Hate as a verb may be defined as an intense or passionate dislike for someone or something. Synonyms for hate include loathe, detest, dislike greatly, abhor, abominate, despise, execrate, feel aversion toward, feel revulsion toward, feel hostile toward, be repelled by, be revolted by, regard with disgust, not be able to bear/stand, be unable to stomach, find intolerable, shudder at, recoil from, shrink from. Hate within a so-called civil society has recently been deemed as inappropriate; especially when actions are taken in response to feelings of hatred directed at multiple persons. Reasons for this directed hatred may be, but are not restricted to race, national origin, religious theology, political ideology, sex, gender identity, or language. Origins and rationale for this hatred must be identified and understood in appropriate context if humanity is to resolve the negative implications of this bitter emotion.
Societies of man have evolved over time from those of extreme homogenous characteristics, or likenesses, to societies of immense diversity of skin colors, languages, values, political ideologies, and religious theologies. Early civilizations such as the Hebrews sought social purity to prevent perceived foreign ills and potential aberrant practices from contaminating their society. Eventually, some nations as Nazi Germany would demand national purity as a requirement for social function. The natural migration of mankind as well its imperfect nature have severely limited the purity of any people; however, some still maintain an abbreviated oneness or unifying characteristic is needed to provide a cohesive society under a common law or rule of law.
Adherence to the rule of law among a common people would serve as an essential guide for the preservation of the society, or nation, as well as its common wealth within a global community. It was the need for this rule of law which served as the impetus for the Founders of the United States of America. Conceived in Liberty, a representative Declaration of Independence avowed their right to be self-governed. An exhaustive dialogue over eleven years rendered a duly adopted Constitution providing a governmental structure for this new Nation. An adopted Bill of Rights explicitly detailed what was forbidden in this government where “We the People” rule.
Unfortunately, human nature’s imperfections precipitated ideas that free men can do better. Once it was believed that with his life and liberty, a man could forge the future and insure prosperity for his family. All that was needed was a common defense against transgressors and general agreements to assist in mutual commerce within the society. Living within natural law as prescribed by nature’s God, future successes were within reach. Original intent for American Society revolved around individual liberty and personal sovereignty where each person practiced personal responsibility for his/her own successes or failures. Success was not guaranteed; however, failure served as a powerful motivator to gain moral guidance for future endeavors. It has been stated that the devil is in the details; and this was certainly true for a young America.
Slavery, brought to the continent by the British, was considered an economic essential to success of the early agricultural colonist in the South. Was this even possible in a nation where the founding declaration proclaimed that “all men are created equal”? Article 1, Section 9 states, “The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight,”. Congress did not enact legislation to end slavery, rather it initiated the Missouri Compromise which dictated that for every slave state (Missouri) admitted to the Union, a free state (Maine) would maintain the balance. In the end, the Missouri Compromise failed to permanently ease the underlying tensions caused by the slavery issue. The conflict that flared up during the bill’s drafting presaged how the nation would eventually divide along territorial, economic and ideological lines. The original Constitution dissolved the issue by 1808; however, political fears over per capita representation in the House of Representatives aggravated the issue until it festered into a great Civil War. Brother killing brother in a civil war describes well the idiocrasy of hate. Ordeals as the American Civil War demonstrated man’s imperfection and inability to adhere to the principles of a moral and duly adopted Constitution.
Bitter scars from a civil war caused raw emotional differences to become evident between geographical regions of a Nation. A race of people though freed by war, suffered the inequities of a second-class citizenship; of which many still suffer today. The passing of time heals all unless the scars are reopened by hatred from both directions. Racial discrimination very possibly would have slowly disappeared over time except for the continuous need to seed discourse by the likes of Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Louis Farrakhan; all calling themselves Reverend. Yet, quota systems and affirmative action policies in higher education have demonstrated inequities in eligibility for desired positions based solely on gender and race, rather than on ability and academic achievement. Since the 1970s, reverse discrimination against Caucasians has been prevalent in selection processes in advanced professional education. It must be asked: How have the Origins of Hate evolved into the Roots of Rage?
Liberty and Tyranny define the characteristic endpoints on a continuum of human governance. Liberty is the freedom to do as one pleases, free of physical restraint and arbitrary or despotic control. Tyranny is rule by an authoritarian and often oppressive despotic government with little or no regard to the permission of the governed. A free person is capable of compassion for fellow humans without mandates from any governmental source; however, compassion may become limited when governments institute taxes on free men under a pretext of pseudo-compassion for the distribution of wealth to the general population. These policies closely align with those of noted communist Karl Marx, “…From him according to his ability; to him according to his need”.
Beginning in the Woodrow Wilson era, a population expanding shore-to-shore with improving sanitary and living conditions began to realize improvements in economic conditions. Seizing the Constitutional power to levy taxes, a liberal administration initiated economic policies to strengthen its ability to win influence, power, and control. The 16th Amendment to the Constitution initiated a tax on personal income and became an economic windfall for the federal government. The 17th Amendment removed the election of U.S. Senators from the legislatures of the States to a popular election. Rationale for the change was to remove perceived corruptive influences within the state legislatures. The actual results were, however, a removal of Senatorial candidates from the access of the voters to a popularly-elected Senate easily corrupted by special interests in Washington. Now, these special interests and lobbyist have full political and financial access to Senators who rarely see their constituents.
In Democracy in America, Tocqueville stated, “The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money”. This statement summarily describes the government’s debt secondary to its borrowing money from the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds. So evident was the potential for abuse and governmental oppression that Thomas Jefferson quoted, “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them”. Premonitions from history came to fruition as both political parties enacted legislation which took money from public taxes to win the favor of partisan voters.
Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 terminated previous policies utilizing a quota system based on reuniting immigrant families and attracting skilled labor to the United States. Civil rights movements of the 1960s led many to believe previous quota systems to be discriminatory. According to the October 2015 Online Journal of the Migration Policy Institute, between 1965 and 2015, the highest number of immigrants (11.6 million) to the United States have come from Mexico. Chain migration of family members and illegal immigration has for the most part negated the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act passed to address border enforcement and the use of social programs by immigrants. As more and more illegal immigrants abuse the social safety nets compassionately provided by U.S. taxpayers, angst and actions by irritated taxpayers toward those abuses should not be unexpected.
Is there any doubt that the origins of hate have delivered the roots of rage as a result of governmental abuse and corruption toward those who are paying the bills? Abraham Lincoln stated in the Gettysburg Address, “…our forefathers brought forth on this continent, a new Nation, conceived in Liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal”. The Founders of our Nation now weep at what has become of their dreams. Benjamin Franklin stated, “We give you a Republic; if you can keep it”!
Borders have function and a purpose! Citizenship is a privilege with rights and responsibilities. As appropriately stated, those rights guaranteed by citizenship are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Without respected borders, there is no nation; no need for citizenship; no privileges or responsibilities; a loss of liberty and self-directed happiness.
Compassion to our fellow man is the responsibility of being a free human; it is not the purview of a Constitutional government. It is noble to be charitable with one’s own fortune; it is thievery to be generous with someone else’s fortune. Government’s duty is to facilitate its citizens that they might flourish and be compassionate to the less fortunate; not to give to others after first taking from someone else. This is the difference between Liberty and Tyranny; the Origins of Hate or the Roots of Rage. Who is to blame?