“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

Fanatics always use ringing rhetoric, and speak in the highest terms of truth, good and evil, and particularly of retribution. To some extent capital punishment is the act of a fanatical society: The taking of the murderer’s life does not bring back the victim’s, and it does not prevent other men from [committing] such crimes. I am aware that the death penalty often seems to be a practical solution — and indeed many murderers want to die, and are caught because of their need for punishment. Many, now — and I am speaking generally — are in the position they are because they so thoroughly believe what all of you believe to a large extent: that you are flawed creatures, spawned by a meaningless universe, or made by a vengeful God and damaged by original sin.

(Pause.) Fanatics exist because of the great gap between an idealized good and an exaggerated version of its opposite. The idealized good is projected into the future, while its exaggerated opposite is seen to pervade the present. The individual is seen as powerless to work alone toward that ideal with any sureness of success. Because of his belief in his powerlessness [the fanatic] feels that any means to an end is justified. Behind all this is the belief that spontaneously the ideal will never be achieved, and that, indeed, on his own man is getting worse and worse in every aspect: How can flawed selves ever hope to spontaneously achieve any good?

Dictation. Basically (pause), a fanatic believes that he is powerless.

He does not trust his own self-structure, or his ability to act effectively. Joint action seems the only course, but a joint action in which each individual must actually be forced to act, driven by frenzy, or fear or hatred, incensed and provoked, for otherwise the fanatic fears that no action at all will be taken toward “the ideal.”

[...] No one is going to mistake Ruburt for a fanatic, or a psychic nut, or whatever. [...] He cannot remotely be considered in that framework—except by fanatics, who are already within it.

Comment: now: for all of the fanatic’s display of energy, he feels basically powerless. [...]

[...] That ideal, however, different in one area than in another, was usually self-righteously applied with a vengeance and fanatical zest, so that all things outside it were seen as evil.

[...] In such concepts any natural goodness, or natural intent in man becomes not only invisible psychologically to the fanatic, but man’s natural nature appears as a direct threat to the ideal projected by dogma of any kind.

[...] (Humorously:) When you are picketed (in NYC) by fanatics, you must be doing something right.

[...] I understand that fanatics, for example, have their place. [...]

Fanatics certainly serve a purpose, and actually they help maintain overall equilibrium of society by serving as examples to others, who often have some of the same beliefs but are of a less explosive nature.

By going to extremes fanatics point out to others the virtue of more moderate ways, and their actions actually make others with the same kind of persuasion evaluate their own beliefs. [...]

[...]

[...] Jonestown, Harrisburg, and When Is an Idealist a Fanatic?”

You must realize that fanatics always deal with grandiose ideals, while at the same time they believe in man’s sinful nature, and the individual’s lack of power. [...] Fanatics call others to social action. [...]

[...] [Adolf] Hitler pursued his version of “the good” with undeviating fanatical intent. [...]

[...] They would become the victims of Hitler’s fanatical ideal of Germany’s good.

The nation served as an example of what could happen in any country if the most fanatical nationalism was allowed to go unchecked, if the ideas of right were aligned with might, if any nation was justified in contemplating the destruction of others.

Look at it this way: If someone tells you that pleasure is wrong and tolerance is weakness, and that you must follow this or that dogma blindly in obedience, and if you are told this is the only right road toward the idealized good, then most likely you are dealing with a fanatic. [...] If you are told to give up your free will, you are dealing with a fanatic.

Let us look briefly at that entire affair, remembering some of our earlier questions: When does an idealist turn into a fanatic, and how? [...]

(Pause.) No one is as fanatical, and no one can be more cruel, than the self-righteous. [...]

[...] When does the idealist turn into a fanatic?

[...] And the same applies to our Reverend Jones, and to any fanatic, for the fanatic speaks in exaggerated terms, but he or she speaks beliefs that to some extent each of you hold, but to what degree? [...] And you may say they are fanatics, which they are. [...] So even the fanatic serves good purposes. And I will tell you that no one and no fanatic leads masses of people. [...]

