Root of All Hatred - Scribd Edit
Root of All Hatred - Scribd Edit
What is hatred?
Psychologists tell us that hatred is a feeling of loathing toward another entity
that comprises one or more of the following emotions: anger, jealousy, fear,
and prejudice. This means that if somebody hates chareidim (or anybody
else), it must be because the chareidim cause him to be angry, jealous,
frightened, or – the venom of prejudice – the chareidi is truly not doing any
of the first three but the hater thinks he is.
In truth, we don’t need psychologists to tell us this. The Chumash tells us the
exact same thing. Let us learn about hatred from a real legend, one of the all-
time all-star professional Jew-haters, Pharaoh, King of Egypt:
And he said to his nation, “Behold, the nation of the Children of Israel are
more numerous and powerful than are we. Let us outsmart them, lest they
multiply, and it shall be when a war should befall us and they will join
forces with our enemies and battle against us and we will be banished from
3 One Above and Seven Below
1
Exodus 1:9,10
2
Ibid. 1:12
3
Ibid. 1:7
4
In this example we do not encounter the anger component. I believe that jealousy and fear are
much more prevalent in general. Notwithstanding, we do not have to search too far to find a
Biblical precedent for hatred based on anger. This is the driving force of Esau’s hatred as the
verse says (Genesis 27:41) And Esau begrudged Jacob on account of the blessing that his
father blessed him; and Esau said in his heart…and I will kill Jacob my brother.
5
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (www.merriam.com) says: Prejudice - An adverse
opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge.
much more likely to rebel and turn against the unfriendly host given the
opportunity. Thus, though Pharaoh’s reasoning defies logic on two counts,
imaginary fears tend to hijack rational judgment. Not only does Pharaoh get
infected by this affliction, but he manages to infect his entire nation.6
Symptoms
It is not necessary to state that the symptoms of hatred are quite easy to
recognize. As it is one of the most common afflictions of mankind, we see
them all the time. These include (aside from the usual headaches, nausea,
shortness of breath, palpitations, dryness in the mouth, and hives):
intolerance, withdrawal, complaints, criticism, blaming, accusation,
domination, and, in the most extreme situations, violence.
Hm-m. What is the difference between the list I wrote out and the one that is
enclosed in parentheses? Oh, I am sure it is quite obvious. The parenthetical
list comprises afflictions that physically affect the person that does the
hating. The one that is hated won’t feel a thing. The open list comprises
afflictions that affect the relationship between the hater and the hated. And
they are felt primarily by the hated. The hater is oblivious to them. The
symptoms of the parenthetical list may be indications of any of a whole slew
of maladies. But the symptoms of the open list – all of them - are indications
of only one type of malady: a damaged relationship between people. And
these symptoms are perpetrated by those whose goal it is to inflict such
damage.
Each and every one of these symptoms is an instrument of destruction; they
will maim or destroy any potential relationship. True, they are not equally
destructive - some of them may be relatively mild and others are totally
devastating (I kind of arranged them in order of severity); yet, they are all
symptoms of the same malady. The ‘choice’ of symptoms that is being put
into effect merely reflects the intensity of the affliction. Lest one may think,
“Just because I am critical or prone to blaming this person does not mean that
I hate him. I certainly wish him no harm.” It makes no difference.7 Certainly
you truly wish him no direct harm, but you are hell-bent on destroying any
kind of healthy relationship. A vengeful hatred is only a more acute strain of
6
I am obviously interpreting the scripture from a modern day perspective – that all despots are
really paranoid. There is a more fundamental understanding of the scripture that Pharaoh never
lost control of his wits and he was quite aware that his concerns were unfounded. In typical
anti-Semitic fashion, he was consciously inciting his people to cooperate with his plans to
enslave the Jews.
7
There is no demarcation point where mild ill feeling toward someone ends and virulent
hatred begins.
5 One Above and Seven Below
the selfsame disease where, in addition to the relationship, the hater is out to
destroy the hated as well.
What we understand from this is that any voluntary course of action which
serves to damage an existing or potential relationship between people is a
display of hatred.
This list of symptoms is very significant because it is intended to be the focal
point of many of the upcoming chapters in the remainder of this book. I
intend to come back to this list and to elaborate on how some of these
symptoms characterize the relationship between chareidim and non-
chareidim (Orthodox and otherwise).
Causes
What causes hatred?
