In my opinion, aggressiveness is triggered by hostility, without which it is dormant: a mere potentiality incapable of harm. It may include an abnormal sensitivity or intellect that intensifies or alters someone’s perception of environment. The fact remains hostility, as perceived by someone who feels painfully antagonized and proportionally victimized, is always a factor. Therefore, aggression cannot be dissociated from victimization, not only that of victims but also that of aggressors. These aggressors are victims of their sick minds or of ill treatment they have endured. They deserve compassion, besides indignation.

They are liable to a punishment that ought to be effective and exemplary, not vengeful. Vengeance and violence are one and same thing. Both are resentful and harmful. Both are reprehensible. The harm inflicted does not remedy harm suffered; it simply compounds one harm with another, and invites yet another harm. It lengthens chain of savagery from x (a frightening number of savage links) to x+1, potentially +2, +3, +4, etc., instead of breaking it and helping to free humanity from it. There is no worse slavery than savagery. The best course is to make every effort to get over a wrong and forgive it, while bringing wrongdoer to justice.

In sum, justice should not serve to avenge people. It should serve to prevent crime and protect public, by intimidating or incarcerating those who are a menace to others except under threat or behind bars. It should never push severity of this mandate to point of cruelty, in which case it would be a perversion of justice, an ominous sign of barbarity. On contrary, it should be a jewel in crown of civilization and foreshadow coming of a better humanity, more consistent with its true nature and purpose – in a word, more humane.

The difference between severity and cruelty is radical yet subtle; it must be emphasized. Cruel law enforcers delight in punishments they inflict and readily overstep mark. They are vicious and blameworthy, like criminals they punish. Law enforcers who are severe, but not cruel, administer punishments reluctantly or regard them as a necessary evil they would gladly forgo if they could. They deplore criminal element in society and strive to neutralize it through intimidation, or incarceration as a last resort, and preferably through reformation, a fundamental change of criminal mind for better. Their ideal, as unattainable as it is elevated, is supremacy of justice without institution of justice: no threats, no prisons, only people who deeply understand and freely exercise principle of justice.

Impossible as this supremacy is, it is usefully pursued. The institution of justice can become less and less necessary for manifestation of justice, which can become more and more customary. This progress depends on wisdom and willpower of its proponents who make it their duty to educate, assist, and encourage potential followers. It also presupposes that these potential followers take an active part in this endeavor. They cannot be actual followers unless they welcome this education, assistance, and encouragement, and display intelligence and determination of their own.

How much can we collectively be civilized – that is, mutually respectful and helpful, in knowledge that this high goal can unite our wills toward a common good of colossal proportions? In other words, what is ceiling of our possible civilization, which implies responsibility and solidarity, an elevation of life to love? Nobody knows limit, so none should be set but sky!

Generally, in a loving environment, human beings show humanity as naturally as fruit trees give fruit in summer. Love is to these beings as sunshine is to these trees. It helps them grow into what they are meant to grow into (unless their nature is flawed from start, which is an exception to rule): beautiful and bountiful creations, as opposed to ugly and puny aberrations. Yet, beware of love; it can be possessive and manipulative, selfish and devilish! Yes, some angels have horns, unnoticeable at first sight under their pretty hair; their paradise is hell.

True love is in image of God (by God I simply mean fundamental cause of everything. It brings us into existence and, within limits of its might, supports us in our quest for fulfillment). It is a desire to nurture, not to capture. Under its divine rule, one always has other’s best interests at heart. No one, however, should be supportive to point of being an accomplice in someone’s oppressive or destructive acts of egocentricity, folly, or injustice. These evils should not be loved and served; they should be hated and combated.

Hate is legitimate toward them, whereas people who embody them are worthy of love because they exceed them by their ability to do good. They are indeed greater than sum of their evil ways; they include power to improve them. Therefore hate is directed at these ways, and love at this power: It promotes people’s ability to do good. What if a person who is oppressively or destructively egocentric, foolish, or unjust never responds to this love? In that case it is lost and life of this person shamefully amounts to a waste of soul.

By a stroke of luck, my parents were bright and warm people who helped me blossom into a joyful and respectful individual. Their love was true and so was love of many others who took part in my life. I was also lucky enough to be a good seed. I was a strong and healthy boy, extremely lively and moderately clever, cheery and gentle-natured, though impatient and self-assertive. In my eyes, until my family moved to poor and tough neighborhood, civility was norm among members of society; it made sense. Barbarity, on other hand, was a stupefying rarity. The abused weakling gave me an understanding of barbarity – which was common in this neighborhood – and replaced my stupefaction with commiseration.

Laurent Grenier’s writing career spans over twenty years. During this time he has broadened and deepened his worldview, by dint of much reflection and study, and in the end has crafted A REASON FOR LIVING, his best work to date.