Fan or fanatic? Do you know the difference? I am continually astonished that many people donāt. It seems that for many, they are unable to draw a line between being a fan and being a fanatic.
A fan is someone who likes football. They watch it, follow it, go to some games, and talk about it with their friends. A fanatic is a person who rounds up six of his buddies, paints their big olā beer bellies with the letters C-O-W-B-O-Y-S (or any other team) and then takes their shirts off at the game even when the temperature is freezing. They somehow think that their fat, hairy, letter-painted bellies are going to cause their team to win. No one really likes these guys and we all think they are pitiful jokes, however, they are the ones who get their painted bellies on TV. Just like many of the fanatics on some of the evening cable news programs: I know Glenn Beck and Keith Olberman have painted bellies under their suits!
Pro-life/pro-choice. A fan of pro-life votes their conscience on that issue or go to a church that supports their belief or may send money to support politicians who believe the way they do. A fanatic kills an abortion doctor. See how the difference betweens a fan and a fanatic can turn ugly?
I wrote recently on Facebook about the protestors who show up at the funerals of soldiers carrying signs that say things like, God Loves Dead Soldiers and other inflammatory sayings that are too disgusting to even write here. These people are protesting the Armed Forcesā Donāt Ask Donāt Tell policy because they hate homosexuals. These people are fanatics. They are also the scum of the earth in my opinion. Yes, they have the right to protest but not at the funeral of a dead soldier. Just because it is your right to do it, doesnāt make it alright to do it!
They top off their fanaticism with their claim they are doing it in the name of God and by saying they are Christians. Are they Christians? Not by any standard I could ever imagine. Would God condone their behavior? Not any God I could ever believe in would condone this abominable behavior. Again, this is an example of fanaticism at itās worst!
We have been bombarded this week with the fan versus fanaticism issue with the death and subsequent circus surrounding Michael Jackson.
I liked Michael Jacksonās music, thought he was fascinating to watch in his videos and respect his enormous talent and his contribution to the music industry. I am a fan of Michael Jackson. A fanatic is a person who believes Michael could do no wrong and was a wonderful, sweet, humanitarian. They are unwilling to see the drugs, the weirdness, the sickness, and the perversion. They make up excuses for his sleeping in the same bed with children. They question he even had a drug problem though he had a $50K a month pharmaceutical bill. They want to talk about his selflessness in giving to others while the guy was burning through money more selfishly than perhaps any one in history! They tried to make him an icon to the black community when he clearly had surgery and skin treatments to look anything but black. He even had white babies with white women from what apparently was white manās sperm. The folks who canāt see that there is a difference between his musical talents and his weirdness are fanatics.
A fan is a person who thinks Sarah Palin has beliefs they can support, an agenda they can agree with, and values they want to emulate, etc. A fanatic is a person who can see no wrong with anything she does. Sheās not a quitter at all even though she quit her job in the middle of it simply because it got too tough. She is a responsible person who is teaching our kids a valuable lesson. (Yep, someone tried to convince me of that argument! I taught my kids that if you take a job, you finish the job even when it has become uncomfortable to do so.) Barry Goldwater Jr. this week even said how well spoken she is. Really? Barry and I live pretty close to each other, is he watching different television interviews than I am? You may like her beliefs and I donāt really care if thatās the case, but to call her well spoken? People who blindly support her because she is a woman, or a Republican, or ānewā are not fans, they are fanatics. They canāt see past their own personal delusions of who they want her to be or are trying in their hearts and minds to make her be. A fan can like her, support her and still be smart enough not to agree with every move she makes. A fanatic canāt make that distinction. It works on both sides of the aisle.
An Obama fan is someone who probably voted for him for any number of reasons. They liked him, thought he brought a number of good things to the table, thought he was a better choice than the alternative, thought the good about him outweighed the bad and were/are convinced that he has the best interests of the country at heart. Someone like me. A fanatic is someone who drank the Kool-Aid and thinks he can do no wrong and that every word that comes out his tele-promptered mouth propels him as he walks across the water. That is clearly not me. I am not a fanatic. I see every bit of the wrong Obama is doing just like I can see the right that is being done. I am not a fan of everything he is doing and I am clear about why.
By the way ā do not write me about the fact that I voted for Obama. I did. I donāt apologize for it. What you think of my voting record is not any where on my list of things I give a crap about. Iām not sorry I voted for him . . . yet. I donāt agree with a LOT of what is going on. And trust me when I say that if it doesnāt work, I will lead the charge to vote someone else into office. So donāt write me or comment to say he is an idiot, a communist or a socialist. Attack a specific policy if you want. Thatās fine. I can debate policies all day long. But donāt resort to name-calling. Donāt do it about Obama, Palin, Bush, McCain or even Pelosi ā yep, even Pelosi. Why? Because resorting to that would make you a fanatic.
Fanatics are typically unable or unwilling to see the good because they are so caught up seeing the bad. Conversely, they also get so caught up seeing the good, that they canāt see the bad. As the saying goes, āThey canāt see the forest for the trees.ā Thatās how fanaticism works. It blurs your vision. Sometimes it even blinds you. It takes away your ability to think calmly and rationally. It is a strong emotion that causes people to speak before they think (or speak instead of thinking) thus causing incredibly stupid things to fall of out of their face. Donāt believe it? Read some of the comments I will get following this. Combine fanaticism with stupidity and meanness and before you know it you, you have violence. Thatās the combination that leads to gangs, hate groups, Aryans, the KKK and others.