Yes, of course, we did previously discuss anger, jealousy, fear and prejudice
and we may even be able to throw in some extras such as feelings of guilt,
shame, frustration and inadequacy, but all of these are actually components,
not causes, of hatred. The question is, what transforms human emotions into
anger, jealousy, fear, etc. and ultimately into hatred?
As Tevye the Milchman said: “That I can answer in one word” –
Unhappiness.
Yes, unhappiness! (It’s a tradition!)
If someone is happy with himself and with how he gets along with the
important people of his life, he has no motivation to hate anybody. Happy
people do not hate. It is only unhappy people who choose to hate other
people because they feel that it is the other person’s fault that they are
unhappy. If only the other person (or people) would not continue to do what
he does, would do something else, or wouldn’t be here at all, the poor
oppressed hater [presumes that he] would be happy.
Alas, now that that person won’t stop doing what he does, or won’t do what I
want him to do, or won’t go away, and all this is making me quite unhappy, I
am justified to hate, detest, abhor, loathe, dislike, shun, spurn, hold in
contempt, despise, disdain, deride, ridicule, fault, blame, criticize, condemn,
malign, vilify, denigrate, disparage, deplore, or at least decide that I won’t be
best friends with this evil uncooperative demon.8
This concept is not my own. It is modeled from a popular thesis in human
behavior developed by Dr. William Glasser, M.D., founder of the William
8
Incidentally (and sadly), this is how many people feel about their spouses, children, teachers,
and/or parents.
Glasser Institute. He calls his thesis Choice Theory and he calls the resulting
application Reality Therapy. I cannot do justice to this thesis in the few lines
that I can allot to this discussion, but if I may, I will try to briefly summarize
his assertion.
Dr. Glasser posits that we live in a world that is driven by what he terms
external control. Here is what he means: Human beings are similar to
animals in that they are constantly in search of satisfying their physical needs
for survival and physical comfort. In addition to this survival need, humans
are unique that they have strictly human emotional needs – for love and
belonging, power and respect, freedom, and fun.9 Every individual has his
own profile of what measure of each of these five basic needs is essential for
his well being. For example, some people have a very strong need for power
and respect and not so much for fun and freedom. These people may become
workaholics and control freaks. They may not have much spare time for
themselves, but they don’t miss it. Others may have a strong need for love
and belonging and not so much for power. These people will be loyal and
submissive and yet be content. There are myriad combinations.
Each person creates a picture in his mind of what would be for him the ideal
society and environment based on his personal needs and interests. Glasser
calls this a person’s quality world. This quality world is an imaginary place
in which all of one’s needs are met to his satisfaction. Thus, it is natural that
every person goes about his business doing his utmost to make his real world
come as close as possible to his quality world. Perceivably, this is what
would make him happy.
For most people, the real world never comes close enough. And so he is
unhappy. The individual subconsciously tries to determine what is going
wrong and his subconscious reaches a natural conclusion: the reason that he
cannot attain his quality world is because his quality world is his own. The
people with whom he interacts – his spouse and his family, his co-workers,
superiors and underlings, his neighbors, government official and authorities,
or perhaps, his clergymen and co-religionists - do not share his personal
quality world. They each have their own. Their lack of cooperation in his
quality world is what is making him unhappy. The question now becomes:
what must he do to rectify this discrepancy?
The natural answer is to exert whatever influence is available to cause others
to participate in the attainment of his personal quality world. In other words,
get the other people to behave as he wants. This is what Dr. Glasser calls:
9
Dr. Glasser defines fun as any activity driven by the desire to learn something new.
7 One Above and Seven Below
upon the first two, but it is a natural attitude of one who subscribes to
external control psychology.
What emerges is that not only are all three beliefs patently false, but as
concerns the first two beliefs, the exact opposite is true. We can only control
our own behavior, we cannot control another’s behavior. When undesirable
events, i.e., things that interfere with our quality world, befall us, we are
naturally unhappy. Thus, we believe that the events made us angry or jealous
or fearful. Dr. Glasser maintains that although our natural impulse is to ‘get’
angry or jealous or fearful, we don’t passively become angry as if we are not
in control. Our own behavior is the only department in which we are indeed
in control - we choose to be angry. Glasser actually dispenses with the
transitive term “get angry” and replaces it with an active term “anger”. We
are unhappy about this situation and so we choose to anger, or- we choose to
envy (active tense of being jealous), or- we choose to fear, or- we choose to
depress (in contrast to becoming depressed). Ultimately, we choose to remain
unhappy and accordingly, as we do not acknowledge this to be our personal
choice and we look toward others as the sole source of our unhappiness, we
choose to hate. This is our behavior and we can control it and nobody else.
