zantonavitch Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 How do you deal with enemies? How do you deal with evil people who hurt you? The best way -- if they aren't beyond all redemption -- is to do as Nathaniel Branden sometimes advises: Attempt to wisely and heroically "make a friend out of an enemy." But you can't surrender your sacred self or your ideals in the process. You can't abdicate your convictions, your honor, or your soul.Thus, often enough, this idealized convert-enemies-into-friends hope can't be realized. And if you can't honorably escape or avoid them, then you simply have to fight and defeat your enemy. In 1977 when Ronald Reagan explained his basic plan and strategic vision for America's enemy, the Soviet Union, he said: "We win and they lose."* * * * * The basic way to deal with enemies -- despite what religion and the Judeo-Christian ethic teaches -- is to hate them and then destroy them. You're supposed to glory in hurting them, seeing them suffer, and making them die. Think of Batman, Spiderman, or any other comic book superhero. Altho' it was meant as a wildly un-PC joke, the recent film Borat essentially got it right: The over-arching desideratum is to seek to "drink the blood of every man, woman, and child" of your enemies. And such a clean, pure act of Good triumphing over Evil does not pollute or degrade you, despite what everyone says. The goal and wholly legitimate desire to overcome your foe ultimately comes about because, ideally, you're a good person who doesn't attack your fellows, but who works hard and smart and successfully. Thus you properly and justifiably have a high self-regard. You have great respect for your own self, life, character, integrity, values, honor, and even public name and reputation. So you revile any would-be destroyers. * * * * * In this regard, Christian charity, tolerance, forgiveness, and love is an immense evil. This masochistic, "turn the other cheek" ideal violates the lofty standards of justice and social morality. It virtually treats good and evil the same. The poorly thought-out and deeply-flawed moral code of Christian "grace" and "love thy enemy"-ism essentially regards creators and destroyers as being equivalent; violators, attackers, and criminals are considered about equal to their victims. Now this is a great act of ideological depravity and a stunning repudiation of the holy individual and of rational, civilized society. It is a betrayal of the best version of yourself, and results in the destruction of your part of the world. To equate good and evil, and to not discriminate thereof, is simply monstrous. Sympathy for the evil is treason to the good. * * * * * Evil today comes in many forms. This includes: Plato, Kant, philosophical skeptics, conservatives, progressives, neo-cons, environmentalists, Christians, Muslims, fundamentalist jihadists -- and even libertarians and "not overly religious" lapsed Catholics and non-practicing Jews. But it also takes the form of Ayn Rand at her most faithful and authoritarian. However painful this may be to Objectivists, it also takes the form of this highly charismatic and intellectually seductive cult-of-personality leader who could be so maliciously and hatefully moralizing and psychologizing. It takes the form of this part-time cult leader who could be so angry, manipulative, and anti-social, as she repressed her emotions and rationalized her personal weaknesses. Evil today often takes the form of nothing less than "false prophet," Eastern Orthodox, true-believer, religious, cult Objectivism. * * * * * It's worth noting that all the people and beliefs listed above are evil in their own way. And all need to be fought in their own way. All have their special lacunas and vulnerabilities -- usually based on the nature of their evil. And all these limitations need to be learned, exploited, and ruthlessly attacked by the good guys. But "reaching out to" or "extending the hand of friendship to" these various evil people and beliefs, under most circumstances, is morally wrong and practically counter-productive. Tolerating and forgiving those who don't and won't tolerant and forgive you is profoundly mistaken and often depraved. Especially if they're fundamentally in the wrong and you're in the right. Generally speaking, if someone openly hates you and actively works to destroy you, you need to reply in kind, and seek mighty revenge. You need to hit him, in effect, twice as hard as he seeks to hit you; and four times as hard, if he actually succeeds in hitting you. This is justice and morality. This is also often the best and only effective method of deterrence. If there's ever going to be "peace" on earth and bountiful "love" in the world -- with the Brotherhood of Man ascendant and triumphant -- then these miscreant enemies of yours need to fall to their knees and cry a Niagara of tears. They need to be forced to surrender -- and to beg you to forgive them. If you, the would-be victim, can't or won't reduce the bad guys to this level of debasement, dishonor, and humiliation, then war will be the permanent state of mankind, and of all our various philosophical movements. * * * * * Evil needs to be smashed and defeated at all times -- not engaged and appeased. Enemies need to be unambiguously stopped and crushed -- not accommodated or reasoned with. "Peace" and "love" is only possible when evil is destroyed. You can't bargain or compromise with it, nor can you somehow befriend it. Once your enemy has been found to be strongly and objectively evil, no long-term truce is even possible. All such pathetic and depraved attempts to secure a "time-out" or "detente" in this timeless battle will be correctly regarded as craven debasement and shameful weakness, by both the evil-doers and the world. All such negotiations with evil constitute a horrific act of appeasement and surrender to the forces of blackness. In the end, enemies and evil-doers need to be fought. Unforgivable and unrepentant opponents need to be openly, loudly, proudly, energetically, zealously hated; and then rudely, crudely, unceremoniously extirpated and extincted. This is as true for Ahkmoud Amadinijad and Leonard Peikoff as it is for Plato and Kant. It's as true for Jesus and Marx, as it is for all the lesser malicious ARIans and bizarro Randroids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now