I recently made a joke about Stephen Baldwin on my facebook page. I think calling him a celebrity is a sad commentary on both our entertainment industry and on society. When your biggest film role is Barney Rubble in Flintstones 3 and your solution to every problem is to baptize someone, I think you are a pitiful spokesperson for any cause of substance. It was a tongue-in-cheek, off āthe-wall comment that surprisingly fired some folks up! Thatās when I realized something else about fanaticism: Fanatics love it when a person says what the fanatic wants them to say and they hate it when a person says something the fanatic doesnāt want them to say. Fanatics can, for the most part, only wholeheartedly agree or wholeheartedly disagree. They canāt find a happy medium based on thought, consideration or opposing points of view. They lack respect for the opinions of those who donāt agree with them and often convert their dislike of the personās opinion into a dislike of the person.
I recently watched a segment of 60 Minutes with Supreme Court Justice Scalia. Justice Scalia spoke of his very close friend, Justice Ginsberg and how they have such an unlikely friendship. After all, you have Scalia, a true conservative and Ginsberg, a liberal. He said, āI attack ideas, not people, and there are very good people with very bad ideas.ā Fanatics canāt do that. If they disagree with any of it, that have to disagree with all of it. Ā And they almost always have to make it personal.
I know the words I have written here will infuriate many of you. I know that because I am not saying what some of you want me to say. Iām not saying what you want your idea of who Larry Winget is to say. I am not stating your opinion, so you arenāt going to like it ā thus, some of you will decide you donāt like me. I honestly donāt care whether you like any of this or not. And I donāt care if you like me or not. Somehow I will survive. I am not saying any of this for you to agree with or disagree with. I am saying all of this because I believe it. Thatās one thing you can always count on from me: I wonāt say anything to pander to your likes or dislikes. I will only say what I believe. If you like it, Ā fine ā if you donāt, weāll both live.
And if my words really do infuriate you, that’s only proof you are a fanatic. These words have the ability to infuriate you? Seriously? Do you not have a life? Lighten up!
Bottom line: I donāt care for fanatics. I donāt like their comments ā donāt find them interesting ā donāt care for their meanness ā or their lack of depth. Does that mean I donāt respect what they have to say? Yes, sometimes it does. Many times, they arenāt voicing a reasonable position. Their vision is blurred and they arenāt seeing or speaking clearly. They are just babbling hate, stupidity and lack a clearly defined, substantiated position. That’s why a fanatic has Ā never changed my mind about anything.
Fanatics tend to be one-dimensional people. They have no balance, no middle ground, and no depth. A fanatic leads with their belief and nothing gets in their way. Not even kindness or consideration, manners, thought, or rationality. A religious fanatic always leads with fanaticism. An anti-abortion fanatic leads with that position. A gay rights activist leads with their fanaticism. A right wing OR left-wing fanatic leads with the latest stupid thing Pelosi or Obama or Rush or Hannity has said or done. A fanatic of any cause canāt get past the cause long enough to even be human sometimes. That is what makes them so un-interesting. And the saddest part for the fanatic is that they donāt understand that their fanaticism weakens their position, it doesnāt strengthen it or endear any of us to their belief.
Some of you are going to say to me something along the lines of, āHello pot, meet the kettle.ā (If I have to explain that joke to you, move on.) You will think it is crazy for me to even be saying all of this because of who I am and my strong position on so many subjects. I do take a strong stance on many topics but I am not a fanatic about any of them. Trust me when I tell you that I donāt lose any sleep over any of this. I donāt let politics, religion, stupidity, obesity, bad parenting, people who donāt pay their bills or fanatics of any type keep me awake at night. Thatās why they make Ambien! I hate stupidity, but it doesnāt effect my evening much. I donāt like the bailouts but I am not going to cry over it. I canāt stand bad service but it doesnāt ruin my day. None of this stuff dominates my life, my business or my happiness. So stop writing me asking if I actually LIKE anything. I like so many things. I am a happy guy who loves his friends, his wife, his boys, his family, his bulldogs, cooking, great food, a good scotch and a smooth cigar. I am not such a fanatic about anything that I am willing to sacrifice my happiness or the things that really matter to me over it.
When you comment, and I hope you do, donāt turn this into a discussion of healthcare, Obama, Palin, abortion, Michael Jackson, Stephen Baldwin, or the bailouts. I am sick of writing about candy bars and in about five postings it has become about communism. While I love stirring the pot, some of the comments are so off base they take the fun out of it! This rant is about fanaticism. Does this mean I am opposed to you voicing a dissenting opinion? Hell no. I love dissenting opinions. I hate it when people kiss my ass and agree lovingly with every word I say. (Though sometimes itās fun, Iāll admit.) I like fans but I donāt like fanatics even about my own stuff. I enjoy disagreement. I enjoy argument. My true friends are people who hold many opposing views in regards to politics, morals, parenting, religion, business, gay rights, abortion, gun control and much more. I respect them and their opinions even though we disagree because they are well informed, articulate, and offer thoughtful argument in support of their opinion and in opposition of mine.
To summarize: Donāt be a belly painter. Know what you believe, why you believe it and have a reason for your position. Consider both sides of an argument before taking a side. Take the high road and donāt resort to stupid name-calling. Donāt attack or support blindly. Donāt lead with your cause ā lead with who you are. And if who you are IS your cause, know you are a one-dimensional, boring person. Lastly, be smart enough to separate your emotions and your mouth.
FACEBOOK: Join me as a friend on facebook and keep your eyes open for more television and a new book coming soon! Larry Winget Facebook Page.