Accordingly, says Dr. Glasser, when one is faced with a situation that
conflicts with his quality world, and external control doesn’t seem to work,
as is often, though not always, the case, it doesn’t make sense to continue
implementing a remedy that has not worked until now. It is far more sensible
to shift gears and to see what he can achieve by modifying his own behavior.
This means that a person who is unhappy because of the way that reality
conflicts with his picture of a quality world has two options that are totally
within his control:
• Change what he does – i.e., his own behavior – toward achieving his
quality world OR
• Change his picture of a quality world to something more realistic.
Sadly, very few people are students of Choice Theory (Dr. Glasser laments
about this repeatedly in his writings). So the story is usually the same:
external control minded people – i.e., most of us – are adamant that their
have absolutely no other choice. Moreover, one who must control with brute force is
“enslaved” by the necessity to implement it. I call this the “Elevator Door Syndrome”. If one
wishes to hold up an elevator, he can do it with ease by putting his hand against the open door.
The only problem is that he is stuck standing there for all the time that he wants to show the
elevator who is boss. The minute he tires and removes his hand, the elevator reverts to its
original behavior. Similarly, brute force, even when it works, it is usually temporary and at a
price. The Nazis were so taxed by their policy of enslavement and extermination that they
expended critical resources that were vital to military success. Thus, their frenzy to dominate
their rivals dominated them.
9 One Above and Seven Below
relationships with the people who affect their personal quality worlds must
function on their terms. When it doesn’t, they try to remedy the situation by
exerting control techniques – reward or punishment, sheer domination, or
harassment in the form of criticism and blame. If that doesn’t work or it is
beyond their capabilities, they cut these people out of their quality world by
withdrawing from them or discriminating against them (intolerance) or by
doing away with them – murder. Regardless, the subject has come no closer
to realizing his quality world and therefore remains unhappy. All that he
accomplished was to damage or destroy a relationship that was potentially
vital to his well being.
Now we understand what causes hatred – it is the inability to control or
influence the behavior of people who do not help one realize his personal
quality world.
We have also learned something else. We have learned that all of the
symptoms of hatred that I described a few pages back are actually commonly
used techniques of external control.
Hateful people are fixated on controlling the behavior of the people who, in
their opinion, are not ‘behaving’. Note that this control is totally independent
of the need for ‘power and respect’ that was listed earlier (page 6) as one of
the five basic needs that may or may not be a vitally essential component for
the quality world of the individual. Even one who has a low need for power
and respect but has strong unfulfilled needs in other areas – for example,
freedom or pleasure (survival) – is interested in controlling the behavior of
relevant people to comply with the demands of his needs.
Now, we can better understand Pharaoh’s concerns. Pharaoh was only
interested in hosting the Children of Israel insomuch as they are instrumental
in helping him achieve his quality world (which probably involved a lot of
power and respect). Pharaoh had to be in control. It is very likely that the
Israelites were no more numerous than Egypt but they very likely were more
powerful - albeit not in a physical sense. They had their own agenda, their
own quality world; and it did not match Pharaoh’s. It wasn’t so much that
they could overpower or control Egypt but that Egypt could not overpower or
control them. That level of power – the autonomy of the Jews - was more
than Pharaoh could tolerate. They “are more powerful than we” – i.e., we
cannot control their behavior, and consequently, they have more power than
we can manage.
And so, Egypt embarked on a campaign to disempower the Jews and to
augment their own power. Their message was: “We will defeat them before
they defeat us.”14 And how does this drama end? Ki ba sus Pharaoh… “For
Pharaoh’s horses with their chariots with their riders came to meet the
sea…”15 In a frenzy of hatred they took their best [remaining] chariots,
soldiers and horses and, of their own volition, rushed headlong into a raging
sea. Pharaoh’s imagination became a self fulfilled prophecy. All because he
thought there were too many Jews hanging around. And he never bothered to
count.
Pharaoh is in good company. The Tanach (and, indeed, history) is replete
with stories of hatred, all of which are composed of the same basic elements:
(1) a protagonist who does not comply with the quality world picture of a
seemingly higher ranking or more powerful antagonist and (2) an antagonist
who resorts to external control techniques in an attempt to compel the
protagonist to cooperate in fulfilling his (the antagonist’s) personal needs or,
alternatively, to totally remove the protagonist from his quality world. In all
of these cases most observers would agree with the statement: the antagonist
hates the protagonist.
