opinions-political-usVsThem

sometime i find political movements whose stances on issues i support, but which are based on a core of 'Us vs. Them'. It seems to me like the best thing to do is not to support these movements. However, i wonder if there are any successful political movements which were not based on a core of Us vs. Them? Could it be that humanity is doomed to the path of hatred, and that the only way to bring positive change is to traffic in hatred? I hope not.

What would be best would be mass political movements which don't identify an enemy. A hopeful middle group would be mass political movements which claim to love their enemies (but not sarcastically/ironically, as that is in a way worse than honest hatred).

For the time being I think I'll adopt the policy of not joining any mass political movement for which an enemy is one of its central issues, although I'll continue to consider the pessimistic alternative that the best (non-hate) is the enemy of the good (limited hate).

I note that game-theoretically, enemies exist, and i feel that it's permissible to recognize enemies in planning, both strategically and tactically. What i am opposed to is using the enemy as a rallying point, as an argument for supporting the group, as a litmus test for group support, or as one of the end-goals of the group. In more emotional terms, if the group's emotional energy is bound up with opposition to the enemy, then there's a problem.