Hate or hatred- abhorrence, abomination, anathema, animosity, animus, antagonism, antipathy, aversion, detestation, disgust, enmity, execration, horror, hostility, ill will, loathing, malevolence, malignity, mislike, objection, odium, pain, rancor, rankling, repugnance, repulsion, resentment, revulsion, scorn, spite.
I have told my children, both my own and those who I have taught over the years that ‘hate’ isn’t a word that should be used too freely. It’s often a bit of a throwaway word that doesn’t really express the true feelings at the time, or, in fact it overstates them. You may well dislike something even dislike it intensely but, in my view that is a decent step from ‘hate’.
This being said I am seriously questioning my feelings towards some elements in New Zealand society, and even some people involved in or with those elements. For example my feelings towards this woman are bordering on hatred but as I don’t know the person then I don’t honestly think I can ‘hate’ her. I DO hate the things she has done, and I DO hate this sort of behaviour from anybody. But, OK, I’ll just carry on thinking she’s despicable, contemptible, disgraceful, obscene, or any combination of the synonyms above.
Now my feelings for THIS woman I also have to think about. Again I don’t think I truly HATE her but, by God I dislike her intensely. For 3 years she has been the Minister Of Social Welfare and has been installed in that position for the next 3 years of the National administration in New Zealand. For the time she’s been at the top of the Welfare Agencies pile she’s continually played a ‘blame game’ as she is doing here that absolves her agencies and puts 100% of fault at the doors of the perpetrators of some of the worst child abuse and cruelty that any civilised society has seen. I almost said ‘condoned’ because so little seems to have been done about it! Baby killers are still walking free, and families of child abusers are still nurturing their own. This is a disgrace that this woman has paid lip-service to for years but has seemed to be ambivalent to if her stated policies with regard to the strata of society who are (in the majority of cases) responsible for violence against children pan out.
The families of these beaten children are the poor, the hungry, the unemployed, the disadvantaged, the disenchanted, the disenfranchised, the down-trodden. These people are taking the lines of least resistance and falling into habits that are dysfunctional and destructive and they see no way out.
How much truth there might be in the abusive mother’s words, they reflect the thoughts that exist in her head, they reflect how her mind rationalises things, and, in part they reflect some aspirational aspects of her life. That she doesn’t have the ability to cope, or manage her actions may or may not be something SHE has to deal with, but in our social welfare state should she have to deal with it on her own? Ms Bennett tells us that 25 different agencies were involved in this case and if this is so over a number of years then Ms Bennett needs to take one of the PM’s ‘steps back’ and do some serious analysis of the work the agencies do. If they were doing all the things they are empowered to do, and if they were failing to bring about change in the life or the girl or the behaviours of the mother then the question must be asked- “Why was the girl still in the care of the mother and her equally suspect father?”
Parents are always told they have a duty of care to their children, and the vast majority of them know and understand this. Our Governments are always told they have a duty of care to the people of their nation, but this government at least seems not to be concerned with this.