To help visualize this concept, as well as to lighten up an otherwise somber
chapter, I invite the reader to sit in as an observer of a day in the life of a
Biblical psychotherapist. We are about to witness the most popular external
control techniques, a.k.a. symptoms of hatred - intolerance, control by
punishment, control by reward, domination, and murder – put into action.
Here goes:
Therapist: Miss Lillith, please admit the first patient!
Well-l-l, if it isn’t his majesty King Nimrod! What seems to
be the trouble, O Mighty Lion? You don’t seem your chipper
self today!
Patient: The Mighty Lion has a thorn in his paw.
Therapist: And who might this thorn-in-the-paw be?
Patient: A disloyal subject.
Therapist: An oxymoron, your Highness. Who could even think of
defying you?
Patient: He calls himself Abram of the Opposite Direction.
Therapist: Not a team player, is he?
14
Sound familiar? This is the message that Noah Efron paraphrased into Tommy Lapid’s party
line as was noted in chapter n. See page y.
15
Exodus 15:19
11 One Above and Seven Below
Therapist: Well then, O Great One. That sums it up for now. Please
come back next week and let me know how things went. And,
oh, as usual, this session is on the house.
Next patie…What is that Miss Lillith? Urgent call on Line 3?
Sounds a bit frantic? Alright, I’ll take the call. Hello! – Yes,
Mr. Caine. How are you? – Oh, I’m so sorry to hear that. –
Your younger brother, huh? – Yes, you already told me that
you think he is just so much hot air. - Yes, I see. You just
couldn’t manage to get your offering to score points and –
Ah-ha. He could do it and you just weren’t Able. – Please,
Mr. Caine, you must calm down and try to relax. Perhaps, if
you only improved the way you… – Uh-huh. Others have
been telling you that lately? Well, maybe… – OK, OK. Just
please calm down. What if you just had a nice talk… - You
did? What was it that you said to your brother? – Nobody is
supposed to know? Well, your secret is safe with me. Now,
now, please, try to control yoursel… - What was that? He
makes you want to just… – No, Mr. Caine, you can’t be
serious. That will solve nothing. You must consider the
conseque… – Mr. Caine, I beg of you, let’s not start a mutiny,
please just take a deep breath and relax. Even if you were to
“get away with it”, as you say, you must realize that you
would be ostracized from society. You would become a
drifter, marked for life - Mr. Caine, may I suggest an
emergency appointment? Can you be in my office at 4:00? -
Very well. In the meanwhile, just lie down and rest and don’t
speak with anyone, especially your brother. You need not be
your brother’s full time watchman. See you at 4:00, then? -
OK, good-bye.
Miss Lillith, this client is quite distraught and I am concerned
that he may do something irrational. Please alert the proper
authorities and you may admit the next patient.
Ah yes, Mr. Lavan deCheat. It’s been what – about six years
since you came to me last? And, how are you today?
Patient: Not as good as yesterday!
Therapist: And what seems to be the problem?
Patient: It’s my son-in-law, again. He ran off on me just when I was
trying to get the upper hand.
15 One Above and Seven Below
one is already too long. I will present a modest list in a footnote.20 You might
notice that I have listed more than ten references from Pirkei Avot alone, all
of which, in some way, touch upon some aspect of Dr. Glasser’s Choice
Theory. Back in chapter 7, I heralded Pirkei Avot as a comprehensive
anthology of chareidi ideals and, if you recall, I even stated that Pirkei Avot
focuses primarily on sustaining social relationships (page ?).
The list of sources is far from complete. In fact, I purposely omitted two of
the most fundamental sources to illustrate how central this philosophy is to
chareidi ideology. The runner-up of the two is the notable Mishna in Pirkei
Avot 4:1:
Who is mighty? He who subdues his inclinations. As the verse says, “One
who is placid is better than a hero; and one who rules over his spirit is better
than one who conquers a city.”
This adage, that true heroics is the ability to control one’s own behavior, is so
much a part of Orthodox consciousness that almost every Orthodox Jewish
day school in the world has it enshrined into a mural and prominently
displayed somewhere in the main hallway. Every chareidi kid wins prizes for
quoting it by heart. It most certainly makes an impression. Moreover, if we
look at the entire Mishna, we find that it covers most of the five basic needs
that combine to form an individual’s quality world:
• Fun, which Glasser defines as the drive to learn new things – “Who is
wise? He who learns from all men.”