Follow Larry on TWITTER to read what’s going on. http://twitter.com/larrywinget
Brand new product released this week. The PBS special, Success Is Your Own Fault and a bonus DVD, Larry: Unplugged, Unleashed & Out of Control! is available NOW. Go to the Larry store on my website.
http://www.larrywinget.com/dvd.html
Special introductory pricing of only $49.95! Save $50 off the normal price of $99.95. Two full length television quality DVDs for $49.95.
Larry, I must say, I like your common sense style and have read many of your books. I do like most of what I read, eating the meat and spitting out the bones. This post however Larry was the best and most intellectual I have read so far.
Side note: I flew Delta today. A 300 plus woman came in carrying her plate of food and sat across from me. She asked for a seat belt extension and then complained about being so squished!
Ok, I read this entire blog. Well written. Well said.
Larry, when I disagree with you ~ you will certainly know it.
Can’t disagree with you, yet….that’s all. Guess I am as crazy
and ecclectic as you, but for sure not as articulate and never
will pretend to be. Know that, I am thinking about everything,
and am turning it over and over my head. I speak with my
friends about you and most know you and your work. Want to
make sure I am hanging out with thinkers and contemplators.
They, and I, admire philosophers such as yourself….Here is my
comment.
Debbie Grooms
Very well said and written in language very much like Army manuals using stick people pictures. If they don’t get it they never will.
Larry, I’m sorry if I sound like I’m kissing your asterisk and agreeing lovingly with every word you say, but this post is terrific!
Unfortunately, much of TV (and other media) love — or need — fanatics as much as the fanatics love/need them, and this alliance has grown so big and needy, it probably cannot be stopped. But maybe your post will help.
-jim
Larry,
Spot on my friend.
I would say based on my reading of your blog posts and most of your books that you are indeed a fanatic or at least very close to it in the areas of reason and common-sense. That is the true thread that I see binding your work together. I have yet to read anything of yours that is truly ground breaking other than it offers a blinding glimpse of the obvious followed by well reasoned argument and thoughtful examples and told in a way that can be entertaining or infuriating.
That said, if being close to a fanatic of logic and reason is wrong, count me in.
Keep ranting!
Larry- I agree with your definition of fan vs fanatic. A fanatic cannot reason or use judgment. That is one reason I disagree with your appraisal of Glenn Beck. I don’t think he is a fanatic. He is very devoted to his cause (most of which I will admit to believing in, smaller government, self responsibility, reducing debt). I do think he goes over the top at times in his rants about specific people.
I believe there are varying lines between fan and fanatic. You can be a fan in some areas and fanatical in others. A fanatic is one how lets his emotion overpower his judgment, reason and intelligence. We all have areas where our ability to analytically rationalize get short circuited at times.
I do enjoy your posts even if I don’t always agree with them. When I don’t it is because I have a rational reason not too.. which makes sense to me but may not to you š
Keep typing away and stirring the pot. Only when it is stirred can the cream rise to the top.
Scott
The other day you posted a tweet about Obama being a socialist, and I responded saying that if he embraces those ideals and puts them into policy, he’s a socialist, and we should call a spade a spade. That’s my feelings on the subject, and will call him a socialist accordingly.
However, I have found him to be well-spoken and have ideas I agree with. I also like the fact that he still dates his wife, and I point to him when I want to get the point of marital happiness across.
I still don’t think he’s a fit president, never have, and that’s why I voted for Bob Barr.
I might disagree with some things you say, but the life-building things you say in your books, as well as you being you, are things that have made me a fan of you, and I’ll likely continue to be one regardless.
Regarding Michael: Sure he was screwy in many ways, but who among us is free of quirkiness, right?
Regarding Steven: Hey, Fred, you wanna give your life to Jesus?
Hey Larry š
Love your definition and explanation of fan vs. fanatic. I was able to identify with both terms (unfortunately). I used to be a scaredy-cat fanatic — that is, I followed my “safe” beliefs blindly and avoided everything I felt was “dangerous”. Thank God I finally crawled out from under the rock and opened my mind and heart. I believe being a fanatic either adamantly or obediently leaves you very lonely. You miss out on life and the people in it.
Thanks for putting this phenomena into words!
~a fan š
Very thought-provoking and well thought out. I enjoyed reading it! It’s must-reading for all “fanatics” but as you say, they probably won’t “get it.”
Great post Larry, very well put! Reminds me of why I always loved that line in the movie “The Siege”: “I tend to be suspicious of all true believers. Present company included.”
Larry,
I don’t think you’ll lose anyone. Other people and I like to follow you because you speak your mind, whether you think people will agree with you or not.
I like listening to and reading articles by people both on the right and on the left, as long as they are reasoning, even if I totally disagree with them. What you put in your post has helped to verbalize whether I listen to someone- I listen to the fans, not the fanatics.
The world would be a better place with more fans and less fanatics.
Larry,
You forgot to throw in the kitchen sink! You covered so much ground in this post that I had to read read the thing twice.
Unlike you, I did not vote for Obama. I’m not fanatical in my views opposing him for the Presidency I just didn’t think he had the capacity to deal with the financial crises appropriately, and I think my opinions on this will end up being correct. I will also admit I wasn’t overly thrilled with McCain’s ability to deal with this issue either, but I thought him to be the better choice.
The way in which his administration is handling the financial crises by issuing (creating from thin air) trillions of dollars (not Billions) of currency to solve a crises of gargantuan proportions caused by lax regulations on banks and other financial institutions is more than just alarming, its perilous.
This creation of fiat will have a long term detrimental effect on the American economy and that of other leading economies for decades to come. And to make the situation worse the money being created is being funneled back into the hands of the originators of the problem through TARP and asset guarantees.
