The moment I realize someone is my enemy ….. I simply say , “Meh” and get away from them. I don’t speak to them and I take myself away from their presence. Life is too short for the unhappiness of dealing with them. I don’t want to understand them. They hate me and that is all I need to understand. I will take what they hate and be that person they no longer have in their life. I take their hate at face value and move on. I am not going to waste my time trying to change their minds.
I have defeated many enemies over the 258000+ years that I have been on this planet, understanding them is what gave me the advantage over them, but I have never loved them. I will say however, I respected some of them, and killed them anyway.
I think the meat of this is that of the “love/hate” relationship. Both involve us really, really getting close to the person (“Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer”).
The “understand them” process is at work in both; and when it’s sufficient to utterly (and rather effortlessly) destroy someone . . . it’s also sufficient to really love them. (With “respect” being a feasible manifestation of this).
Personally, I don’t count any as “enemies” against me. They can if they wish, but I don’t. Perhaps part of that is my confidence that given proper stimulus, I could rather speedily defeat them . . . or love them.
I think there are two kinds of enemies. Those that hate you for no reason other than to want what’s yours and those who are responding to acts where they have been attacked.
The problem lies in the rationalisations that both kinds use to feed the hatred because that is easier to keep fuelled, given our species characteristic desire to wallow in blaming others for our own ills.
Understanding why we are perceived as an enemy might be a more effective, constructive step, towards accelerating a loving relationship. However, justice seems to be about evening the score and what it usually does is feed the quid pro quo downward cycle.
A quote comes to mind that might be just as appropriate as yours. “I have seen the enemy and it is us”
@spitfire3dc
That quote certainly ties into this whole “love/hate enemy” thing.
Often times what we might “hate” or see as “enemy” in another, is just an externalization of our own inner battle with ourselves.
Which can be individual or collective. Many people hold a latent frustration, disgust or even hate of what we as a collective species are (or even what they are?); sometimes without conscious awareness of it. It’s too uncomfortable to consciously digest this, so it manifests in all kinds of acting-out behaviour for the sake of ego-protection.
Why “we are perceived as an enemy” can go a long way towards peace. But there is perhaps far more traction in recognizing why we are perceiving others as enemy.
Because this is something within our ability to influence the strongest.
@Jear77
It would certainly be an interesting exercise-of-fantasy. In a good sense — because it gets us thinking about things. I can remember a time when popular “entertainment” (like prime-time TV shows), would invite exploration on these things. (Right now it seems like we are more “entertained” by criminality and dysfunctionality and overall “rat-bastard-ness”)
Personally, I would have a hard time calling any war “unnecessary” — just because all of them helped shape who we currently are. Some were over silly things like land or riches or pride. And others, like WWII and Hitler’s Nazis, were perhaps essential for the species at the time.
But what if our species could progress/mature to a point where such extreme exercises were NOT “essential” . . . and we could find less destructive and traumatizing ways to realize positive growth as a species?
I think of images from various martial arts shows/movies where such a powerful “master” existed that they could defeat any foe that came at them without throwing a single punch or kick . . . and sometimes portrayed doing so with such ease that they could sip a cup of tea with one hand while doing so!
The hero is schooled in Ba Guai (iirc), which literally means “circle-walking”. They get in right close to an enemy, using circular motions that simply deflect all energy directed at them. The ultimate goal is to “inhabit” a space directly behind the antagonist with one hand placed on their upper back. The enemy essentially defeats themselves with all the energy they expend.
We understood the Japanese in WWII well enough to utterly defeat them. It was through this understanding that we knew we needed to drop the atomic bomb.
After we dropped the first bomb on them, President Truman issued the following to the American people-
If they do not now accept our terms, they may expect a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth. Behind this air attack will follow sea and land forces in such numbers and power as they have not yet seen and with the fighting skill of which they are already well aware.
– Truman
When the Japanese did not agree to our terms, our understanding of them was further validated when they still didn’t yield, so we dropped a second atomic bomb.
It was through our understanding of them that REQUIRED us to utterly defeat them. If we hadn’t have done this, more lives would have been lost, and it would have been potentially catastrophic for both sides.
And look at Japan now, a global leader. Through westernization, we helped them thrive and grow from the ashes.
@Weenis
An understanding of another that never goes beyond their role in a personal profit/loss equation may not be deep enough for this process to work.
Tell me: do you at least respect the Japanese culture?
You clearly must not have read my post. See as the topic states, “understand your enemy well enough to utterly defeat them”, which, we clearly did… so I don’t know what you’re talking about going “beyond their role in a personal profit/loss equation” has to do with anything.
I respect the Japanese culture so far as it has westernized.