• Survival, which includes material wealth and pleasures – “Who is
wealthy? He who is joyous with his portion.”
• Power and Respect – “Who is honored? He who honors all who are
created.”
• Freedom – This is not alluded to in this specific Mishna but we find later
on in Pirkei Avot (6:2): “For we do not find one who is free other than he
who is busy with Torah study.”
And what is it that, in my opinion, holds first place as the ultimate source to
illustrate that we chareidim maintain a more internal oriented ideology than
the ever-popular external control psychology that afflicts most of mankind?
The envelope please…
… would you believe it? – it’s Leviticus 26:3!
20
Genesis 4:7: Exodus 19:5,6; Leviticus 19:18; Deuteronomy 11:13, 26-28; Ibid. 26:17-19;
Ibid. 30:11-20; Tzephania 2:1; Psalms 1:1-3; Ibid. 34:13-15; Proverbs 16:7; Kohelet 9:11;
Pirkei Avot 1:14, 2:1, 2:4, 2:7, 2:15, 2:16, 3:13, 4:10, 4:28, 5:13, 5:22; Talmud Bavli Gittin
6b,7a; Avoda Zara 17a; Sanhedrin 18a.
21 One Above and Seven Below
That’s right! The same passage that lays the groundwork for defining what is
a chareidi tells us what we must do to find true gratification:
If you are to walk within my statutes and guard my commandments and
perform them.
As I wrote in chapter 3, this verse which, in its original Hebrew, comprises
all of eight words, presents the whole picture (of course, we still need Rashi
to spell it out for us) with a clear message: it is entirely within our control. If
we behave in the manner that G-d the Father expects from us then we merit
the compensatory benefits package:
I shall give the rains in their time and the land will give forth its yield and
the tree of the field will give its fruit. And the threshing will linger until the
grape harvest… And I will give peace to the land… And you shall pursue
your enemies, and they shall fall… And I will devote my attention to you,
and multiply you… And I shall put my sanctuary in your midst… And I
shall walk in your midst and be your G-d and you shall be to me for a
nation…
In other words, G-d is promising us success with all of our relationships, be it
with our livelihood - rainfall and bountiful crops; with our neighbors –
“peace to the land”’; with our enemies who hate us and want to destroy us 21 –
“and they shall fall”; with our families – “and multiply you”; and, especially,
with G-d. Here, the Torah is presenting a generic societal quality world, and
it is all contingent upon our own behavior. It won’t do us a bit of good to
coerce anybody else to comply with this program nor will our quest to reach
the summit of Mt. Neverest – our ultimate quality world – be impeded by
anyone else’s behavior. In fact, outside of judicial law and some references to
childrearing that appear in Proverbs22 (which are themselves subject to
interpretation) there is virtually nothing in all of Jewish literature that
advocates any form of external control.
What comes out is that the dedicated chareidi is much less predisposed to the
forces of hatred than is the non-Jew, non-religious and even the non-chareidi
for the following two-dimensional reason:
To the non-Jewish Jew hater, the mere existence of the Jew in his real world
picture severely imposes on his quality world picture. No matter how
removed or uninvolved from the Jew that he may be in practice, he cannot
21
The thrust of Choice Theory is to better the relationships that affect our quality world.
Nevertheless, if a relationship has become destructive and is beyond our power to improve, we
are forced to protect our own quality world as the need for survival is the most primordial of
the basic needs that it comprises. But even when this is necessary, if it is totally driven by
external control with no aspect of “self” control the chances of success are reduced as noted
previously (footnote 13).
22
Proverbs 13:24 and 23:14
remove the Jew from his real world picture and, as such, his quality world
picture cannot be gratified. This is what they call The Jewish Problem. What
this indicates is that they maintain some obscure kind of relationship with the
Jewish entity, which defies explanation,23 that does not meet their fancy but
they cannot manage it unless they resort to very extreme “final solutions”
such as forced conversions, anti-Jewish legislation, enslavement and
extermination. To the anti-religious secular Jew, the religious Jew is even
more imposing.24 As neither of the above two communities hold G-d in either
their quality world or their real world pictures, their relationship with the
[religious] Jew occupies a prominent [sore] spot in their real world picture.
