• 1 BREGMAN, Rutger, De meeste mensen deugen. Een nieuwe geschiedenis van de mens, Amsterdam, De Corres (...)

1Human beings are inclined to cooperate, rather than compete, with each other, and it is the History of Mankind that demonstrates it; in a nutshell, this is the message that can be extracted from the ground-breaking volume by Rutger Bregman De meeste mensen deugen. Een nieuwe geschiedenis van de mens, published in 20191. Bregman’s work consists of a reconstruction of the last 200.000 years of the history of mankind, which is based on a series of recent anthropological, biological, archaeological, psychological and sociological discoveries and studies. Essentially, the author believes that this accumulated knowledge contributes to validate the idea that men and women are naturally inclined to love each other. According to this perspective, periods of crisis – social, economic, political – prompt the emergence not only of a tendency to oppress, but rather a tendency toward solidarity and mutual support between human beings.

• 2 For a completely different perspective see: GAT, Azar, War and Human civilization, Oxford, Oxford U (...)
• 3 Among the most effective recent operational definitions stands the one provided by the European Com (...)
• 4 On these topics see: Klein, Ezra, Why we’re polarized, New York, Simon and Schuster, 2020.
• 5 Recent historical and historical-linguistic studies published in Italy include: Faloppa, Federico, (...)

3Regardless of any general and definitive assessment on the issue, which we do not intend to advance here2, in recent years the media has provided a worrying picture of political and social relations, which are characterized by an increase in so-called «hate speech»3 and a constant re-occurrence of «hate crimes», also as a consequence of the multiplication of virtual spaces for discussion, now potentially accessible to anyone. The increased visibility of hate phenomena is often considered as strictly related to the extreme polarization of the political debate4; indeed, more and more space seems to be given to hate speech directed against the scapegoat of the moment. Therefore, it is no coincidence that the scientific debate on «hate speech» has also been intensifying rapidly. This was followed by a redefinition, still in progress, of several aspects of international law and national legal systems, which resulted in an improvement of the systems of sanctions aimed at discouraging and punishing this type of practice5.

• 6 FOTIA, Laura, Le politiche dell’odio e il Novecento americano, in ID. (ed.), Le politiche dell’odio (...)

4Scholars from different disciplines have analysed the concept of hate. For instance, social scientists, neuroscientists and psychologists have described hate as a form of passion, a feeling, an emotion, but, on the whole, the very concept of hate remains ambiguous and hardly ascribable to rigid interpretations. Indeed, even within each of the various disciplines that have attempted to addressed this topic, it is difficult to find an unambiguous definition of the nature of «hate» widely shared and accepted. As a result, the term «hate» continues to be often used to indicate profoundly different phenomena and realities6.

• 7 Agnew, Vanessa, «History’s Affective Turn. Historical Reenactment and Its work in the Present», in (...)
• 8 See: Stearns, Peter N., Stearns, Carol Z., «Emotionology. Clarifying the History of Emotions and Em (...)
• 9 One of the goals of Plamper’s work is proposing an innovative approach to the study of the history (...)

6In a constant dialogue with neuroscience, the approach proposed by the so-called «history of emotions»7 seems to open interesting scenarios regarding the role of hate in human evolution. Such an approach integrates neuroscientific evidence on the neural mechanisms of the brain underlying memory, empathy and fear processes, utilising wide-ranging analyses that propose new interpretations of important historiographic problems, such as the development of discriminatory propaganda strategies, segregating policies, collective racist behaviours, genocides and mass violence, the role of fear in the genesis of collective behaviours, or the relationship between oral history and memory. Even in the context of this recent field of study, however, the interpretative strands have clearly differentiated over time, bringing out sometimes irreconcilable positions, which in turn refer to the more general dichotomy between universalism and social constructivism8 and, again, to the age-old debate on the relative importance of «nature» and «culture»9.

• 10 FOTIA, Laura, Le politiche dell’odio e il Novecento americano, cit., pp. 11-13.

8Instead, it is necessary to leave room for the idea that both the feelings of hate and hate-motivated behaviours result from concrete and partially identifiable and interpretable dynamics. This does not mean one has to deny the important role of emotional and affective components in the emergence of hatred; if anything, it means to favour its social and political dimensions while leaving the study of its emotional dimension to the fields of psychosocial and neuroscientific research, although without forgetting that strong two-way links connect the different dimensions of the phenomenon10.

• 11 On the debate between the social-constructivist and the universalist approach see: PLAMPER, Jan, St (...)

9Thus, while considering hate phenomena as a synthesis of emotional, cognitive and cultural factors, and while weighing up those approaches that see emotions as a by-product of either biological or socio-cultural processes and those that propose intermediate interpretations11, here we have chosen to highlight the cultural, social and political dimensions of hate.

• 12 On the use of the concept of delegitimization in historiography see: CAMMARANO, Fulvio, «Delegitimi (...)
• 13 Some of these behaviors are considered typical “hate behaviors” by social psycholgists OPOTOW, Susa (...)

