“Hatred can rot away at a person’s intelligence and conscience.”
Refusing hatred does not necessarily mean withdrawing an objection. Liu Xiaobo made that distinction in I Have No Enemies: My Final Statement, dated December 23, 2009. The Chinese writer and democracy advocate addressed the authorities prosecuting him while maintaining his opposition to their actions. The featured sentence follows the English translation by Human Rights in China. It identifies a danger within a person’s own judgment: hatred can damage the capacities through which people think and recognize obligations to others. That warning gives his argument a direction different from simply deciding which side deserves to prevail in a political confrontation.
The statement belonged to Liu’s 2009 trial context. It was later read by Liv Ullmann at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo on December 10, 2010, when Liu could not attend. The year attached to this quotation is therefore 2009, the date of the statement, rather than the year of the award. In the text, he distinguishes respect for people from acceptance of monitoring, arrest, indictment, or judgment against him. His rejection of an enemy mentality did not erase the dispute. It was a way to keep the dispute from determining the whole moral character of his response to those exercising power.
That distinction matters in less extreme disagreements as well. Once another person is understood only as an enemy, evidence can become something to use against them rather than something to examine. A correction may feel like a defeat; a concession may be treated as betrayal. The result is a smaller range of possible judgments, even when the underlying grievance is serious. Resisting that narrowing does not require indifference to injustice. It requires the ability to name an action, assess its consequences, and demand change without turning every person connected with it into a target beyond the reach of ordinary human consideration.
Liu’s sentence should not be used to tell injured people that anger invalidates their experience. Anger can call attention to harm, and neither reconciliation nor forgiveness can responsibly be imposed by a spectator. The quotation concerns the danger of allowing hatred to govern intelligence and conscience. A practical reading asks whether a response preserves the ability to think clearly and protect dignity, including one’s own. That leaves room for protest, accountability, and firm opposition. The statement’s moral ambition lies in sustaining those commitments while refusing a political imagination in which an adversary’s humanity must disappear before one’s own freedom can be defended.
The statement is dated December 23, 2009. Its English translation was prepared by Human Rights in China.
Liv Ullmann read the text at the December 10, 2010 Nobel ceremony. Liu was absent; the quotation’s year follows the statement’s original date.
The sentence warns that hatred can corrode judgment and conscience. Liu distinguishes goodwill toward people from acceptance of the actions taken against him.
It does not erase the need for accountability or ask readers to regard repression as acceptable. The dispute remains explicit in the surrounding statement.
Evaluate whether a response can identify harm precisely while preserving the capacity for evidence and moral judgment.
Do not impose forgiveness on people who have been injured. The useful question is how to oppose injustice without allowing hatred to determine every choice.
Explore more "Quotes of The Day"
Discover more notable quotes from influential voices across politics, science, business, technology, sports, and culture. Each quote offers insight into how ideas, beliefs, and decisions shape the world around us.