The TARP program was designed originally by the Bush administration to funnel money into the economy by issuing to banks and other financial institutions money to resume lending to un-freeze credit markets. Hank Paulson, under the Bush regime, in my opinion failed by switching mid stream and changing the formula for the use of this money and switching the program to lending the money to banks for their use to “shore up their balance sheets” instead of using the monies to assist them in selling the “toxic assets” held by these institutions. The issuance of debt issuance occurred but to date there has been little resumption of lending to businesses and consumers which was the original design of the program.
Many will blame the Bush administration for this and many others will blame the Obama administration, but the bottom line is that the administration in office is responsible for oversight of federal programs currently in place regardless of the originating administration. Guitner has diluted the process by forsaking accountability and oversight.
I think the administration was so caught up in the process of reviewing the “to big to fail” balance sheets of the major banks they have missed the point in correcting this problem and that is their needs to take place a de-leveraging of the “toxic assets” being held by banks and other financial institutions.
The banks have caught a break for now with the recent rewriting of the mark to market accounting rules, but this may only stall the inevitable, without the write downs and the losses needing to be incurred by the sale of these “toxic assets” banks balance sheets, and their ability to lend, will be hindered for many years to come.
I could be wrong though, the administration could actually be allowing the banks to buy time to allow them to recover some of these losses by hoping and praying the markets and the economy recover enough to lessen the strains being placed on the banks and other financial institutions. However, if this is the case then capital markets will remain frozen and I think it will cost many more American jobs. With several trillions of dollars in loans coming due in the next 12 to 36 months you just need to wonder where the money to refinance these loans are going to come from TARP II?
Larry, Larry, Larry…
As my parents used to say “You are getting too big for your britches.”
Not all of us think that the belly painters are “pitiful jokes.” How can it possibly be true that NO ONE likes them? I laugh when I see them because I think they are a group of hard working guys just being care free if not a little silly and having some harmless fun. You follow that up with a description of a murdering fanatic. Are you really going to make that analogy? Your depiction of them is nothing less than mean spirited.
By the way, just because MILLIONS of people share the values and beliefs of Sarah Palin does not make us fanatics. You seem to have drunk some of that main stream media Kool-Aid yourself. Why don’t you take your own advice and look at both sides of the story. You seem to be waking up to the reality of the huge mistake you and others made of voting for someone because of what they said and not looking at what they have actually done.
Although I know you won’t lose any sleep and I wouldn’t really want you to, please stick to your strengths. Your books are good; some of your opinions really suck.
Hi Larry!
Good reminder. Echoing your post, “It’s easier to be stupid,” let me ask you a question, Larry.
“Is it easier to make money from fanatics?”
Actually a question to every one here.
Let me “hear” your thoughts.
I think one of the main distinctions between fans and fanatics is how they allow their core beliefs to affect their lives. There is a clear distinction between fan and fanatic, and that was well described here. I also noticed that that Larry took the time to show that he isn’t going to lose any sleep over what people think of him or his ideas. There’s a great message in that statement, because its clear he doesn’t let some things bother him.
I think one of the difficulties here is whether or not one can just “lighten up” and stop knee jerking from their core belief system. I think this is mostly because people have been doing it for so long, they don’t know HOW to do anything differently. I think the key to not letting these things affect you is to separate them into what you can and can’t control. Don’t like how things are going in Washington? Great. There’s an election coming up in 2010. Until then, resolve that as much as you don’t like it, there’s nothing you can do about it until then.
One can change from being a fanatic to a fan, its just a matter of whether or not you allow your emotions about a situation affect the way you see the world.
Larry,
Just a quick quote or two:
“A fanatic is someone who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.” Winston Churchill
and
“Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim.” George Santayana
Wes
Good Post Larry,
One thing… Good post, Nice common sense feel to it. But why do you spend so much time defending your postion when it’s uncalled for. I think if you have an opinion “shoot from the hip” I’m sure most of us will get it.
BTW.. love your stuff, and I mean that in a total non-fanatical kind of way.
Cheers!
Well spoken and thought out article. I do find it interesting though that there are not the flaming responses against your post that I thought would be there.
I am not a fan of Michael Jacksons music when he was an adult (I like the Jackson 5), and wasn’t crazy about the way he lived his life, but I do know and respect that many people cared about him, and loved his music. He did a great deal for the music industry with his videos and work. So although I did not care for him personally and don’t mourn his loss, I am sad that he is gone, because he brought so much joy to so many other people.
I can appreciate your difference between fan and fanatic. I am surprised that you voted for Obama tho. I also voted for Obama, and it was the first time in I can’t tell you how many years that I actually felt like I was voting ‘for’ someone, as opposed to ‘he’s the lesser of the 2 unqualifieds’. It was the first time in my life that I sat glued to the TV the whole inauguration day. From start to finish. The inauguration itself, the talk afterwards, the balls, the whole 9 yards. I have never done that before, and don’t really know why I felt compelled to do so that day. Maybe it was finally a feeling of optimism, hope, and belief that finally we have someone coming in who can truly make a positive difference, he gets it, someone who knows how to connect with people and work with them. I know that he’s not perfect, and he will make his share of mistakes. He has a lot to deal with, a lot of people and issues to contend with. But I sleep much better at night knowing he’s at the helm. Does that make me a fanatic for being glued to the TV that day? Maybe. Do I know he’s not the saviour of the country? Yes. Thats up to each of us to do our part.
