free economics & law ebooks & the Triumpf of Ill Will
“We may fight like men, with laws, or like animals, with claws.” -Eric Engle
Some of you are upset others elated, here are many free ebooks this week to comfort, console, or counsel you!
Quizmaster 20 Questions: Law & MBE MCQ Bar Review
Gold, Geopolitics and Game Theory:
Bitcoin: Digital Finance Law
Financial Cryptography
American Corporate Law for European Jurists
Secured Transactions (Article 9 UCC) Law and Bar Exam Review Quiz Questions
Criminal Law
Federal Rules of Evidence Law for Law School & Bar Exam Prep Q&A
CHINESE VOCABULARY BUILDER CHENG YU PROVERBS SONGS AND POEMS
U.S. Constitutional Law for German Speaking Jurists
Hatred and the Limits of Compassion
Hatred—a word so potent, so visceral, that even uttering it evokes deep discomfort in some or even most people. In our age of sanitized morality and polished liberalism, with bloody meat packed in plastic wrappers, hatred has become unacceptable, the emotion left to languish in dark corners, denounced as the indisputable sign of a fallen humanity in our brave new world. Yet, late modernity’s rejection of hatred has crippled our understanding of human nature and left society vulnerable, complacent, and increasingly incapable of confronting genuine threats to moral and social integrity. Are you starting to understand why Trump won yet, or do I have to beat it into your head with a black iron frying pan?
Hatred as a concept, as an emotion, and as a motivator, is badly understood in our times, particularly by the very intellectuals who pride themselves on discerning human motivations. Modern intellectuals, especially those identifying with liberal traditions, have chosen to bury hatred under a mountain of moral repudiation. They denounce it, banish it, scorn it. But this emotional excommunication blinds them and those foolish enough to follow their self-appointed so-called betters. As a result of their placid pablu, what we have today is a feeble understanding of hatred’s role and purpose—a profound lack that hinders meaningful resistance to those forces which ought to provoke nothing less than fury.
#### *The Historical and Philosophical Case for Hatred*
In classical thought, hatred was not only acknowledged but was often advised. The Bible itself admonishes us to “abhor what is evil” (Romans 12:9) and Greek philosophers argued that there is a time to hate, especially when it comes to defending virtue against vice. The great minds of antiquity viewed hatred not as a sin in itself, but as a necessary force in the fight against injustice and corruption. The Greeks, with their rigorous focus on ethics and societal harmony, saw hatred as a guide to justice—a tool that, when wielded by the discerning, could distinguish between right and wrong with unparalleled clarity.
This is not to suggest that hatred is a pleasant experience, or that it doesn’t carry risks of corruption. But what we have lost is the nuanced understanding that hatred, directed rightly, can serve justice as much as kindness can. Hatred, when tempered and guided by moral wisdom, has the power to shield, to protect, and, above all, to confront what liberal compassion cannot bear to address.
#### *The Legacy of World War II and the Demonization of Hatred*
The modern aversion to hatred is rooted, understandably, in the atrocities of the 20th century. The horrors of Nazi ideology, grounded in racial hatred, were indeed a testament to the depths of cruelty that hatred can inspire when combined with toxic ideologies. Yet, in our desperate bid to expunge this toxic legacy, society has jettisoned not only the abuses of hatred but hatred itself. We have come to fear it entirely, painting it with a broad brush as something wholly incompatible with virtue.
By doing so, however, we have allowed ourselves to become complacent. We shy away from speaking about evil with the requisite vigor; we fail to meet monstrous forces with the condemnation they deserve. We have forgotten that to truly love justice, one must hate injustice; to truly love peace, one must be willing to resist—sometimes ferociously—those forces that threaten it. The pursuit of moral neutrality has thus rendered us morally hollow, incapable of the righteous indignation that great and grave evils demand.
#### *The Liberal Blind Spot and the Consequences of Compassion without Discrimination*
In abandoning hatred, liberals, in particular, have compromised their ability to discern and defend. While compassion and understanding are hallmarks of a just society, indiscriminate compassion—even towards those who are the very embodiments of malice—blurs the line between good and evil. There is no moral virtue in tolerating cruelty, just as there is no courage in shrinking from confrontation with the malevolent.
Intellectuals today, steeped in a culture of empathy and dialogue, see hatred as a primal force to be overcome, a vestige of our basest instincts. Yet, what they fail to understand is that some things *ought* to be hated. And here lies their greatest vulnerability: an inability to hate is an inability to recognize, let alone resist, what deserves resistance. This is why, with surgical precision, those who understand hatred as a tool will find themselves with the upper hand in moral and political struggles. To those who wield hatred wisely, without letting it consume their soul, belongs a formidable weapon—a weapon that many in liberal circles have forsaken and forgotten.
#### *The Potential and Perils of Reclaiming Hatred*
To be clear, hatred in its rawest form is dangerous and often destructive. It is not something to be celebrated but rather something to be honed, disciplined, and directed towards genuine threats to human dignity and freedom. Misused, hatred can consume both its object and its wielder, spreading violence indiscriminately. But disciplined hatred, restrained by moral clarity and released only when confronted by true malice, has a purpose in human society.
By reclaiming a thoughtful approach to hatred, we do not surrender to base instincts; rather, we equip ourselves with the full spectrum of human emotion necessary to confront a complex world. Hatred, paradoxically, can protect the gentle, the innocent, the righteous—when we reserve it for that which threatens all three.
#### *Conclusion: A Call for Emotional Discernment*
If we are to preserve the best of liberal values—if we truly desire justice, peace, and compassion—then we must not discard hatred as a mindless, barbaric force but recognize it as a valuable, if perilous, part of the human experience. To love deeply is to be willing to defend that love vigorously; to cherish virtue is to condemn vice. Those who reject hatred as inherently evil lack this resolve and will forever fail to confront evil with the strength required to overcome it.
And so, I call upon intellectuals, liberals, and all who would shrink from the concept of hatred to reconsider. Hatred, like any strong force, must be approached with caution. But to reject it wholesale is to render oneself vulnerable—to misunderstand the reality of the world in which we live. Let us not shy away from righteous fury but reclaim it, using hatred not as a blunt instrument of harm but as a scalpel of discernment, wielded to protect, to shield, and, above all, to stand resolutely for what is good and true.