Even the religious Jew who does hold G-d in his quality world picture, if he
happens to be anti-chareidi - i.e., the haters and shunners a la Isaiah - it is
because he allows the chareidim, and the way he perceives their behavior, to
occupy too prominent a spot in his real world picture. Accordingly, the
behavior of the chareidi imposes upon his quality world, he will be unhappy,
and will look at the chareidi as the source of his unhappiness.
The dedicated chareidi,25 on the other hand, makes his relationship to G-d the
preeminent relationship in his quality world. This relationship is one over
which he has full control as is indicated in Leviticus 26:3. Consequently, no
one – not the anti-Semitic non-Jew, nor the anti-religious secular Jew, nor the
anti-chareidi religious Jew – is capable of interfering with this relationship.
As such, the chareidi is capable of gratifying his quality world despite the
non-compliance of his adversaries. This is one dimension of the distinction
between chareidim and non-chareidim that I wish to make.
The second dimension is simply that the primary social components of hatred
that I listed above – jealousy, anger, fear, and prejudice – are not prevalent
attitudes in our relationships to non-chareidim. Consider the following:
• Jealousy - It is typical for the non-Jew or non-chareidi to look over his
shoulder and to note some of the more spiritual benefits that accompany
the lifestyle of a devout Orthodox Jew with a tinge of envy. He senses
that these ‘benefits’ are for the most part inaccessible to him unless he is
prepared to undergo a drastic lifestyle change. One cannot have his cake
23
Conceivably, if they don’t like us they could simply ignore us. As Rabbi Berel Wein once
said in a tape, “Nobody hates Venezuela.” (This was way before the rise of Hugo Chavez.)
But, as we know, the standard rules of civilization do not apply to us. As Dr. Seuss would say:
Why do the goyim hate the Jews? I do not know, but it’s not news.
24
This may be because they cannot resort to forced conversion, enslavement, or extermination.
They have to make do with anti-religious legislation.
25
There is no denying that copious members of the chareidi camp may be less than dedicated.
This is why we notice chareidim who are afflicted with external control psychology.
23 One Above and Seven Below
and eat it, too. Conversely, the chareidi certainly has no cause to be
jealous of the non-chareidi being that, if he so desires to enter the non-
chareidi world, he can do so at the “drop of a hat”.
• Anger – Anger is a component of hatred whereas the hater feels that he
has been injured or wronged by the hated. This is a consequence of the
actions of the hated disrupting the hater’s realization of his quality world.
This rarely applies to a chareidi being that, as I wrote, the preeminent
relationship that resides in the quality world picture of the chareidi is his
relationship with G-d. This relationship is immune from outside
interference and, as such, a chareidi cannot perceive a non-chareidi as
injuring this relationship and disrupting the realization of his quality
world. The chareidi has no cause to be angry toward the non-chareidi.
• Fear – I have seen numerous newspaper pundits exclaim that ‘we’ (the
Israeli public) must [forcibly] integrate the chareidim into the work
force. Or, better, “The chareidim must understand that they will have
to…” Yet, I suppose that most of these citizens would panic if they were
to see a sudden influx of chareidim infiltrate their workplaces.
Conversely, there are quite a few unoccupied seats in the numerous
chareidi study halls throughout the world, and it would not scare us a bit
to see the secular Jews fill them up. The chareidi does not live in fear that
the non-chareidim are going to invade his overpriced Shabbat restricted
neighborhood and drive him out. Nor is he worried that they will flood
his schools with their children. Go ahead – make our day!
• Prejudice – The chareidi has no illusions that non-chareidim cohabitate
through bed sheets. Trust me on this one.
The sum total is that in addition to what I wrote earlier that the chareidi is
capable of gratifying his quality world despite the non-compliance of his
adversaries, he has much less external cause to be unhappy in the first place
and certainly has no need to look at anybody else as an obstacle to
gratification.
This brings to a close our discussion on the root causes of hatred. Only one
issue remains – what can be done to remedy this problem?
Unfortunately, the philosophy of Choice Theory dictates that there is not
much that the hated can do to pursue the gratification of his own quality
world and, at the same time, meet the demands of somebody else’s quality
world especially when they are in conflict. Only the one who is afflicted with
non-gratification and the components of hatred can modify his quality world
picture or his method of gratifying it.
In the meantime, we are faced with the age old technique of dealing with the
symptoms when we cannot treat the disease. In the upcoming chapters we
will attempt to relieve the most debilitating symptoms.