The Etiology of Hate: Anti-Semitism and Anti-Tamil Brahmanism

When you’re faced with public expressions of malevolence that defy conventional explanations such as difference of opinion or bias, you know it’s time to take it a step further.

A search into the psychology of the hater will provide the answers. Only by confronting the etiology of hatred and the psychological make-up of the enemy can you begin to craft an appropriate response.

While my main concern is anti-Brahmin or more specifically anti-Tamil-Brahmin (ATB) in the state of Tamil Nadu in India, this post is about sharing a well-known analytical framework.

What’s in the back of the mind? In the next article, I will describe how these dimensions manifest in the Dravidian ATB individual. This article aims to present particularly in-depth work that already exists in the field.

Jean-Paul Sartre – The anti-Semite and the Jew

Jean-Paul Sartre is one of the leading figures in the philosophical world known for his contributions to existentialism. A fierce thinker like the world has never seen, he even refused to accept the Nobel Prize for fear of unconsciously losing his freedom of thought.

In 1944, shortly after Paris was liberated from German occupation, some of the French Jews began to flock to Paris and the surrounding area.

Following this jubilation, he was dismayed that hardly anyone in the media talked about the Jews, who had somehow made it through the nightmare. Was it for fear of angering the anti-Semite?

This question prompted him to write a deeply profound essay “Reflections on the Jewish Questionlater translated into English as “Antisemite and Jew – An etiology of hatred”.

I have read it several times and am amazed at how well it fits in as a general psychological analysis framework, even outside of the specific European war context. I want to share this with my readers here.

This essay is roughly divided into four parts:

1) A psychopathological analysis of the anti-Semite

2) The Liberal Democrat Response

3) the authentic and inauthentic Jew and

4) a discussion of religious locality and Zionism. The first part, The Psychology of the Anti-Semite, is a spectacular work that still dominates decades later. That’s what I’m going to focus on.

A PDF of this essay is available, Google for “Anti-Semite and Jew”

The only way to do justice to the essay is to publish the whole thing. But here are some relevant excerpts. Again, I encourage people to read the essay. You will thank me later.

Is it a prejudice? An idea? An opinion?

Others [Fakenheim] pointed out that antisemitism is more than just prejudice, because unlike true prejudice, antisemitism does not seem to disappear when knowledge enters the scene.

A “pre-judgment” is a “pre-judgment” which is like a default position based on incomplete knowledge. An act of bias can be that you assume someone is incompetent, then they perform well, then that bias goes away. Does this ring a bell?

There are no facts or corrections you can make to the various “anti-pretexts” to help you. Pretexts of hate are themselves tenuous and could just be a deliberate misinterpretation of events. If that’s not prejudice, what is?

This is where Sartre’s genius comes in — he says it’s not a prejudice, it’s not even an opinion like the ones protected by freedom of expression. Strong words about foreign policy, economics, abortion, social justice, religion, are opinions. Sartre :

Comments are closed.