I am relieved to hear you saying that you are going to reflect your form of communication, I think that is such an underestimated responsibility. I myself find it really difficult and I have to remind myself many times not falling for fear talk by accident.

We can be enemies with ideas, but not with people.

What would you answer when I say that the human mind is not very capable of distinguishing people from ideas? If you declare yourself as an enemy of an idea, how can you not attach it to human beings, for ideas are products of humans?

For example, you hear "war on drugs" or "war on sickness", is it not declaring war on peoples? One cannot go without the other, is what I mean. The human mind produces sensory memories when talking about ideas. The mind attaches to visuals, sounds, smells and touches.

I am unable to think of an idea as pure abstract. Without at the same time having any association whatsoever in my mind.
What maybe makes me believe that this might not be the case is probably the speed in which this happens, for I may not be able to grab any of this rushing snippets as such.

The moment I hear a word like "money" or "world" I immediately start to associate. The more I've seen a particular image to a particular term the more often I associate in that direction. My mind is filled with visuals or sounds.

The harm often is done without intention ... meanwhile I am thinking that the most harm is done with best intentions. I've heard that "it's best not to make oneself common with any means, also not a good one."

Which brings me to the realization that the friendliest outcome is given without a precise intent, even when it sounds somewhat paradox or strange. The Chinese call it skillful spontaneity ("Wu-Wei"). Rather, through an imprecise intention that, due to its open-ended nature, leaves room for alternatives.