But I wonder if we all have a little of both fan and fanatic in each of us…
Thanks for the good words Larry. I don’t know exactly how you’ve developed your philosophy on life itself but I believe the best communicators hold an innate truth their words and convictions. That is definitely you. This is one of your best rants especially when you said “Just because it is your right to do it, doesnāt make it alright…” With respect to “fan vs. fanatics” I think the latter may soon outnumber the former and I ask how can we all just come back to the middle??? Anyways thanks again… I look forward to No Time For Tact and Stop Raising Stupid Kids….
[P.S. I would like to know specifically your views on gun control, NRA, etc. We have to do something!!!]
Good essay! And I like the way you covered a large range of topics, not just entertainment or politics. The essay will make me rethink some of my views, asking myself Why I believe that and follow that, and What do I Really believe? Thank you.
Very well said.
Thanks,
Larry,
As usual, a very fine, well thought-out and balanced post.
I am a bit surprised that, looking at a presidential field of two losers, that you would choose the one who is opposed to almost everything that you so eloquently write about: self control, self determination, and not expecting other people to, against their will, bail you out from your self-inflicted situation.
At least when people accept help from their own church or ethnic organization, they well understand that they cannot sh*t on those who help them, by taking drugs, murdering people, getting drunk, raping women (or men), and so forth.
When the gummint supplies the money (that is, by stealing it by force via taxes), heck, all bets are off. Do whatever you want. It’s a free country.
Pres. Obama has a black Attorney General, a new Latina Supreme Court nominee, and a new black Surgeon General appointee.
The Jewish Auto Czar has just left; in his place is labor’s man, the Jewish Bloom.
Why are clumsy UAW bolt-tighteners worth $100K/P.A. when skilled Chinese workers do the same job for $5K or less?
Larry, you’re a smart fellow, but you are missing a lot of stuff that your usual “Work harder, work smarter” material doesn’t cover.
Have you ever tried out any of your speeches to a union audience?
I didn’t think so.
Larry –
I didn’t think it was possible to become a bigger fan of yours, but this post created new wellsprings of admiration.
As a former radio talk host and newspaper columnist who provoked fanatical responses, I know whereof you speak.
And I also knew while you were telling people what NOT to write in response that you could not stop the fanatics – and sure enough, there they are.
Oh, well – if everybody had their act together as well as you do, you’d be in another line of work and I’d have missed the chance to be entertained by you.
Sincerely,
Ruth Ann Harnisch
Dave – “Black, Latina, Black, Jewish, Chinese” Why does anyone’s ethnicity play into the job they have been hired to do? Why would you even mention this when discussing someone’s job as you did in your response to my posting? And the use of the word “gummint.” It all seems incredibly racist to me. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt as I don’t know you but I must say that I find your posting to be incredibly offensive. But notice that in fairness to all, I posted it any way.
Also, you asked a question and assumed that you knew the answer to it. You asked if I had ever “tried out” any of my speeches to a union audience. First, I don’t “try out” my speeches. Trying material out on an audience you have been paid to address would lack professionalism. Second, you are dead wrong, but people who assume answers before receiving the answers usually are dead wrong. I have spoken to many union audiences.
I do agree with ONE thing you said. I am a smart fellow.
A question back to you Larry – is it possible for fanaticism to be a positive quality? If I was a fanatic about paying all my bills on time or my diet and exercise plan – would that be a type of fanatic?
Is the person who does everything he/she can to improve the quality of life for their family a fanatic or just responsible?
I think it’s possible for fanaticism, when it is a part of your own internal drive, to be a good thing.
Larry,
I agree with your concept of fan versus fanatic. That is the ugly downside of the media websites and their “blogspheres”. There is no more polite discussion, simply angry postulating and one-upsmanship. I’ve stopped reading it, and given up on posting.
I do disagree with your view of Sarah Palin. Minus the two ill-chosen interviews (do you think Obama’s team would have had Biden’s first interview on the Rush Limbaugh show and the second with Sean Hannity?), she is “well-spoken”. The media tends to freely edit her speeches but things look different in their entirety. Then again, I’m not surrounded by your peers in your industry, where slick speech and celebrity often “Trumps” valid content.
I’m not going to go into a long rant on socialism, radicalism, anti-Americanism, statism or anyotherism. I do have an -ism free curiosity as to why you voted for Obama, though. His books, his friends, his voting record, his former church, his website and he all seem to be against every principal you stand for in your books. We all have a right to vote for whom we want for any reason we choose — even if it’s a vote against the other guy. I’m just curious because you’ve said you voted for him, but I have never read why.
Thanks for doing what you do.
Julie Lea – If you are a deeply responsible person and these things matter greatly to you, I wouldn’t call it fanaticism. I think if it directs your life and dominates all you say and do to the point of making you one dimensional, it’s fanaticism. I know people who are fanatics about their diet or their exercise program or even paying their bills to the point they are tiresome to talk to. These are fanatics. While the end result can be positive, it can be still be fanaticism – at least that is my opinion. As I said in my post, I have a strong stance on many things but none of it dominates my existence.
Thanks for your question! I appreciate it.
Thanks John, that is the nicest way anyone has asked me about why I voted for Obama. To give a reason here would be to incite the hyper-partisan responses of the radicals. Suffice it to say: I have extremely conservative fiscal views. I have some liberal social views. I would consider myself “balanced” but of course that is my own self-analysis. I have pretty much kept the details of my political preferences out of it as I have my religious views. Instead, I write about “people” issues that apply to everyone. I do my best to take a broader stance in my approach to business, personal development, finances and parenting.
