May I suggest an essay of Ayn Rand's from her book, "The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution" (or its most recent publication as "Return of the Primitive: The Anti-Industrial Revolution") named "The Age of Envy", where she gives the philosophical/psychological basis for the hatred that you describe that is most typically of the Left -- and in particular, the rabid, shrieking Left. You may not agree with her assessment but its worth a look. Here's a couple of excerpts:
Today, we live in the Age of Envy.
“Envy” is not the emotion I have in mind, but it is the clearest manifestation of an emotion that has remained nameless; it is the only element of a complex emotional sum that men have permitted themselves to identify.
Envy is regarded by most people as a petty, superficial emotion and, therefore, it serves as a semihuman cover for so inhuman an emotion that those who feel it seldom dare admit it even to themselves . . . . That emotion is: hatred of the good for being the good. (Emphasis mine.)
This hatred is not resentment against some prescribed view of the good with which one does not agree . . . . Hatred of the good for being the good means hatred of that which one regards as good by one’s own (conscious or subconscious) judgment. It means hatred of a person for possessing a value or virtue one regards as desirable.
If a child wants to get good grades in school, but is unable or unwilling to achieve them and begins to hate the children who do, that is hatred of the good. If a man regards intelligence as a value, but is troubled by self-doubt and begins to hate the men he judges to be intelligent, that is hatred of the good.
The nature of the particular values a man chooses to hold is not the primary factor in this issue (although irrational values may contribute a great deal to the formation of that emotion). The primary factor and distinguishing characteristic is an emotional mechanism set in reverse: a response of hatred, not toward human vices, but toward human virtues.
To be exact, the emotional mechanism is not set in reverse, but is set one way: its exponents do not experience love for evil men; their emotional range is limited to hatred or indifference. It is impossible to experience love, which is a response to values, when one’s automatized response to values is hatred.
...
Superficially, the motive of those who hate the good is taken to be envy. A dictionary definition of envy is: "1. a sense of discontent or jealousy with regard to another's advantages, success, possessions, etc. 2. desire for an advantaged position possessed by another." (The Random House Dictionary, 1968.) The same dictionary adds the following elucidation: "To envy is to feel resentful because someone else possesses or has achieved what one wishes oneself to possess or to have achieved."
This covers a great many emotional responses, which come from different motives. In a certain sense, the second definition is the opposite of the first, and the more innocent of the two.
For example, if a poor man experiences a moment's envy of another man's wealth, the feeling may mean nothing more than a momentary concretization of his desire for wealth; the feeling is not directed against that particular rich person and is concerned with the wealth, not the person. The feeling, in effect, may amount to: "I wish I had an income or a house, or a car, or an overcoat) like his." The result of this feeling may be an added incentive for the man to improve his financial condition.
The feeling is less innocent, if it amounts to: "I want this man's car (or overcoat, or diamond shirt studs, or industrial establishment)." The result is a criminal.
But these are still human beings, in various stages of immorality, compared to the inhuman object whose feeling is: "I hate this man because he is wealthy and I am not."
Envy is part of this creature's feeling, but only the superficial, semirespectable part; it is the tip of an iceberg showing nothing worse than ice, but with the submerged part consisting of a compost of rotting living matter. The envy, in this case, is semirespectable because it seems to imply a desire for material possessions, which is a human being's desire. But, deep down, the creature has no such desire: it does not want to be rich, it wants the human being to be poor.
This is particularly clear in the much more virulent cases of hatred, masked as envy, for those who possess personal values or virtues: hatred of a man (or a woman) because he (or she) is beautiful or intelligent or successful or honest or happy. In these cases, the creature has no desire and makes no effort to improve its appearance, to develop or to use its intelligence, to struggle for success, to practice honesty, to be happy (nothing can make it happy). It knows that the disfigurement or the mental collapse or the failure or the immorality or the misery of its victim would not endow it with his or her value. It does not desire the value: it desires the value's destruction.
I submit that this is the psychological essence of the Leftists. It is obvious to anyone with a nose on their face that America is the most prosperous and most generous nation that has ever existed. Yet Leftists shriek with glee when the Trade Centers were hit because America -- somehow -- "deserved it".
Deserved it? Why?
For being "culturally arrogant" answers the Left. For thinking that
we haughty Americans
know what is best for everyone. To be insolent enough to believe that living by the principles of reason and individual rights and creating a civilization of material prosperity, skyscrapers and trips to the moon is
better that a "civilization" of living in mud huts, unending petty tribal wars, and baying at the moon to beg for rain.
The Leftist mind
hates achievement and hates values
qua values. Period. They are completely shameless in their utter disconnect between reality and their own bizarre fantasies. Why else would they so enthusiastically embrace communism/socialism? There has never been a communist state that a) wasn't a dictatorship with the inevitable abrogation of its citizen's "human rights", b) that was prosperous in
any sort of the word, and c) wasn't dependent upon the prosperity of
non-communist states (i.e., the United States) to suckle off of, either directly or indirectly. That communism/socialism is a benefit to mankind in
any way is a
demonstrable falsehood yet the Left clings to this
fantasy with the tenacity of a pitbull with lockjaw.
The cause for this "hatred of the good for being the good" is a flawed basis in philosophy, specifically, flawed metaphysics and (in particular) a flawed epistemology (a proper method for thinking). The destruction of latter, most especially, explains why the children being processed by the public school system come out with minds full of mush that are incapable of utilizing reason as a tool for cognition and yet who believe that "feeling"
is a legitimate tool for understanding the world around them.
When millions of minds are systematically crippled over decades to embrace irrationalism -- and you couple that to the "one man, one vote" principle of our republic -- what else would you expect to happen, eventually?