The Hater, or the Hatee?
I’m not sure that it matters either way; life hurts.
But that’s hatred of individuals. Just because there are more than one of them doesn’t mean you hate them as a group. If you hated all Christians because some of them are practitioners of Identity Christianity, then you’d be hating a group illegitimately.
I’ve never been able to make up my mind if I hate prohibitionists, or if I just really dislike their point of view - and if there is an actual difference between these two statements. Am I allowed to sometimes believe it is one, and another moment the other? Because some moments I think the only way to stop a group of people intent on controlling peoples choice of drug (note choice; alcohol is just fine apparently) is to rise up with an army and push these people into a river for being manipulative, hypocritical, ignorant, lie spewing know nothings that have seized the high ground of the ‘law’ out of intellectual lazyness…
On other days I want to forgive them and move on. But damn if the thought of driving them into the ocean doesn’t make me smile.
First off I think that hate is a word that is incredibly overused in the news and in everyday language. I think that hate implies that you are actively against a person or group just because of their race or ethnicity. I think you find relatively few people that actually fit this description. That being said there are tons of passive “racists” for lack of a better term who will discriminate when presented with the opportunity to instead of seeking it out.
I don’t think it is ever ok to hate another group. Using your example of the Nazis, you shouldn’t even hate them. You should want to destroy them for the reason of wanting to protect people you care for the freedoms and lifestyle you believe in. Hating anyone is doing nothing more than sinking to their level and therefore making yourself a hypocrite, although justifiably so.
“Wanting to destroy them” will sound a lot like hatred to many, though - despite the intended benefit of maintaining freedom while doing it.
Before Malmedy: it’s just a job.
After Malmedy: Those fuckers are going to pay.
Contrariwise to the Whiggish triumphalism and secular millennarian thinking of Dawkins, Harris, and other New Atheists that is not the case and I say this as a typical American who thinks religion in general ought to be a matter of individual conscience. For many people, it is difficult if not impossible to change their minds on a fundamental part of their identity and upbringing, especially if they see it as membership in a community.