Sadly, there was a time when you could state a political opinion and have a sane discussion and a calm back and forth on the issues. But in today’s world of hyper-partisanship, those days have passed. Even if I stated that” fortunately, we live in a society where the democratic process allows us to vote for who we want and the first amendment allows us to state any opinion we have,” someone is going to attack that statement and say something ignorant like, “Not if Obama has his way!” I say that because you folks wouldn’t believe the mail I get. I can barely tolerate the insanity, unfairness, and meanness that is so prevalent on BOTH sides. So, no details here. And I do appreciate your thoughtful approach to the question.
To Chris,
With regards to the financial mess, you make a point of blaming the administrations regardless of which party but in the end wasn’t it the America public that caused the mess. Weren’t there all these dumb “idiots” as Larry calls em that borrowed money to buy a half million dollar house with no money down on an interest only loan while earning $40,000 a year! Wasn’t that the consumer’s choice? Everyone got themselves in this mess and now they are all wanting to blame someone else. What IDIOTS!
Believe it or not, I understand that answer. I think it’s the pseudo-anonymity of the web that allows people to behave as despicably as they do when they blog. Most of these people would not use the same language face-to-face. In fact, most wouldn’t say anything at all if with someone who took a position against something they believed. Making things worse, our media outlets have seen fit to brazenly abandon objectivity and further fuel the harsh rhetoric. The result is why I now get my American news from, of all places, British newspaper web sites.
Thanks for your non-answer answer, Larry. It seems there is a side of you that deals with the harsh reality of today and a side of you that dreams of a better tomorrow. There’s nothing wrong with that.
Larry, I used to ‘buy’ your philosophy and style but lately it’s gone over the top. But you are an ‘over the top guy’ so I can understand that, so I started to wonder about your fan base that blindly follows your comments with unquestioning ākool-aidā mentality but I have recently read a lot of great comments from your fans. I have to say, if this country is to turn around, Obama, Pelosi, Palin or McCain be damned, then it will take well educated, well thought out responses and actions from people like those that responded here to make a real difference. I donāt agree with many of your points but thatās because I think on my own. I donāt know what you have against Glenn Beck because heās an opinionist like you and is just voicing his opinion. It takes educated individuals to separate entertainment and fact or, as I think you were attempting to do, separate fans and fanatics. Glenn is part opinion and part entertainment so yes, the fanatics will follow him blindly, the fans will see the entertainment and opinion for what they are just like your comments.
Overall, keep making people think, make them understand they can have opinions too but donāt slam people that are doing much the same as what you do, entertain, create controversy and promote opinions.
“Fanatics are typically unable or unwilling to see the good because they are so caught up seeing the bad.”
You are THE ULTIMATE fanatic Larry – caught up in seeing the bad as you “wait for the other hoof to drop.” Keep waiting, she’s a good woman with good values and a bad decision to quit… thank God you didn’t have any – oh wait… you HAVE made some bad decisions too – right?
I see harmless football fans enjoying a day away from their nagging wives or doing a male bonding thing…nothing bad about it – they are not murderers. They are as free to be idiots as we all are.
Per your 18 principles – Be Positive, Lighten Up, Expect the Best, Love… I’m trying to find the last “positive” blog you’ve written.
I get that “criticizing all who aren’t you” is your shtick, and certainly you’re the last speaker anyone needs to hire if they’re looking for someone to cram sunshine up their backside. The whole “pitbull” thing. You’re fanatically negative and there’s enough of that going on already. You’ve certainly “discovered your uniquess” – just not sure how well it’s serving others and recognize you don’t care if it does or doesn’t. What a legacy of service that is…
You used to be funny dude.
Thanks for the feedback Stephanie. You fulfilled everything I said would happen in this blog and made it about Sarah Palin and then resorted to personal attacks on me. Thanks for proving my point. By the way, I never said she wasn’t a good woman or didn’t have good values. But a fanatic wouldn’t have seen that.
No reason to defend myself against your attacks on me. Can’t find the motivation to argue the points. I will say that I believe it is a POSITIVE thing to take a NEGATIVE stance against stupidity. And I’ll add that most folks still think I’m a funny dude.
About fanatics………
” it is easier for some to just follow others blindly, that way they do not have to think for themselves.”
“To be swept up in a wave of fanaticism is to become one with the sea of other idiots all thinking and feeling the exact same way.”
“A main requirement for a fanatic is an empty, impressionable mind.”
“To become a fanatic is to give up one’s sense of self in order to follow other’s ideals, beliefs, and way of life. It is quite interchangeable with brainwashing.”
About fans…………
“I THINK, therefore I’m FAN.” (not a fanatic!)
Have a great day, liked the blog. jd
Um… Going to split hairs here, Larry, since you bust my chops all the time (without knowing it — HA!). “Fan” is actually short for “fanatic”, so they are actually one and the same.
Gotcha — from one know-it-all to another. : )
Great point Elizabeth, but………. just like with the words, fans stop short of being fanatics.
Larry, once again you have said what needed to be said.
Something that comes to mind as the economy here in North America is what it is, are the mindsets of the people of our society. Along the lines of your “fan” or “fanatic” subject, people have become absolute fanatics of our so-called former life.
Business people are now fanatical about how they think their business should be run, because according to them it should be as it has always been, rather than adapting to the changing environment around us. Then they go out of business, because people aren’t spending their money on that OLD business idea anymore.
The fanatical mindset of many people is that they should have a “secure” job with a big corporation, so now that those jobs are no longer available it’s “impossible” to find a job.
I have a feeling that if the fanatical attitude towards these problems became one of REALISTIC adaptation and exploration of the CURRENT market opportunities, we could turn this whole thing around much faster. The fact is, it wasn’t working. We were living in a fantasy that came crashing to reality and now we have to face it and build something REAL that WORKS.
