Today Terry Madonna mentioned a piece he read this morning titled An Inordinate Fear of Terrorism?, by Bret Stephens.
Link (from The Wall Street Journal)
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
An inordinate fear of terrorism
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I have addressed this issue before and it has to do with authoritarianism. 95% of authoritarians are followers, not leaders, but the leaders depend on the followers to maintain power.
Using authoritarianism as a tactic is faciliated by menacing the followers with a threat or boogy-man. In fact, it's probably necessary.
I'm guessing most authoritarian followers don't recognize that's who they are, but leaders who employ the tactic are quite aware.
Fear is the driving force behind authoritarian leadership, and why do they use it? Because it works.
Be afraid of Barack Obama.....he'll turn America into a Muslim nation, he has ties to Kenyan islamofacists, he's clearly a socialist who will destroy American democracy, his middle name is Hussein, he'll take your guns away, he doesn't wear a flag lapel pin or put his hand over his heart when the national anthem is sung, and not only that, he doesn't know the words to the Star Spangled Banner........oh, and let's not forget, he doesn't put his hand on the Bible when he takes an oath.
If you vote for the wrong person, gays will marry eachother, and then who knows what's next? People will be having sex and falling in love with camels and cattle. Surely there's an agenda to destroy the family.
The writer of the article reminds me that 'fear' can be used as a political tool by those that have found out it can be used as motivator to gain power and influence.
Remember what happened to the boy (politicians in this case) that cried "Wolf" once too often ??
Good post, Fred.
I note that I agree with you most all the time, as Gary notes you agree with me-----
This must slightly unnerve Gary, since he respects both your and my positions, and yet you and I disagree with him a fair amount of the time on a fair number of issues.
[Note to Gary: listen to your blogging friends. They're pretty savvy.]
There is a British politician who speaks his mind in the movie "Sicko," the very respected Tony Benn.
He notes that the tactics employed by unscrupulous leaders are ones of A)fear, and B)demoralization (hopelessness). Both serve to maintain the status quo by keeping the electorate unable to rock the boat.
If people are suppressed sufficiently for long enough a time, they become cowed, non-rebellious. Bureaucracies are very clever at this. So are large corporations when it comes to consumer rights...
I think that C)stupidity ought to be given some credit as well---an uninformed or intellectually incurious group probably isn't going to challenge extant leadership either, and will also conveniently ignore or forget the misdeeds that should see elected officials ousted or prosecuted.
The subtleties of the fear-mongering are just as manipulatively successful as the most blatant tactics . . . innuendo and insinuation are the tiny seeds that grow with the least nurturing. You don't have to directly say something about someone, just infer it and let imagination give it legs.
Geez--I almost said "wings" there, that wouldn't be metaphorically polite, would it?
Anyway, it is that fear-mongering that taps into the most vulnerable parts of psyches that has been the bread and butter of Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, Savage, Beck et al. They pander to those unstated fears and milk them for all they're worth.
The people who can't see them using this tactic don't understand why we dislike them so much for doing it. And the reason people can't see them doing it is because people are already in fear mode and instead of the fear being perceived as irrational, they feel it as genuine.
They bought into the ruse in other words.
It's said that when you're brainwashed, one of the defining characteristics of being brainwashed is that you deny that you're brainwashed and discredit anyone who says you are.
Probably quite true from what I've seen. . . . .
It is interesting to note what this concept of "fear" may well have done in swinging the primary vote in Texas toward Senator Clinton. The "3 O'Clock in the Morning" video certainly implanted the concept of "fear" on some level, didn't it? Jacque and Fred, I do enjoy reading your posts and do agree on occasion. Like you, I just don't keep score. It is what seems to me to be right and wrong; not right and left. GS
I think we will see a lot of the "WHO do you trust to keep you safe" theme in the upcomming elections (Dem Primaries and final General).
It is a valid question and point, but how it is handled and how much is the question.
I know I want to feel that whomever I choose to vote for is qualified for the job and can deal with all its demands. I expect all people do.
It is certainly a fine line between bringing up a point vs needlessly belaboring it.
Gary,
Excellent observation about the "3O'clock in the Morning" political ad. It would be great if we could keep the discussion about the power of 'fear' and it's use as a tool to manipulate people on an academic level.
Recognize when it's being used and discredit it's use when it appears to be irrational or unfounded. Imagine the impact it would have on politics and campaigning.
Politicians would have to resort to statesmanship, honesty, and rational arguments. Sigh.
I thought you might like to continue the "fear in political ads" over here.
Post a Comment