Hate and Fragmentation

Continuing with the reflection on hate, we shall go into what causes it.

Why do we hate? Evidently we know what hate is, for we see that it encompasses human affairs throughout the world, manifesting itself as brutality, conflict, callousness and indifference. Clearly enough, hate is a dominant aspect of our reality as it is today. In the presence of hate, as was alluded to previously, communion becomes impossible.

Human beings today have been divided on the basis of nationality, the colour of their skin, the languages that they happen to speak, and the thousand and one ideologies into which members of society have bought, whether so-called religious or otherwise. From our very early years, we are taught not only to accept these distinctions as fundamental, but also to take pride in them: we are inculcated into nationalism, narrow religious fervour and naive ideological enthusiasm. Along the way, we are also conditioned to become incurably idealistic optimists - or pessimists - unable, in our blind zeal, to directly perceive reality as it is. We come to look at the world through the thick screen of our ideals. In fact, we can hardly even call them 'our' ideals, for we evidently did not arrive at them through independent inquiry. Either we have been conditioned into them at birth, or we accept them on the authority of people who claim to have the complexities of life figured out, who claim, in effect, "We know, you do not know. If you want salvation (a better future), come join us. Otherwise, beware! Our Way is the only Way." Most of us are so thoroughly confounded by life, struggling to find meaning amidst all the degeneration, sorrow, anger, hurt  and antagonism both  around and within us that we flail our arms out in our desperation to be saved. In such a situation, is it any wonder that seductive ideologies, which soothe and aggrandise one's wounded sense of self, become so extraordinarily important?

An ideology gives to its adherents a stable sense of who they are; it enables one to define oneself. We could say that ideology enables the 'construction' of the Self.

Without a group to belong to, what are we? Would we even be said to 'have' a Self in such an eventuality? For instance, this writer belongs, by accident of birth, to the community of Marathi-speaking people in a country called India. He was raised in what sociologists would recognise as a Hindu socio-cultural environment. If one were to ask him who he was, his default response would be the name which he was assigned at birth. His name has been inextricably tied up with these descriptions of identity, and to his sense of who he is. The same holds for every human being who has been raised in a society.

From our very birth, then, we seem to be trained to think in terms of categorisation, of division and fragmentation, of in-groups and out-groups, 'us' and 'them'. As we grow and take cognisance, discomfited,  of the disorder in the world, its many iniquities and monstrosities, we seek to do something  to remedy the situation. This leads us to innumerable ideologies: so-called religion, revivalism, communism, capitalism, nationalism, socialism, feminism, environmentalism and so on. Even today's ostensibly irreligious world is deeply engaged in newer forms of zealous idolatry: proponents of these systems seem to believe that more widespread acceptance of their ideas is a good thing, and to that end engage in propaganda based invariably on a sectional and incomplete interpretation of history, that is, with reference to the past. They also seek to convert disbelieving infidels to their systems, through fear, favour or other such tactics that they have perfected. They seem to think that the world would be a far worse place were it not for the system they adhere to. But one is doubtful of this. The world is messy enough as it is. Would the absence of ideologies really deal a death blow to our lives? One is also sceptical of acting thus with reference to the past. Surely life, with its living, dynamic quality, lies in the present, and no amount of looking for patterns or constructing narratives can secure our future.

Further, and most importantly, all these purportedly effective methods and systems have not succeeded in bringing about a revolution in human consciousness. Yes, they were all conceived as a reaction to some disorder that their proponents perceived in society, with the explicit and stated aim of remedying that disorder. While superficially many of them may have succeeded to an extent, they have in fact accentuated the divisions between human beings, by the importance they attach to labels and fragmentary identities. One group has its method, another has a distinct method: and there is constant struggle and quarrelling between advocates of these innumerable methods to ameliorate social conditions, with the result that the ideal, the method, the system become all-important, and any drive to fundamentally transform humanity is lost in the squabbles. Clearly, in all this, there is no affection, no love. Hatred and doctrinaire closed-mindedness often lead ideologues to demonise the 'other' and to justify this hatred through elaborate rationalisation.

If one has been following the affairs of the human world rather closely, one sees that idealism engenders violence. This is a rather uncomfortable conclusion for those of us who have - sincerely or self-interestedly - given ourselves completely over to systems. One may agree or disagree here, but one thinks that mere logical or verbal argument about this is besides the point.

The question then becomes this - can those of us who are at all serious about the state the world finds itself in resolve that we will not perpetrate division, with all its destructive consequences, any longer?  This will entail that  we inwardly negate all the conditioned identities ingrained in us that prevent communion. It will involve giving up the smug security of belonging to a close-knit in-group that reinforces one's conditioned beliefs and prejudices. If we are unwilling to do this, we may find a worsening of the already rife disorder that the world is in.

To conclude, on observation, one finds that ideology, and more fundamentally, division, is one of the factors of hate. Can we find it in ourselves to negate the whole process of hate? If we do not, then the most well-intentioned efforts to improve the world are bound to fall flat.

If one desires to have order externally, one must have order internally. How can a mind that is in disorder ever hope to create order in the world? Think about it.