Maybe not as controversial as your examples, but thanks for starting up the thinking cap for us š
Larry,
Seems to me you have many FANatics here who agree with every word you say and can’t or refuse to think for themselves.
I always find it hilarious when people write things like “Larry I love your books and have read every one, you go Larry!” or “Well written and thought out Larry” like you’re some kind of idiot normally but this time you really thought things through. Shouldn’t all of your blogs be well written?? Isn’t that what you do? It seems that they think if they lead in with “I have read all of your books” it grants them special access to then commence verbal diharrea all over the screen.
I’ll bet that most who say that don’t actually act on any of your advice.
I would say that from a sales stand point it is great for you to have so many fanatics as they will just eat up and buy up whatever you are offering. They’ll take the same stand as you on everything, believe it to be truth (it is your truth but not necessarily theirs) and argue to the death with anyone who dares defy John Smith & Larry Winget (of course to them you are best buds). Again, not healthy but good for your wallet surly.
I suppose understanding the difference between being a fan and a fanatic can help one identify a potentially unhealthy obsession (in others of course since according to your definition they won’t see it in themselves). Other than that, I’m not sure that it is a topic that will evoke any meaningful responses or discussions (like this one for example).
Cheers.
Oh I forgot to say that I have all of your books, CD’s, DVD’s, mouse pad, shut-up T-shirt, pens and signed card as well. I haven’t read or listened to all of them but it somehow makes me feel like a better, smarter person owning them. You go Larry!! Ha Ha lol.
To Ray,
Yes you are correct the American consumer did put themselves in a position to borrow up the ying-yang when given the opportunity. Although I did not specifically state so in my post I was mostly addressing politico issues related to the ongoing financial crises.
Without change in the way our country controls the regulation of money, the actual creation and distribution of money through investment vehicles, we as a nation will continue to experience booms and busts. Lenders will lend as allowed and borrowers will borrow as allowed. Case in point, when you review the history of the great depression you will see debt or leverage in the form of margin in the securities market as the primary source causing the depression. This is similar to what we see in today’s debt or leverage in mortgage securities.
Without some form of checks and balances on the part of government regulators we will forever continue to be a debtor nation. You just need to look at the current new debt created by the treasury over the last 18 months.
Thanks Larry!
“Don’t be a belly-painter.” That was priceless.
I think you touched on many salient points as did some of the other posters, especially the one about fanatics allowing the subject of their fanaticism to overcome reality, rational thought and basic common sense.
I used to stereotype fanatics as being loud, overbearing, and easy to spot, but this illusion was completely shattered when talking to a former coworker of mine. She was an intelligent, educated, sensible woman with a background in the health sciences, which is why I was completely taken aback when I asked her if she had heard about a significant fossil find that was all over the news. Her response was, “Those are all fake.” I said, “What do you mean?” She explained that her pastor told their congregation that, because they KNEW the Earth was only around 6,000 yrs old (dating according to the Bible) there could not be any true fossils, since they were all dated to hundreds of thousands or millions of years, and the items being termed “fossils” by the media were all hoaxes being created, treated to processes to make them appear aged, and buried by the scientific establishment, so they could later pretend they’d dug them up. I asked her why anyone would do such a thing and she said it was part of Satan’s plan to “move us away from God” by making evolution seem valid. She said all this without blinking an eye, as though it made all the sense in the world.
I just stared at her for a moment, then changed the subject. I didn’t argue the point because she was a good friend and I didn’t want to upset her but also because I could tell that nothing I could possibly say would make any difference to her at all.
That conversation was quite an education for me on the many faces of fanaticism. She believed what her pastor told her because she had been taught from childhood that what the pastor said was true, period, and was not subject to debate. I guess this constitutes more of a habit, an ingrained behavior that many just don’t question, but is nonetheless a form of fanaticism.
First, on the lighter side of this discussion are people who “jump on the bus” fans, fanatics or just a f? For example a professional football team who has chronically lost for years and almost as long as the franchise has been existence (i.e. Cardinals). I assume the bus jumpers are just a f since the word just gets shorter with the level dedication to the cause.
Second, regarding the financial mess Chris mentioned above. I completely agree it is first the consumers fault, only followed closely behind by the dumb bankers and mortgage brokers. Why would anyone loan someone money in the first place when they know $40k/year could really buy someone a home between $80k to $120k at best if they still want to save, eat and have transportation to get to work on time. Sounds to me like a classic case of codependent drug dealer and user. Or maybe everyone forgot the childās game musical chairs and what happens when the music stops?
Then again, why would the bankers/mortgage brokers care when they are using someone elseās money and immediately sell the bad loans into a pool of untraceable swaps “laundering the money” eliminating any accountability for their failure to do their job? All the while guys like Muzzillo ādrug lordā knowingly skimmed his hundreds of millions off of the bad loans. The people at the SEC ācopsā were outside sleeping in the car talking about when they were in the business āwall streetā.
I guess there is a reason why I am an engineer and not business person since I could never understand why in business classes and business people are constantly talking about growing their business. Either the business people failed to understand the āSā curve or I completely missed the concept of what happens when a business matures. Earnings tend to flatten out, but you can still make money if you manage things properly. Have we built a business mentality that a business person is only a success if the profits increase at a constant rate? Why is a business that is consistently profitable with little to know growth a bad thing? Then again, these business people were only satisfying my need for a competitive return in the market as one of the stocks my mutual funds hold.
Yes, I feel I am partly to blame for this housing financial mess. My family stayed in the home we could afford and could see what was happening was not right. I just could not put my finger on the problem at the time so that I could right my congressmen to plug the ādrug dealersā loop holes. Then again would a congressman do anything that could cost JOBS? Damn another case of drug users āAmerican job seekersā and drug dealers āa government writing complex laws/rules to create jobsā.
