Omar Abdulaziz Hallaj's op-ed, "Hatred Discourse," delves into the dynamics of modern tribalism and its manifestation in various social groups, notably in the context of sports fandom and political affiliations. Mr. Hallaj explains that, unlike traditional tribalism where one is born into a tribe, individuals in modern societies voluntarily choose their affiliations, such as sports clubs, political parties, or civil associations. These choices, while seemingly rational, often fulfill a psychological need for belonging and identity.

Mr. Hallaj observes that these group affiliations develop a unified discourse that strengthens their identity, especially in competitive situations. For instance, sports fans will rationalize their team's performance, either glorifying victories or rationalizing defeats, often attributing losses to external factors like unfair refereeing. This discourse serves to reinforce group identity and solidarity, even in the face of defeat or adversity.

The op-ed highlights the dangers of such group dynamics when they escalate into hate speech. As rivalries intensify, the discourse can shift from merely supporting one's group to actively dehumanizing and vilifying the opponent. This hate speech creates a binary worldview where one's group is morally superior and the opposition is demonized. It not only rejects the notion of a middle ground but also discourages any form of dissent within the group. Mr. Hallaj points out that this leads to a scenario where hate speech becomes an absolute reality for its adherents, limiting their ability to see things impartially.

Focusing on the Syrian context, Mr. Hallaj illustrates how such discourses have exacerbated the conflict. Both sides in the conflict have entrenched themselves in their respective narratives, viewing the other as the ultimate evil. This has made conflict resolution exceedingly difficult, as each side is convinced of its moral superiority and victimhood.

The op-ed concludes with a call for a shift in discourse towards more centrist, inclusive positions. Mr. Hallaj argues that conflict resolution must involve transforming hate speech and fostering dialogue and acceptance. He advocates for a collective rejection of exclusionary discourse and the creation of a space for participation and dialogue by all parties. The ultimate goal, as Mr. Hallaj suggests, is to move beyond binary oppositions and create conditions where disagreement can exist without resorting to violence or hate speech.