[...] It is because you expect so much from people that Anita Bryant and fanatics fall so short. [...]

The idea [of democracy] expresses the existence of a high idealism — one that demands political and social organizations that are effective to some degree in providing some practical expression of those ideals (emphatically). When those organizations fail and a gulf between idealism and actualized good becomes too great, then such conditions help turn some idealists into fanatics. [...] Thus, he blocks his reason as fanatically as earlier he blocked his intuitions. [...]

(9:49.) Many cults of one kind or another, and many fanatics, seek to divide you from your natural impulses, to impede their expression. [...]

Only when the natural impulse (to act constructively) is denied consistently does the idealist turn into a fanatic. [...]

Fanatics work best in isolation, where their own beliefs are currently and constantly reinforced, and where they are surrounded by sacred yes-men of one kind or another, whatever their designation. Other beliefs are not allowed to intrude, and even those who are firm believers, but not fanatics, naturally prefer the company of their own kind.

[...] This can propel him or her into a rather severe schizophrenic reaction, in which the scientist now defends most fanatically the same ideas that he rejected most fanatically only a short time before.

[...] Each of you dislike fanatics because you were once so fanatical. [...]

[...] They are told not to be cruel or fanatical, not to die for the sword, or by the sword. [...]

Often there was little difference between the outlaws and the monks, and fanatic roving bands of monks often went through isolated communities or farmlands with a vengeance.

So, dear reader, look at the law as it stands in this country with somewhat more kindly eyes than you have before — for it at least legally establishes a belief in your innocence, and for all of its failings, it protects you from the far more fanatical aspects, say, of any religion’s laws.

[...] Then we will have less frightened people, and fewer fanatics, and each person involved can to some extent begin to see the “ideal” come into practical actualization. [...]

[...] mean-minded, fanatical... [...]

[...] If you want to change the world for the better, and if you are determined to do so, no matter at what cost to yourself or others, no matter what the risk, and if you believe that those ends justify any means at your disposal, then you are a fanatic.

(10:14.) Fanatics are inverted idealists. [...]

You are a fanatic if you consider (underlined) possible killing for the pursuit of your ideal. [...]

(With a smile:) “Your particular conscious and subconscious viewpoints are fluent enough so that they do not hamper the basic material, or cover it with the rock of dogmatism so that it becomes impossible to find … Actually, what I needed were personalities who were not fanatics along any line — including scientific fanatics who would object as forcibly to the reincarnational data as religious fanatics would object to some of the other material.

Years ago, when the Gallery of Silence people began to bug him, he felt threatened, afraid that he would become the brunt of fanatics or extremists. [...]

[...] (Long pause.) He was worried that his natural expression and search, publicly expressed at that point in history, was dangerous because it put him in the gaze of a growing band of fanatics on the one hand, and also roused old fears of a private nature, having to do with the overall validity of revelatory information. [...]

[...] He does not feel that he is involved alone, as he did before: the fanatics, for example, are everywhere—quite visible, and if they might find his work offensive, he is hardly alone. [...]

[...] Actually more simply what was needed were personalities that were not fanatics along any line, including scientific fanatics who would object as much to the reincarnation data as forcibly as religious fanatics would object to some of the other material.

[...] It is instead a fanatical Puritan vein, peculiarly American in character, and restrictive rather than expansive, for the bursts of emotion are highly structured — that is, the emotions are limited in most areas of life, permitted only an explosive religious expression under certain conditions, when they are not so much spontaneously expressed as suddenly released from the dam of usual repression.

[...] It is always creative, and underneath the frameworks of society it provides fresh incentives and new avenues for fulfillment, that can become harnessed through fanatical belief. [...]

[...] Fervor was as important as a government’s treasury, for a state could count upon the devotion of its lieutenants in the same way that many fanatics will work without money for a cause.

(Long pause at 9:32.) That is why fanatics feel justified in their (underlined) actions. [...]