10From this perspective, the phenomena mentioned so far can be recognised throughout the history of mankind. We are here referring to verbal or non-verbal behaviours that turned into delegitimizations of interlocutors12, criticisms of the object of hate or toward which hate has been conveyed, acts aimed at conveying fanaticism without physically damaging people – humiliations, threats, acts of vandalism, use of symbols for intimidation – up to physical aggression or mass violence that resulted in the ultimate and definitive act of physical elimination of the «enemy»13.

• 14 FOTIA, Laura, Le politiche dell’odio e il Novecento americano, cit., pp. 13-17.

12The processes mentioned so far are relevant on a scientific level as they do not refer to isolated or random episodes but rather to criminal behaviours that have had a significant social impact and have often been rationally planned. Such episodes can be qualified as «hate politics» when present alongside forms of planning by political or social organizations, and especially when directly linked to the intervention of state apparatuses bodies, or at least facilitated by such bodies. The articulation of these «politics» cannot be considered exclusively the purview of governments, but also of political parties, movements, and even prominent intellectuals. Nonetheless, such politics have reached the most extreme and ruthless forms when state institutions were involved in their implementation, even indirectly, instigating and legitimizing the authors and guaranteeing substantial impunity14.

• 15 LACAN, Jaques, Il Seminario, Libro I. Gli scritti tecnici di Freud (1953-1954), Torino, Einaudi, 19 (...)
• 16 MANZETTI, Rosa Elena, Odi(i), in TKACH, Maria Laura (a cura di), Incarnazioni dell’odio. Razzismi, (...)

13Among the basic assumptions shared by most of the theses that emerged in the various disciplinary fields is the idea that hate phenomena presupposes the existence of an Other-from-us towards which hatred is directed, which generally assume the characteristics of an “enemy”. In this regard, the psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan underlined how, unlike the other «passions of being» (love and ignorance), hatred, in its «solid» or «fundamental» version, aims not at the other’s have, but at the others’ very being15. Above all, it would be this «solid» hatred that circulates today, «producing segregations and, above all, denying the others the chance to speak»16.

• 17 GALIMBERTI, Umberto, Il Corpo, cit. in DE PICCOLI, Norma, Corpo (e sesso biologico) come marchio so (...)

14The «construction of the enemy» is often linked to social categorisation processes, which contributes to strengthening the sense of belonging to a specific group by emphasising the negative aspects of other groups. These are cognitive processes that allow individuals to orient themselves in the complexity of the world, thus responding to a need for simplification while at the same time feeding stereotypical representations and expectations and often leading to forms of stigmatisation, denigration and rejection of the other17.

• 18 s.v. «Politica», in BOBBIO, Noberto, MATTEUCCI, Nicola, PASQUINO, Gianfranco,, Dizionario di politi (...)
• 19 Cfr. VELTRI, Francesca, Se non è vero, è verosimile. La costruzione del nemico fra realtà e rappres (...)
• 20 ECO, Umberto, Costruire il nemico e altri scritti occasionali, Milano, Bompiani, 2012

15According to well-known scholars, mass politics is based on this friend/enemy distinction, which consists of «aggregating and defending friends and disaggregating and fighting enemies»18. Thus, a specific audience would be convinced to identify a specific group as a threat19. In the collection of essays entitled Costruire il nemico Umberto Eco proposed a «phenomenology» of hatred, highlighting how, in different periods and places, it has represented a cement to build the unity of a group or a nation, and how it had been instrumental in the construction of specific categories of «enemies» through the centuries20. During history, creating the image of the “enemy” has often taken place among people of the same nationality. Still, strategies aimed at the construction of external enemies were equally widespread.

• 21 Among the many studies on fear see: LEFEBVRE, Georges, La grande peur de 1789, Paris, Alcan, 1932; (...)

16Unsurprisingly, rhetoric on hate has proved to be more fruitful during times of social and economic crisis, when the feelings of collective insecurity were stronger; this, in turn, has led to an increase in hate phenomena. Research in various fields has demonstrated that hate can be a consequence of various forms of “fear” that can also occur spontaneously and independently of manipulative strategies attributable to governments, organized groups or individual leaders. However, historical research has also shown how the rooting and consolidation of collective feelings of hatred can be greatly facilitated by more or less systematic operations of propaganda and indoctrination. Such operations have normally been aimed at exploiting feelings of fear by acting on the entire population’s perceptions and imagination or specific groups21.

• 22 MORENO CANTANO, Antonio César, «Parole in Storia: Paura» (transl. Matteo Tomasoni), in Diacronie, U (...)

17The – mostly undeclared – aim was to create the conditions for accepting the solutions proposed by the promoters of hate speech, which were functional to protecting their interests, creating legal frameworks justifying discriminatory or repressive practices22. Mass communication tools’ control, exploitation of culture and educational policies, refined mechanisms of censorship along with forms of indoctrination conveying hate rhetoric, have therefore played a crucial role in the delicate and complex transformation of the «fear of the other» into «Hatred of the other»; thus, the transformation of the «other» in «enemy».