Maybe someday everyone will realize the problem is too many people and too many people want employment (well most honest people). That is why logic gets thrown out the window so frequently now to create a complex web to result in job creation. I guess that would mean someone would need to pay attention in biology class when they talked about population crashes. It is funny how the businesses āSā curve and population crashes both are based on the fundamentals of business and life that are consistently repeatable events.
Then again, I am ranting about something I cannot quite put my finger on to write my congressmen. Oh crap, if we slowed our population growth how would our governments around the world pay for all the empty promises like social security, Medicare, and our new prescription drug program? I guess they would have to think and be creative with a business mind set to figure out how to make it work.
Pat,
Consumers are rightfully to blame for borrowing money as are banks for lending. However, the root of the problem is actually government.
Right or wrong citizens will borrow and lenders will lend what government allows them. If we don’t have curbs and stops in place to prevent “Mozillo” like lenders from shooting for the moon and citizens from borrowing till mars then we can only blame ourselves as a nation.
My brother-in-law is an engineer so I think I understand your logic behind business growth. If businesses didn’t grow, and grow at a pace relative to the growth rate within their industry (hopefully more), then the NEW engineering projects or REVISED projects you work on would go away, and when that happened your employer would have some tough decisions to make which might directly affect your job.
Thanks Larry.
Interesting post. Just today I posted on someone’s Facebook page about religion, but with qualms, thinking that all I’ll get in response is fanatic flaming.
Fanatics refuse to think logically. It’s so sad that they accept a pastor’s lies that dinosaur bones are a big government conspiracy (or that our astronauts did not get to the moon, or that the Holocaust did not happen). But something in them must be more comfortable with these convoluted, preposterous conspiracy theories than with the truth.
As for the guys with the big bellies painted team colors, they should cover up. I no more want to see their enormous bare abdomens than they want to see mine. Just because it is legal for a male to walk around in a Speedo with 80 pounds of gut fat hanging out does not make it attractive. Painted or unpainted. With or without beer and organized sports. Fan or fanatic.
By the way, Larry, I am sure we would all be laughing if we heard your rants rather than read them. Delivery is crucial. Podcasts? Videos? I know you’re a professional, but it would be fun to see you doing a homemade rant on video.
All,
It’s not rocket science.
Take responsibility for your own behavior.
Stop blaming others.
Mental masturbation is exactly that.
Let’s move forward. Please.
Rich
Hi Larry, just heard the first of your three little items that get big results. Fire people. This is absolutely true however, I don’t know if it is all fear of firing people that is the largest problem. My personal opinion is that is the unwillingness of Management to deal with problems (conflict resolution if you will.) It is easier to ignore the problems than deal with them.
What Managers fail to realize is that by not dealing with the problems when they are small, they manifest into much larger problems. In essence, the Managers need to be fired for not firing staff that don’t do their jobs. Let’s all of us remember that the support must come from the top down!
Hello,
For the most part I agree with what you wrote. But in my view, you made a mistake with the part about Michael Jackson. That part only boils down to believing or disbelieving the medias, and has nothing to do with being a fan or a fanatic.
How do you know Jackson’s medical budget? How do you know who is the dad of Jackson’s kids? How do you know if he did or did not have a skin disease called Vitiligo?
I can answer all of those questions for you myself. You don’t know. You are basing that whole segment on what you read or heard in the medias.
/Christian
I just came across this post while doing a search for “response to fanatical republican party”. I guess that might sound like I’m a fanatical democrat but I sincerely hope not.
While watching the Sunday news shows this morning, I have just gotten fed up with the perpetuating of opinions, speculation and total fabrications as news. I did this search in hopes of finding people who are basing their opinion on facts and rationality. I get a physical fiery feeling when I see the talking heads on the various news channels pass themselves off as experts. They are smug, arrogant and complete know it all’s. I might agree with someone’s perspective, even strongly agree but I have become wise enough to seek out information to substantiate the perspective. If what someone says is wrong, even if I want to agree with it, I will see it for what it is and admit it. I don’t see this happening right now with our current political environment. I don’t see our country “bridging” the two parties, by-partisanship, etc. I see a widening divide, a gorge developing, polarization like I have never seen in my life, all of 36 years. Am I wrong? I want so badly to see rationality and truth and science and research to be the focus of our attempts to solve our current social issues. I am so sick of the lies and arrogance.
SO….that is what led me here, I have never heard of you before and will look more into what you have to say about things. I agree with what you’ve written here and am glad to have stumbled upon it.
Thank you.
I just wanted to say something about this comment ” They are unwilling to see the drugs, the weirdness, the sickness, and the perversion”
Totally false. COuld you not be anymore blind? There is absoulutly no solid evidence.
Oh and haha Fan is short for Fanatic
Dont worry we all make mistakes
Hi Larry…
It sure looks like you’ve got a following of your very own fanatics. š
I saw this speech on the computer by militia on it some one who look like Jeff Daniels was in between a liberal and conservative. He shocked the audience by saying American was not the greatest country in the world when the reporter asked him. He turned to the liberal saying they believed America was great yet apologized for every thing wrong. While the smug conservative was told they were other countries in the world that were just as free as America. He then went on with their was a time when America tried to fight poverty and not just the poor meant what it said and did great things. Now it lead the world in defense spending, people incarcerated and obesity Americans needed to pay attention. I doubt if you would like the speech.
The show is called Newsroom and stars Jeff Daniels.