Is hating everyone equally (but obviously prejudicially) worse than hating only one demographic?

Since there are several layers one can examine this from I'll pick the most practical, hence the most meaningful, that of the political. Politically a misanthrope is meaningless since they hate everyone. They're not going to be able to exercise their hatred in a systematic way. Since they must "deal" with people for goods, services, etc., they can not fully commit actions motivated by their universal hate; unless they wish to go on a m murder spree, in which case they quickly would be locked up or killed. Those who just hate one group, however, have a great chance, and hence a greater likelihood, of exercising their hates into harmful action. They can find and/or create allies against the hated cl, group, race, etc., by appealing to some aspect of being the same as their allies versus the differences they see or imagine in the groups that they hate. Group hatred only works in the political realm because the hatred are "shown" to be different from another group that is claiming to be both victim and superior to the hatred group. So, in the realm of the political, I would say hating unequally is more of a problem than having an universal hatred.