemies. We have to be careful not to build a world where the foolish are allowed to think they are wise, perverse go unfettered by lowly the righteous, and the strong cower before the weak. If you have built yourself up to be someone your ontology finds worthy of evaluation, you have approximation and trajectory to realizing your being. However, if another were to not embark, engage, and vow, they are the worse for doing so. This is the law of honor where one’s noun is evaluated by one’s verbs. For this reason, if we can value experiences and actions, persons can in no wise be equal. If he who chiseled himself into a great work gives conceptual hammer to the undefined block, they are right for allowing beauty manifest in man to be destroyed. How long will the great bend the knee to the weak? How long will the wise allow their found humility to abase them before the fool? How long will the caring man care to not hurt him who does not? We must love to build the communion of persons that is life manifest. We must hate to prune that communion of persons and qualities. Either something is not essential to a person, and by our hatred of that aspect as a vice, we can aid them in removing it. If that evil is inherent to them passed their manifest will, our hatred can remove and safeguard our tribe against their threat. If you detest me saying such, perhaps I will be pruned from your communion. It is evil to subordinate the ones we have divine and blood duty to, in order for us to bask in our moral permissiveness. He who sells his blood and God to have a taste of the morality that came only from them, fails to cite their source. Morality is for kind. Good is for yours. Beauty is for sharedness. To let an outsider of valuation in, betrays your unspoken oath and allows them to destroy your communion. If you sell your sons and daughters for a stranger, then you are now amongst my new found hated. I will hope for you no peace in this life or the next passed what you did to your bloodline. If I err in my reasoning or imprecision, I am unsurprised. I am not sure where to break the disjunct, but what I can say is that it is of no value to God or myself to sell out heaven to give welfare to hell. No part of Christ’s beatitudes require me to forgo living them out from fear of affecting others. What is a belief if it cowers at the first moment of opposition. To be Godly is to turn the other cheek, go the extra mile, and to take up your cross. However, it is also to flip the tables of those that offend your Father, to debate and ridicule blasphemers, and to institute your kingdom on earth at their detriment. If you can’t walk in this dichotomy, then your mind is ravaged by the categories of the modern age and will fall to our new kind of ancient men. The socialized reductionist view of Christianity is that it is to sell out your kind for the hoard. Rather, it is to trade your will for God’s by taking upon you His cross and building His kingdom. It will be of more average benefit to all people, but you are a fool to think God has no enemies in this endeavor. One of them is found portionally within myself, and I ask God to this day more sever and rid me of my portions against Him. Kindness is for your kind. Man is what he refuses. What we refuse we oppose. We are then that which we oppose. I am happy to both die and be a threat for little ones, God, and the beautiful natural world that He gave us. If I am found evil for my hatred of that which hates what I love, I will be seen on the conceptual battlefield. I will not trade that which I love to not hate what I hate. May the victor inherit a better world, but let them inherit it at the fall of their detractor. I hate. I am angry, loathful, and spiteful. In some portion of this, I sin and am evil. However, the more I approximate that divine will that simply is, I hate those that curse fate. I can later discover within myself gifted grace to offer to them. In the meantime I will not let heaven fall for hell’s sake. I will hate, and from which, I will live out and actualize my love. As I love much, there is much to refuse. My God bless me to be a better man than I am or work toward. In the meantime, I am a threat to my threats, foe to my foes, and enemy to my enemies. If we shine the light of values anew, we see with new clarity the dark recesses of the world and mind. To love, hate. I had to re-edit this chapter multiple times to tone down the hatred. I hope I live to regret this chapter, and if I do, I will hate that I wrote it. For today, I seek to be more than I am by striving to love what I hate.