The difference between hatred and contempt

[zachor_ve_kavod]

I won't belabour the point, as the difference should be obvious to everyone here, so I'll just give some examples:

I hate Islam.

I have contempt for the politically correct cowards on the Left.

Leftists hate the conservatives.  Leftists have contempt for the muslims.

Muslims hate Jews and Christians.  Muslims have the same contempt for the politically correct cowards on the Left that I do.

Feminists hate men.  They have contempt for women who stay at home to raise children.

Blacks, by and large, hate white people.  They have contempt for outsiders who wish to help them.

The reason I am giving these examples is because in recent conversations people have asked me what did Rabbi Kahane mean when he said that liberals have contempt for the arabs?  They really didn't understand what he meant by that.  Those in the Obama administration don't hate the arabs, but they have tremendous contempt for them.  And the feeling is mutual.  This attitude may lead to a catastrophe.  Contempt can be a dangerous thing.

[Xoce]

I won't belabour the point, as the difference should be obvious to everyone here, so I'll just give some examples:

I hate Islam.

I have contempt for the politically correct cowards on the Left.

Leftists hate the conservatives.  Leftists have contempt for the muslims.

Muslims hate Jews and Christians.  Muslims have the same contempt for the politically correct cowards on the Left that I do.

Feminists hate men.  They have contempt for women who stay at home to raise children.

Blacks, by and large, hate white people.  They have contempt for outsiders who wish to help them.

The reason I am giving these examples is because in recent conversations people have asked me what did Rabbi Kahane mean when he said that liberals have contempt for the arabs?  They really didn't understand what he meant by that.  Those in the Obama administration don't hate the arabs, but they have tremendous contempt for them.  And the feeling is mutual.  This attitude may lead to a catastrophe.  Contempt can be a dangerous thing.

VERY INTERESTING!!!

[q_q_]

your examples are of bad people using and taking advantage of people.. you think they have contempt for each other.  I suppose you could say that..
one treats the other like a disabled person, the other treats him like a doormat.

what rabbi kahane meant by contempt was clear from his own explanation whenever he said it.  And your examples don't represent it at all.

I don't think either of those are what rabbi kahane meant..

He spoke of those that seek 2 states side by side, do not understand the arabs. Arabs want all the land, they have national pride.. "I have national pride, and so I understand others who have national pride".  "all arabs have national pride"  "they believe that land is theirs, I understand that"(and therefore, they have to go)..  "they don't want an israel 1cm x 1cm".. or any size, shape or form..   So the point is. These people that want an Israel and palestine side by side, don't recognize the values that the arabs have.. they refuse to acknowledge that they even have those values.. that they think it's their land.

Arabs are actually well aware of the western mindset, it is very clear to them.. and so they talk of international law.. and when in the west using westenr standards to condemn israel.. Really it means nothing to them - AND WHY SHOULD IT - they are arabs.. they have their own values. They treat the west with contempt by treating them like doormats . but that's different.. it's not the contempt that rabbi kahane referred to. In the arab mind, He referred to it somewhat but not as the arab having contempt, but as the fact that to the arab - like to a school bully -  being nice is percieved as weak, and that's bad..   As Kahane said.  He doesn't want love, he wants respect.  Better an israel thati s hated by the whole world, than an auschwitz that is loved by it.


Zachor, I am willing to bet that in every case of rabbi kahane talking about those that want 2 states having contempt for the arabs, he explained what he meant!!!!!!  Just quote him and i'll show you!

You said many don't understand it. Who doesn't?

From your analysis, it looks like you didn't!

[Ulli]

I have thought since a time about this issue too.

Imo the leftists are not really aware of their contempt for the Arab Muslims.

[q_q_]

I have thought since a time about this issue too.

Imo the leftists are not really aware of their contempt for the Arab Muslims.

I don't think rabbi kahane ever said that leftists have contempt for arabs.. He may have said liberals do..

'cos there are leftists that believe that it is arab land and the whole thing is palestine, and jews shouldn't be there.. they may also feel guilty as a westener for allowing jews to be there, and those that are jews feel guilty

it's a complicated thing...

They also have the same feeling towards religious people.. though it's politically correct for them to say so.  They aren't embarrassed or ashamed about it..

I'm sure that without political correctness they would say that the arabs are land people.. but the jews are there, and they are going to have to accept it.. so work on them, and hopefully they will change their mind.
They are trying to get the arabs to change..  They have contempt for both jews and arabs.. they say "come on arabs, stop firing your rockets".. "come on israel, that was too much, ok?"  It's like mediating between kids for them.

I think the word contempt is too complicated... In a sense most sane people hold the arabs in contempt..   (though i guess the contempt they have is fundamental.. in not accepting arabs as arabs)

rabbi kahane just said it to turn things around onto the leftists or liberals.. and he was smart enough to make the  case and respond well..

certainly there is a contempt there though for not accepting the arabs for being an arab, for having his values..  And in trying to change those values. Rabbi Kahnae would accept that they are.. and the question is how to respond.

the following is based on something ronen said.. it's not what you think(being nice, wanting peace.. that's not relevant to them), it's what they think, and how are you going to respond to that.  (doesn't mean think what they think.. nor does it mean change what they think, it just means how will you respond to what they think/do.. so as not to get trodden on)..


I think maybe the liberals do know that they hold the arab and other cultures and religions in contempt..  When they try to change them.
When they worship them that's something else. But pecking away trying to change them does show contempt, and is patronizing or humouring them.
Like, when the arabs say "I WANT TO DESTROY ISRAEL".. the west ignore it, and say stop firing rockets. They just don't take them seriously.. They say "yeah yeah ok, that's fine, but first, stop firing rockets"..  Like somebody that says "i'm going to go to university and then i'm going ot become a hippy". Eventually the parent says "ok", because by pretending to accepting that, he thinks maybe the kid will change. 
These liberals are more sophisticated and manipulative than you give them credit for.
For them, believing that the arabs want peace, can mean BELIEVE in it, HOPE for it!!! Because they see no other option!  Just like (dennett) they say they believe in G-d and only believe in believing in G-d.   Same thing

[Ulli]

I think the most important point in solving a conflict is to understand the nature of your opponent.

This includes to know what he wants.

Rabbi Kahane has understood the nature of the Arab Muslim perfectly.

I agree with you, that the liberals (In my country they are called leftists/socialists) refuse to accept the fact, if people's nature is not like they think it should be.

They have a certain ideology in their had and all what contradicts it, even the most obvious, is ignored.

[zachor_ve_kavod]

q_q_, I understand perfectly well what Rabbi Kahane meant.  Your hangup about words is a little troubling to me though.  Contempt is not a difficult concept to understand.  Neither is the word Leftist.  It is true that Rabbi Kahane did not use the word Leftist, instead calling them liberals, but that's because the term Leftist wasn't in use.  We've realized that the classic definition of the word liberal is about as far removed from describing the modern liberal as possible, so I and many others prefer the term Leftist.  But it refers to the same thing.  Are you some kind of Foucault, Derrida wannabe?  Please don't waste my time with that sort of nonsense.  The meaning of my thread is clear and cogent.  If you wish to dispute it, you will have to abandon any pretense at reason, and I don't think that's your style.