12 responses to “In the moment you understand your enemy well enough to utterly defeat them, you also understand enough about them to love them”
The moment I realize someone is my enemy ….. I simply say , “Meh” and get away from them. I don’t speak to them and I take myself away from their presence. Life is too short for the unhappiness of dealing with them. I don’t want to understand them. They hate me and that is all I need to understand. I will take what they hate and be that person they no longer have in their life. I take their hate at face value and move on. I am not going to waste my time trying to change their minds.
I have defeated many enemies over the 258000+ years that I have been on this planet, understanding them is what gave me the advantage over them, but I have never loved them. I will say however, I respected some of them, and killed them anyway.
@immortal_pirate
I think the meat of this is that of the “love/hate” relationship. Both involve us really, really getting close to the person (“Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer”).
The “understand them” process is at work in both; and when it’s sufficient to utterly (and rather effortlessly) destroy someone . . . it’s also sufficient to really love them. (With “respect” being a feasible manifestation of this).
Personally, I don’t count any as “enemies” against me. They can if they wish, but I don’t. Perhaps part of that is my confidence that given proper stimulus, I could rather speedily defeat them . . . or love them.
Which way the process goes, is entirely up to me.
I think there are two kinds of enemies. Those that hate you for no reason other than to want what’s yours and those who are responding to acts where they have been attacked.
The problem lies in the rationalisations that both kinds use to feed the hatred because that is easier to keep fuelled, given our species characteristic desire to wallow in blaming others for our own ills.
Understanding why we are perceived as an enemy might be a more effective, constructive step, towards accelerating a loving relationship. However, justice seems to be about evening the score and what it usually does is feed the quid pro quo downward cycle.
A quote comes to mind that might be just as appropriate as yours. “I have seen the enemy and it is us”
@spitfire3dc
That quote certainly ties into this whole “love/hate enemy” thing.
Often times what we might “hate” or see as “enemy” in another, is just an externalization of our own inner battle with ourselves.
Which can be individual or collective. Many people hold a latent frustration, disgust or even hate of what we as a collective species are (or even what they are?); sometimes without conscious awareness of it. It’s too uncomfortable to consciously digest this, so it manifests in all kinds of acting-out behaviour for the sake of ego-protection.
Why “we are perceived as an enemy” can go a long way towards peace. But there is perhaps far more traction in recognizing why we are perceiving others as enemy.
Because this is something within our ability to influence the strongest.
I wonder what would have happened during various wars if that philosophy was true…
@Jear77
It would certainly be an interesting exercise-of-fantasy. In a good sense — because it gets us thinking about things. I can remember a time when popular “entertainment” (like prime-time TV shows), would invite exploration on these things. (Right now it seems like we are more “entertained” by criminality and dysfunctionality and overall “rat-bastard-ness”)
Personally, I would have a hard time calling any war “unnecessary” — just because all of them helped shape who we currently are. Some were over silly things like land or riches or pride. And others, like WWII and Hitler’s Nazis, were perhaps essential for the species at the time.
But what if our species could progress/mature to a point where such extreme exercises were NOT “essential” . . . and we could find less destructive and traumatizing ways to realize positive growth as a species?
I think of images from various martial arts shows/movies where such a powerful “master” existed that they could defeat any foe that came at them without throwing a single punch or kick . . . and sometimes portrayed doing so with such ease that they could sip a cup of tea with one hand while doing so!
Have you ever seen this show?
http://avatar.wikia.com/wiki/The_Headband
The hero is schooled in Ba Guai (iirc), which literally means “circle-walking”. They get in right close to an enemy, using circular motions that simply deflect all energy directed at them. The ultimate goal is to “inhabit” a space directly behind the antagonist with one hand placed on their upper back. The enemy essentially defeats themselves with all the energy they expend.
I think the quote is garbage.
We understood the Japanese in WWII well enough to utterly defeat them. It was through this understanding that we knew we needed to drop the atomic bomb.
After we dropped the first bomb on them, President Truman issued the following to the American people-
When the Japanese did not agree to our terms, our understanding of them was further validated when they still didn’t yield, so we dropped a second atomic bomb.
It was through our understanding of them that REQUIRED us to utterly defeat them. If we hadn’t have done this, more lives would have been lost, and it would have been potentially catastrophic for both sides.
And look at Japan now, a global leader. Through westernization, we helped them thrive and grow from the ashes.
@Weenis
An understanding of another that never goes beyond their role in a personal profit/loss equation may not be deep enough for this process to work.
Tell me: do you at least respect the Japanese culture?
@griz
You clearly must not have read my post. See as the topic states, “understand your enemy well enough to utterly defeat them”, which, we clearly did… so I don’t know what you’re talking about going “beyond their role in a personal profit/loss equation” has to do with anything.
I respect the Japanese culture so far as it has westernized.
@Weenis
So I hear you saying that you will only love (or respect) people as they strive to become more like you?
This Is the personal profit/loss perspective I was talking about
@griz
If you want to discuss this tangential topic, i’m game, but that’s not what this topic was about.