Fanatical extremists have controlled local towns, counties, regions, and countries worldwide. Before the American Revolution, the Village of Salem and the Witch Trials come to mind regarding religious extremism. The religious fanaticism that gave rise to witch trials started in Europe in the 17th century, but most Europeans came to their senses by the middle of that century. However, hysteria was reignited in the American Colonies with the book by Joseph Glanvill, who had a method to prove the existence of witches and ghosts. Life was hard in New England in the 1690s. If crops died or young women acted bizarrely, they had easy scapegoats using Glanvill’s “narrative.”
Today, criminals and politicians have repurposed the meaning of a “witch trial” to deflect their guilt and blame their accusers. One of the tests in an actual witch trial involved dragging an accused witch to a river, stripping her to her underwear, binding her, and throwing her into the water. Since a real witch would never allow herself to be baptized, she was assumed to sink like a rock. Would criminals or politicians prefer an actual witch trial over a long-drawn modern one?
During the Gilded Age in the late 1800s, American politicians were bought and sold like cattle by powerful men who adulterated politics to suit their purposes. The problem became so apparent that many of the current anti-monopolistic laws were eventually enacted at the end of this period. However, recent Supreme Court decisions indicate the predilection, in cases like Citizens United versus Federal Election Commission, to again allow corporations, foreign entities, and other special interests to control the lives of American citizens more effectively.
To cite another example of naked political extremism, the remnants of the southern plantation class reestablished control over their local and state governments after the Civil War. They were able to kill Reconstruction and enact Jim Crow laws that disenfranchised millions of Americans for nearly a century. It took an act of political suicide by the Democratic Party in 1964 to pass the Voting Rights Act. This caused the Dixiecrats to leave the Democratic Party and magnetically realign their political allegiance to the party of Richard Nixon.
The facts of blatant institutionalized racism are still denied to this day and are not allowed to be discussed in schools and colleges in States of denial like Florida. The overt and covert racists reflexively say, “Racism is a thing of the past. I’m not racist. There is no need to rehash America’s history except for the sanitized patriotic version I approve of. Can’t we all ignore slavery and Jim Crow?” There can be no reconciliation or forgiveness without knowing and confronting the truth.
Twisted Extremist Logic, Historical Snippets
Fanatical extremism is a real thing with real consequences. People of goodwill who choose not to live under anarchy or authoritarianism typically live in harmony with others, even if the others are different. This is called the desire to live in a democracy. To live in relative peace and harmony, it is necessary to heal old wounds between cultural groups and work diligently to prevent new conflicts from occurring. However, it is impossible to heal old wounds if a sizeable percentage of America’s population are fanatical extremists.
Healing has happened in the past. At one time in American history, most Protestants hated or disparaged Catholics and vice versa. This fact is primarily the result of centuries of European wars between Protestants and Catholics. Likewise, many European Americans hated or disparaged anyone not from a European county. Today, all civilized, WOKE Americans have overcome their cultural hatred of non-Europeans and religions other than their own.
Any wound-healing process presupposes that all sides of a culturally inflicted wound understand what happened and agree to let the wound heal. For example, if a group of religious zealots continues to insist that young women should be tried for being witches even after the town passes a law to allow women to be bareheaded in public, the wound will never heal. Typically, true zealots will force the issue if a young woman walks out of her house without a headscarf. A black-robed zealot will then grab or stone the young woman for not wearing a headscarf. The zealot might say, “Why is the young maiden insulting her people by not wearing a headscarf? She is violating MY culture and reopening a wound!” So instead of OBEYING the law and letting the wound heal, the extremists turn the argument around and accuse the victim of reopening the wound.
Extremists inevitably twist logic enough so that it seems “logical” to their supporters. Since many prefer sugar-coated fantasies from their favored dishonest news source over difficult, complex truths, they lap up gaslit lies like drinking their favorite beverage. I call this perverse logic. It is a form of logic but 180 degrees off-center, dishonest, and inconsistent.
One of the most famous misguided lies was the “science” of eugenics. This so-called science was taught in almost every college on Earth from the 1890s until the 1960s. Eugenics was based on the belief that eugenicists should alter the human gene pool by excluding those groups deemed inferior. Likewise, the “superior” groups should be encouraged to propagate. The ultimate eugenics practitioner was Nazi Germany which sought to not only propagate the world with the blond, blue-eyed Aryans but eliminate whole races of humans. The general idea of eugenics was also popular in polite societies in America, without the genocidal aspects. Forced sterilizations and the prohibition of interracial marriages are concrete examples of the American eugenics movement well into the twentieth century.
Eugenics also reinforced the fear of immigration by “inferior” races. Eugenics leaders helped persuade the Federal government to impose immigration restrictions on those less-than-humans. Some Americans may still believe in eugenics.