• 23 FOTIA, Laura, Le politiche dell’odio e il Novecento americano, cit., pp. 17-25; see also: FALOPPA, (...)

18Practices aimed at creating terror and fear in the population for political purposes, repressive policies based on discriminatory assumptions, propaganda strategies aimed at identifying enemy, have spanned centuries and continents, but reached unprecedented levels during the Twentieth century particularly in the context of totalitarian regimes23.

• 24 Ibidem, pp. 22-23. For a definition of crimes against humanity see Art. 7, Statuto della Corte Pena (...)

19The atrocities committed during the Second World War demonstrate how rhetoric based on hatred and policies aimed at the intentional construction of internal or external enemies, particularly in a cultural and economic context that allows for their diffusion and consolidation, contribute significantly to the occurrence of collective tragedies or, by borrowing legal concepts, crimes against humanity24.

• 25 FOTIA, Laura, Le politiche dell’odio e il Novecento americano, cit., pp. 22-23; Dichiarazione unive (...)

21The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 could then be interpreted as a rejection of any form of manifestation of hatred or, at least in terms of principles, as a rejection of hate policies, even though both the Declaration and other mechanisms of international promotion and protection of human rights have not been able to prevent the periodic recurrence, in different forms and intensities, of practices and behaviours similar to those mentioned up to now. Policies aimed at instilling hatred towards an enemy, now external, now internal, have continued to travel across continents, facilitated by the dynamics triggered by the Cold War’s logic, and continued to be present in ever-renewed forms up to these days25.

• 26 AIME, Marco, Nuovi volti del razzismo, in TKACH, Maria Laura (a cura di), Incarnazioni dell’odio. R (...)

22Similarly, although scientific research has deconstructed the idea of race, we cannot claim that today we are in a completely post-racist era. In addition to traditional forms of racism that, despite being less present, occasionally give rise to insidious phenomena we are witnessing the periodic revival of new forms of «cultural» racism, particularly present in the language of political movements with «sovereign» tendencies that cannot renounce xenophobia. Thus, overcoming the biological accounts of race has given way to a «cultural racism without races». This type of racism does not reference the natural inferiority of the other; however, it finds other ways to dehumanise the other. For instance, the other is stripped of its human dignity and reduced to an object. Also, the Other is criticised to hinder or prevent the production of feelings of identification, solidarity, or empathy. According to this «rhetoric of hatred», the «irreducible diversity» of the «enemy» would result in the impossibility of a coexistence that would not lead to the destruction or disappearance of other groups and, therefore, the impossibility of any form of integration26.

• 27 SARTRE, Jean-Paul, L’essere e il nulla, Milano, Il Saggiatore, 1968 [ed. or.: L’Être et le Néant: e (...)
• 28 DE PICCOLI, Norma, Corpo (e sesso biologico) come marchio sociale, cit., pp. 29-30.

23In cases of racism and those of gender-based violence, the processes of de-humanisation affect the body of the Other, which, as Jean-Paul Sartre already noted in 1943, constitutes the psychic object par excellence27. Assaulting the body through the creation of demonising narratives and representations or real violations of physical integrity is equivalent to assaulting the individual's personality, whose identity can be denied and annihilated28.

• 29 FOTIA, Laura, Le politiche dell’odio e il Novecento americano, cit., pp. 33-35; ZANATTA, Loris, «La (...)

32On the contrary, it could be argued that the dramatic and tragic events of the twentieth century can also be read as a story of pivotal reactions to hate speech and crimes, which constituted efforts to facilitate forms of knowledge and understanding of the Other, thus overcoming the extremes of confrontation and laying the foundations for promoting more articulated and less simplistic evaluations. Such efforts had the intent to accept the complexity of reality, which is, presumably, a necessary condition for a civil confrontation that enables the peaceful coexistence between the individuals and the States, and at the same time, enable the construction of policies of solidarity and cooperation. Therefore, a slow and often silent unfolding of practices aimed at opposing and containing the impact of hate phenomena as much as possible. In particular, such practices have been strongly asserted when crimes and human rights’ violations have reached intolerable proportions for large sections of the national public opinion and the international community, to the point of encouraging the maturation of political cultures attentive in the protection of democracy, pluralism, cooperation29.

• 30 For an analysis of the recent use of the concept of “hate virus” see: FALOPPA, Federico, #odio. Man (...)

34Overall, the historical research proposed here aims to strengthen the knowledge necessary to fuel interdisciplinary reflection. A reflection that we believe is more necessary than ever to become fully aware of the potentially destructive force inherent in hate speech and policies and in constructing the enemy. Ultimately, this would serve to effectively oppose the spreading of the «hate virus»30, which has produced – and still does – sufferings of incalculable dimensions in quality and quantity to a huge number of victims.