“We go, curtailment or and, with as quick wings as meditating or the loving thought, I will run to the revenge.”
According to the Webster spiteful and vindictive hatred is a “strong aversion or associated hatred to bad intention.” It is the bad intention which differentiates desire from revenge and lasting hatred characterizes that it, of the rage, the anger or the aggressive impulse: “The anger is an answer to the frustration and can be extinguished if the frustration is surpassed or is eliminated. The rage can also be triggered by the frustration but it implies a feeling of narcissist wound, an offense to the pride, a shame and humiliation to the sense of self. The rage state, with its muscular contraction and increase in the cardiac beat and consanguineous pressure, eliminates the sensation of defenselessness associated with the damaged feeling of self and it replaces by a provisional feeling of omnipotence and invulnerability.”
Hatred is even different from spiteful and vindictive hatred. Whereas hatred is more flexible and the person who hates can not have desires nothing else to have to do with the hated person, spiteful and vindictive hatred implies all a complex mental staging of offense and retaliative desire of revenge, that takes conceivable to the subject to lucubrate all the evils for the object of its hatred throughout the time becoming attached themselves to the past and sketching things for the future, of way similar to since the romantic lover with respect to the loved woman or man does. While the loved person is idealize, the hated person is had like omnipotent evil.
Children and adults can have these feelings of vindictive resentment, but not until the boy is able conceptual “relations subject-object in duality victimize-victim and the relation among them… Each component of the story - he damages to me and my retaliative damage requires it to I of the present ability at the age of 3 years to organize the experience in the form of events that have an argument, with a beginning, means and a end.”
In agreement with Pao, the spiteful hatred that connects the past with the future establishes a continuity frame which stops the one that it hates is a way to feel “something” instead of not to feel anything, to feel amorphous, empty, without intention and crushed by the anxiety, devoid of identity. This same author observes that the one that hates, put in a dilemma of fear and fears, does not want to offend in order its hatred, but cannot avoid to feel offended and to wish the recovery and urges the other to feel just like he feels. The one that hates does not support the indifference.
Other authors suggest young them that were victims of abuses, or scorns, undergo a sharp shame that reduces the self-esteem of way like spiteful hatred and vindictive it serves like via eluding the impotence that entails that feeling of shame.
Abounding in the analogy between the romantic love and spiteful and vindictive hatred we will say that scene eliminates the solitude feeling, is an attachment form that eradicates the malaise. On the other hand the person who hates “undergoes the force of her rage and the pleasure of his [supposed] final triumph” with so of not feeling like victim. “When the sense of self has been developed like a center of beginning, organization and integration of the aversive and other motivations within the experience of the spiteful and vindictive hatred, any thing that increases spiteful and vindictive hatred is undergone like fortifying self, and any thing that threatens spiteful and vindictive hatred is undergone as a threat to self.
“To fit accounts” it conforms the conscientious and inconvenient dynamics of hostile acts and fantasies and is common to vindictive and spiteful hatred, envy, the masochism, the auto saboteurs activities, and the idealist or suicidal act. The peculiar thing is that these people usually do not go to therapies to exactly deal with these feelings negativism because they are egocentrically affective experiences. The subject experiments to please, is in agreement with its feeling of hatred. The one that goes, surely forced it, resume impermeability and omnipotence “catches in a preoccupation by the fault that offends, that person by the damage attributed to the treason or the injustice and demonstrating an unshakeable attempt to strive untiringly reason why the vindictive person feels like justice.” That vindictive mental state turns to the subject into an intolerant and moralistic being “until the point of the social and moral inconvenience.”
The vindictive subject seems to have stopped in the time, at the time of to have received the offense, and the advantages that it obtains from its state, according to Karen Horney, this obsession distracts that it of feelings that produce malaise and shame to him, are defenses, expensive for the subject since it annuls “the practical, legal and ethical considerations about making damage, not only to the offending or treasonous assumption, but to all the community and its criteria, children and, in fact, the own vindictive person as it happens in the case of the suicidal terrorists.” It is necessary to include/understand that the person who accumulates these feelings of retaliative hatred undergoes a painful process of disconnection and escalation between the auto respect that is dictated by the ideal of I and the defenselessness, the fault to him and the shame that affect to him. “It is in this sense that the shame conflict triggers or incites the rage and the consequent vindictive mental state that makes intelligible and confers status of coherent narrative to that rage and the subsequent vindictive acts.”