A more recent example of perverse logic is when racists loudly declare that no one should discuss racism. Instead of studying history and recognizing the unequal treatment of some Americans, these racists repeat their mantra. “ We are not racists, and stop talking about racism! My children should not hear this stuff. I am not a racist.”
Extremists unwilling to give up a lost cause also create conflict in periods of relative stability or during healing. Instead of letting a cultural wound heal, naturally, extremists pick at the scabs until they bleed again. The wound then gets infected, worsens, and the cycle is repeated.
Extremism can come from the extreme left or right. Communist extremists can pick at old wounds in weakened societies to gain control of the country using the ballot box or force. Cuba and Venezuela come to mind. Likewise, right-wing extremists can stoke up fears within their societies, win elections, or take control by force. Nazi Germany and modern-day Hungary come to mind.
San Francisco is a perfect example of a place that can veer to the radical Left. Like places on the extreme Right, they compete with other Left-leaning places. They try so hard to be on the extreme Left that they escape from reality, just like the extreme Right. However, a moderate administration is elected occasionally, and San Francisco returns to the mainstream. Still, like some congressional districts that seem permanently magnetized to the extreme Right, San Francisco can easily slip into an unrealistic fantasy world on the opposite magnetic pole of the extreme Left. A recent example was the City’s election of District Attorney Chesa Boudin in November 2019. His bail and enforcement policies were so permissive that the Left-leaning City came to its senses and recalled him in June 2022.
One telling characteristic of some radical extremists is their tendency to favor fantasy over reality. They tend to ignore the current situation and history to retain their fantasies. For example, some extremists use reverse logic and mendacity by calling anti-Nazis Nazis and actual Nazis “good people.” These folks are either ignorantly unread or craven liars.
Other radical extremists have the opposite state of mind. They do not ignore reality or lean towards fantasy. Instead, they are stone-cold cynics or sociopaths. Rather than falsifying or excusing criminal or uncivil actions by fellow extremists, they will either silently or loudly applaud the illegal acts. Instead of deploring bad behavior, these cynics become more closely aligned to the magnetic field of their extremist heroes. They find it refreshing when their anti-hero honestly and unapologetically says that he will not suffer any consequences if he shoots someone on Fifth Avenue. These anti-hero worshipers are very similar to those who would have celebrated the lawless activities of Al Capone in the 1930s. I am unsure if these people worship their anti-hero’s honesty or machismo.
Some excuse or overlook the bad behavior of fanatics. They are active participants, at worst, or appeasers, at best. History has never been very kind to appeasers, like conservative Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain of England in the 1930s. Instead of confronting Adolph Hitler’s bad behavior head-on, he weakly and obsequiously assured everyone that he could manage Herr Hitler. Excusing or underestimating a threat can allow a wolf free access to a flock of lambs which is weak, naïve, and stupid. Any moderately aligned supporters on the left or right who condone a wild wolf inevitably cause lambs to be slaughtered.
Those 43 Republican senators who voted against a Trump conviction in the second impeachment trial displayed for all to see the weakness and appeasement of senators like Mitch McConnell. Despite the herd mentality, I am sure there was more than one Republican senator who regretted voting for Trump’s acquittal. Senator Barry Goldwater had the moral courage to side with American Democracy and tell Richard Nixon he would be removed from office in 1973. Unfortunately, moral courage seems to have been drained from the veins of Republicans over the last 50 years.
An Insight into the Followers of Extremists
Most acolytes or supporting spectators of fanaticism, whether on the Left or Right, also have a unique habit when asked to explain their fanaticism. Instead of coherent explanations using facts and logic, they nearly always respond with regurgitated propaganda from a book, an email from a fellow extremist, a web article, a podcast, or a video FROM SOMEONE ELSE. They cannot explain their “own” position using their own logic in their own words. I sense they allow someone else to magnetize their political and mental electrons. They have taken the easy road and are controlled by someone else’s narrative.
For example, when a follower or sympathizer of extremism is confronted by indisputable facts contradicting their beliefs, they freeze instantly. Their pulse quickens, but they fall back on their psychological conditioning. They remember snippets from videos and speeches that allow them to ignore indisputable facts. They are reassured by their indoctrination that either a billionaire or those reptilian people are behind the Deep State cabal (the Deep State cabal or similar name works for both the extreme Left and Right!) Their pulse returns to normal since the Deep State cabal explains everything. Fundamentally, fanatical followers on the Left or Right fail to see or acknowledge the contradictions of their beliefs. For example, their propaganda masters repeat the reassuring word FREEDOM endlessly, yet these same masters endlessly undermine American freedoms, liberties, and safety.