Concurrence Within Contrast

In the passage on Page 38, Mulisch contrasts the ideas of love/light with hate/darkness. However, by doing this he also implies that one cannot exist without the other. He writes, "And yet we've got to hate Fascists, and that's considered perfectly alright. How is that possible? It's because we hate them in the name of the light, I guess, whereas they hate only in the name of darkness." Despite the fact that hatred is involved in each, if you are hating in the name of the light, it makes it alright. But how exactly can one 'hate in the name of the light?' Does this mean you are hating out of love? Possibly, that you are hating because of their lack of love? "We hate hate itself, and for this reason our hate is better than theirs." Mulisch is justifying hatred by saying that if you are hating someone because of their cruelty, it makes it alright. However, it's fair to say that this idea is very contradicting. It is understandable to have a dislike for mean people, but allowing yourself to feel hatred just makes you stoop down to their level. Later, at the end of the passage, he writes "We've got to become a little bit like them in order to fight them- so we become a little bit unlike ourselves." Essentially, you have to become like them in order to think like them and discover their weaknesses so that in the end you can 'beat them.' The Jews hate how they are being treated by the Nazi party, but in order to somehow get back at them, they have to let themselves become hateful and evil. Otherwise, their kindness and love will get overrun with hatred. If love is going to exist, you need to cancel out the hatred with hatred of your own. Such an odd idea, isn't it, that you need both in order to have one? Hatred and love are opposites, yet they are somewhat synonymous. Because, in fact, in order to know love you have to have known hatred as well.