From fanaticism to barbarism is only one step. – Denis Diderot
Humanity is filled with instances of blind belief. It’s astonishing that while the physical world has transformed over the past thousand years, our psychological state remains largely unchanged. The fear of hellfire and damnation, nihilism, and anarchy underpins our very existence. On the outset, a violent act, whether physical or psychological, germinates first as a blind belief. A Hindu must blindly judge a Muslim as inferior or an enemy before committing violence against him, and vice versa. A pattern evident in any two groups in conflict—Jews and Arabs, Democrats and Republicans, etc.—the story repeats itself: one group labels the other as a threat, and then employs violence to remedy the threat.
An inherent desire for superiority forms the basis for blind belief and stems from an internal lack of self-love. Only when I feel inadequate, unworthy of love internally, do I seek validation externally through religous, political, or social identity. It can even be as basic as tying one’s sense of self to one’s physical appearance. But I want to delve deeper into this topic.
Why does a person blindly believe something? Let’s take a closer look at this phenomenon. When I blindly believe that I am superior to another person, I place them on a scale of inherent worth and deem them less worthy. This label defines their inherent value. For example, saying that Black people should die because they are all criminals labels and dehumanizes individuals based on their skin color. By labeling someone as ugly, I dehumanize them by allowing their worth to be defined by an external factor. It’s like saying a person is worth less because they have blue eyes. Rationally, this is absurd, yet many of us do it regularly. We treat others differently based on skin tone or physical appearance. How many of you have treated a beautiful woman differently from an ugly one?
Extrapolating further, an extreme blind belief can become fanatical and lead to violence. The mindset of I belong to the one true religion and am going to heaven, while everyone else will suffer ever-lasting damnation in hell has historically led to all sorts of atrocities. It has been said that the greatest warmongers in history were various religious leaders. The list goes on and on, but perhaps the following is a good illustration:
*A brief description of each war
Crusades (1095–1291): The Crusades were a series of religious wars initiated by the Catholic Church in medieval Europe whose primary goal was to reclaim Jerusalem and other holy lands from Muslim rule. There were at least eight major Crusades, with the First Crusade (1096-1099) being the most successful, resulting in the capture of Jerusalem. The Crusades had a profound impact on the medieval world, leading to significant cultural exchanges and shifts in power dynamics.
Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648): One of the most destructive conflicts in European history, fought primarily in Central Europe. It began as a battle between Catholic and Protestant states within the Holy Roman Empire but evolved into a more general conflict involving most of the great powers of Europe. The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 ended the war and reshaped the political map of Europe.
French Wars of Religion (1562–1598): These were a series of conflicts between French Catholics and Protestants (Huguenots). The wars were marked by brutal massacres, such as the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre in 1572, and resulted in significant loss of life. The conflict ended with the Edict of Nantes in 1598, which granted substantial rights to the Huguenots.
Taiping Rebellion (1850–1864): The Taiping Rebellion was a massive civil war in southern China led by Hong Xiuquan, who claimed to be the younger brother of Jesus Christ. The rebellion sought to overthrow the Qing Dynasty and establish the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom. It resulted in the deaths of an estimated 20 to 30 million people, making it one of the deadliest conflicts in history. The rebellion was eventually crushed by Qing forces, but it significantly weakened the dynasty. Second Sudanese Civil War (1983–2005): This conflict was primarily between the central Sudanese government and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA). It was largely a continuation of the First Sudanese Civil War and was fueled by ethnic, religious, and economic tensions. The war resulted in approximately at least 1 million deaths and displaced around 4 million people. The conflict ended with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005, leading to the independence of South Sudan in 2011.
At times like this I wonder if the main prophets of each religious tradition experience severe frustration at their followers inability to follow their teachings. Didn’t Jesus say to love thy enemies? If so, how did the Catholic Church interpret this to mean that they were mandated by God to kill Muslims (during the Crusades) or other Christians that aren’t Catholic (during the Thirty Years War and French Wars)? How can anyone logically arrive at this conclusion?
Similarly, how can any devout Evangelical Christians in America equate Jesus with guns and American military might? If Jesus exists, which I believe he does, he must feel frustrated by his followers’ inability to follow the path of non-violence and love that he sacrificed his life for.
But let’s get to the heart of the matter, shall we? The foundation of a blindly believing fanatic is an incredibly low self-esteem and a profound lack of self-love. Their sense of self is so closely tied to an identity—whether religious, political, or otherwise—that they are willing to commit violence against perceived threats. Their fight against an epic enemy, in turn, reinforces this sense of self.
On January, 6th 2020, Donald Trump incited a mob to forcefully invade the Capitol Building in order to stop the transfer of power. The mob (commonly called J6ers) blindly believed that the election was stolen. It was not, of course, but this highlights the problem with blind belief. Even when presented with copious amounts of evidence, such individuals refuse to accept something as true if it contradicts their prevailing worldview. Underlying their blind belief in their leader is an externalized sense of self, seeing themselves as American patriots destined to save America. The entire QAnon movement is based on this epic fight against the so-called Deep State.
While I don’t deny the existence of the Deep State, I do deny that violence is the answer to dismantle it. We forget that millions of Americans voted unconsciously for the Deep State because they couldn’t, and to a large degree still can’t, distinguish between a selfless public servant and a selfish politician. Therefore, the onus is on us to remove the beams from our own eyes, rather than engage in a physical struggle against a perceived enemy.
If any MAGA supporters were reading this, they might instantly label me a “paid actor” or a “member of the Illuminati.” Perhaps I’m simply someone who believes in the liberating power of love and the transformative power of non-violence as a catalyst for change. However, to someone who believes blindly, anything that doesn’t align with their way of life is seen as a threat that must be eliminated by force or violence.
I do not hate or wish to remove these people. Unlike them, I do not desire any violence to befall them. They are human beings just like I am. They may be confused or dealing with severe mental issues, but they are not unworthy of basic dignity and respect. This, I believe, is called love. In my view, the answer to effecting change is to engage non-violently. But in order to do so, the shift from violence to non-violence must happen first in our hearts. We must, collectively, move towards love. To prevent fanaticism and avoid barbarism, we must bring love into the equation thereby commit to bringing about change in a non-violent manner.