Hate as a Great Unifier? A Detestable Notion

Re “Love’s OK, but Hate Keeps Us Together,” Commentary, Jan. 20: Crispin Sartwell argues, following Heraclitus and others, that hate is a progressive engine of change. Academics, and maybe arms dealers, love this kind of talk. In a ludicrous cherry-picking of ancient sources and detestable quotes, he argues that hate is a unifying force throughout all societies. He says, in closing, that as the universe was born in conflagration, and since we are part of this universe, we are “exploding [read: with exclusionary hate] right along with it in our own peculiar way.” But the tension of ideas doesn’t necessarily mean hate. And it’s certainly possible to extend compassion while artfully defending one’s views.

Charles Crellin

Morro Bay

*

Over time, things have moved from hate and its bad effects to a neutral zone -- if not love -- that keeps us together. For instance, wars have diminished from big wars (WW I, WW II, Korean War, Vietnam War, etc.) to small wars, such as in Afghanistan and Iraq. Israeli-Arab hate has diminished from three or four big wars to suicide explosions and retaliations -- still bad but not as bad as before; and as we learn more, we will move more to a neutral zone.

Divorce “hate” has been reduced from cruelty to dividing assets. Globalization has created rights for women in Afghanistan and jobs for Third World labor with better pay. Anger management among nations and individuals will further enlarge the neutral zone between hate and love and, over time, the sum of a neutral zone plus love will become much greater than hate.

Nake M. Kamrany

Los Angeles