Is ethnic hatred always wrong and bad?

Yes, it is.
It is, because you are automatically including every innocent person of that ethnicity in your hatred.
In case of discriminating against that ethnicity, you also victimise and abuse innocent people.
And, based on your discrimination, do you think it would be good for members of that ethnicity, to hate everyone of yours?

I agree with you that it is wrong and bad because it automatically includes every innocent person, but at the same time, it is right and good because it greatly diminishes the personal abuse that has plagued the victim.

The question I have for you, then, is why does the wrong and bad cancel out the right and good of the victim? .

What is your reasoning for putting greater importance to the lives of the innocent people lumped in the overall ethnic hatred instead of the life of the innocent abused victim?

Discrimination is less severe than personal abuse. Discrimination, in this case, is not even abuse because its only purpose is to compliment avoidance. Think of it like discriminating against fruit by exclusively choosing to eat red apples, you avoid eating green apples. Now just apply this to work, school, neighborhoods and so on. That is not abuse.

To answer your other question, good is based on personal benefit. If hating back in retaliation benefits the members of that ethnicity, then more power to them. What is the alternative? Should they tolerate the abuse?

Fucking hell yes.. I hate every white middle-aged male, Reason: Congress

And maybe if you used the word “avoid” instead of hatred this might end up better.

I don’t think so. Some ethnic hatred is deserved.

Suppose that you are on the receiving end of ethnic hatred – you’re a Jew and many of your people have been killed by, say, Christians acting in the name of God. Or perhaps Moslems acting in the name of Allah. You haven’t done anything but live your life, and someone wants to wipe you out. (Examples above: Crusades in Europe).

If I were in that situation, I would be damned pissed off at the Christian ethnic community that is trying to kill me, and I would do anything to get back at them – and kill every one of the group trying to kill me.

It’s fine and dandy to say “ethnic hatred is always wrong” But few things are that cut and dried, and categorically saying that is simply ignoring the feelings of the people feeling the hatred. [THat view is typical idealistic claptrap that doesn’t take into account the real world.]

or if you are a Palestinian having your house bombed by Israelis. Oh wait, that does not count, eh?

@ragingloli – that’s a reasonable example too.

Yes, for the reasons @ragingloli said. Physical traits can not be altered, so one has no control over what they look like. Lastly, ethnicity is a totally man-made concept.

Hatred is pretty much always the wrong answer.
Hating burns up energy you could use for other purposes. You can avoid certain people without hating them. If someone is attacking you, you can defend yourself without hate.

It’s difficult and it does not come naturally but must be learned and maintained with discipline. It takes a lot of energy to move beyond hate, but that energy is well-invested in that it prevents you from losing even more energy to hatred further on. You can mount a much more effective defense when your mind is not clouded by hate.

Hating a defined group of individuals for the past actions of individuals perceived as members of the group is wrong for several reasons:
The definition of the group membership may be subjective. The individuals one perceives as members of the group may not know about the group, and as such their actions can’t be ascribed to their group status.
You may perceive a group as homogeneous when in fact it contains many different subgroups which don’t exhibit uniform behavior.
Past events are not adequate to predict future events. If all negative events in a person’s life were precipitated by members of a particular group (even if the group is a “real” one, and even if all members of the group act uniformly) that doesn’t prevent someone who is not a member of the group from causing further negative life events, nor does it assure that members of the group will continue to cause such events.

tl:dr; I hate everyone equally

@sensin

No.

Ethnic hatred is based on prejudice which means prejudging without proof. However, in this case, the victim’s prejudice for the entire ethnic group is based on a personal statistical likelihood of abuse (law of probability).This means the victims ethnic hatred is based on logic which means ethnic hatred is right. The fact that the incidences of abuse were greatly reduced when the victim’s ethnic hatred began proves that the statistical likelihood of abuse on a personal level was high. This means ethnic hatred is good. So unless the victim is some sort of sadomasochist, he or she would be an absolute idiot to not be prejudice against the entire ethnic group because the only alternative would be to continue suffering from abuse.

The only form of hatred I consider bad is one that leads to physical abuse. Other than that, all other forms of prejudice are acceptable. So the victim is right and good in being prejudice against the entire ethnic group providing the fact he or she doesn’t escalate it to a physical hatred.

The victim would be suffering from some serious self-esteem issues if he or she puts greater value into the innocent bystanders of his or her hate over the victims own well being, but then again there are people who would turn the cheek (jesus style).

I don’t consider it bad or wrong, but I’ve always felt that it is idiotic, why would someone hate another human being based on ethnicity? Then again, mankind is an odd species and amusing to watch with so much baseless arrogance flying around.

Hate is a poison. Those who hate will increasingly perceive life as loveless and hopeless. While the emotion justifiably arises when one is the object of hatred, an unfortunate consequence of their hatred is that they are likely to become identical to those who hate them (think “dig two graves”).

Of course when a group declares war, your group has the right to defend itself, even if an offence is the best defense. However, hatred of the attackers is misdirected. Those who inflame members of their group, seeking some political/economic advantage from the violence they encourage, are more deserving of such feelings.

Throughout history, religious and government leaders alike encourage their populace and military to hate those declared to be the enemy, and legitimize all actions against them, no matter how inhumane. Unless we learn how to resist aggression without hatred, technology will continue to enhance the capability for brutality until all civilization has been destroyed.

HAtred is poison, forgiveness is healing. I would urge counseling & making at least one friend of that ethnicity.