Fear Politics

[English]

It strikes me that polititians and the media in the US love scaring the American people.
Whether it's about Aryan Nations in Idaho, cannabilistic Rednecks in West Virginia or Islamic Terrorists hiding around every corner in New York. Seems most of you are terrified of your own countrymen!
I think most problems in the US are blown out of all proportion, principly by the media and by politicians.
The US is really not that dangerous.
If you look at Nationmaster you'll see that even Denmark has a higher burglary rate than America and many Asian and African nations suffer far worse at the hands of terrorists than the US.

[CARLHAYDEN]

First, you are correct that SOME politicians in the United States of America DO use fear as their stock in trade.

Second, you omitted the two most enduring examples of fear campaigns used in this country: (a) terrifying the elderly that the other side will eliminate social security, and (b) terrifying blacks that the other side will have them lynched, burn their churches, drag them while chained behind their vehicles, etc.

Third, you are correct that many of the legitimate things to fear are worse in many countries where the average American is unaware of the scope of the problem (burglary is also far more prevelant in the UK than in the US).

So, the question becomes, why the resort to fear campaigns?

The answers to that questions are also multiple.

First, it is believed (and plausible) that fear campaigns have worked in the past.

Second, if you cannot put forth your own plausible program, then it is so easy to resort to a fear campaign instead.

Third, the American response to problems such as terrorism, burglary, etc. is far different from the response of the rest of the world to those problems.  Whereas most of the rest of the world has a fatalist response to such ills (as in, well, its something we just have to learn to live with), the American response is to make efforts to significantly reduce those problems.

In short, Americans believe in eliminating terrorists, NOT appeasing them (as one tangible example).

[DA]

For those interested
(note I opened up Nationmaster to check it out before finishing reading the post )
______________________________________

Murder:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_cap

USA: 24/62
UK: 46/62
AUS: 43/62
CAN: 44/62
Colombia: 1/62
Qatar: 62/62

Murder by gun:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_wit_fir_cap

USA: 8/32
UK: 32/32 (What are you people using knives? poison?
AUS: 27/32
CAN: 20/32
South Africa: 1/32

Assaults:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_ass_cap

USA: 5/57
UK: 7/57
AUS: 10/57
CAN: 9/57
South Africa: 1/57
Azerbaijan: 57/57

Rape:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_rap_cap

USA: 9/65
UK: 13/65
AUS: 3/65
CAN: 5/65
South Africa: 1/65
Saudi Arabia: 65/65

Burglaries:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_bur_cap

USA: 16/54
UK: 7/54
AUS: 1/54
CAN: 10/54
Saudi Arabia: 54/54

Kidnaping:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_kid_cap

USA: No Data
UK: No Data
AUS: No Data
CAN: No Data
Colombia: 1/9 (124.35 per 1000 people!)
India: 9/9 (.07/1000)

Fraud:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_fra_cap

USA: 17/61
UK: 2/61
AUS: No Data
CAN: 8/61
Germany: 1/61
Saudi Arabia: 61/61

Embezzlement:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_emb_cap

USA: 30/44
UK: No Data
AUS: No Data
CAN: No Data
Czech Republic: 1/44
Romania: 44/44

Total Crime:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_tot_cri_cap

USA: 8/60
UK: 6/60
AUS: 86/60
CAN: 11/60
Dominica: 1/60
Yemen: 60/60

Prisoners:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_pri_cap

USA: 2/100
UK: No Data
AUS: 73/100
CAN: 77/100
Rwanda: 1/100 (just over twice as many as US)
Syria: 100/100

Executions:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_exe_cap

USA: 20/33
UK: No Data
AUS: No Data
CAN: No Data
The Bahamas: 1/33
Uzbekistan, Iraq, Somalia: 31-33/33 (0 per 1 million)


All data is ranked on a per capita basis; numbers of people within the country didn't skew the results.

Apologies if I mixed up Austria and Australia, I didn't spend forever on this.

[DA]

First, you are correct that SOME politicians in the United States of America DO use fear as their stock in trade.

Second, you omitted the two most enduring examples of fear campaigns used in this country: (a) terrifying the elderly that the other side will eliminate social security, and (b) terrifying blacks that the other side will have them lynched, burn their churches, drag them while chained behind their vehicles, etc.

Third, you are correct that many of the legitimate things to fear are worse in many countries where the average American is unaware of the scope of the problem (burglary is also far more prevelant in the UK than in the US).

So, the question becomes, why the resort to fear campaigns?

The answers to that questions are also multiple.

First, it is believed (and plausible) that fear campaigns have worked in the past.

Second, if you cannot put forth your own plausible program, then it is so easy to resort to a fear campaign instead.

Third, the American response to problems such as terrorism, burglary, etc. is far different from the response of the rest of the world to those problems.  Whereas most of the rest of the world has a fatalist response to such ills (as in, well, its something we just have to learn to live with), the American response is to make efforts to significantly reduce those problems.

In short, Americans believe in eliminating terrorists, NOT appeasing them (as one tangible example).

2-a-I) terrifying the elderly that the other side will eliminate social security
2-a-II) and drugs (commonly labeled as medical care).

[dazzleman]

People generally vote either their hopes or their fears, or some combination of the two.  It is easier to appeal to people's fears than their hopes, so this is what politicians often do.

There are however, some things that really should be feared, and some politicians who don't wish to deal with these things accuse their opponents of stoking people's fears because they have raised legtimate issues.

The real question is - are the fears legitimate?  If the fear is that electing Republicans means that every black church from Maryland to Florida will be burned, then the answer is no, and the stoking of that fear by a politician is highly irresponsible and reprehensible.  On the other hand, if the fear is of a terrorist attack, that is a highly legitimate fear, and politicians should provide some ideas on how to handle this issue, and not accuse those who raise the issue of stoking fears.

The issue works both ways.

[opebo]

Americans are incredibly fearful people, there's no doubt about it.  However our fears are generally irrational - some activities which are genuinely dangerous, like driving, are embraced.  Other activities that do not fit into the protestant work ethic, such as vacationing abroad, having sex, smoking/taking drugs, are submitted to an entirely exaggerated calculation of risk.  

One can't really blame politicians for playing on the fears of this puritannical society for electoral gain.

[TeePee4Prez]

There are many prime examples of fear poltiics.  The biggest one nationwide is terrorism and the Bush/Cheney agenda.  I'm sure there are many on local levels I don't know about, but if you have been reading the PA-13 thread in the Congressioanl districts, fear tactics are being heavily used by Melissa Brown into scaring white voters in a transitional area into voting for her.  KeystonePhil will deny this of course.  Other "red herring" tactics include trying to use the Catholic church to appeal to working class voters via the abortion issue and school vouchers.  I don't mean to beat Philly politics to death, but I'm sure the aforementioned I listed are issues in other parts of the country such as New York, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, and other big cities.  

I don't want to beat the Pennsylvania bitch thread to death, but hey, it's relevant to this topic.  I really want to hear other local perspectives that I may not be aware of.  Hey, that's what these forums are for!

[cwelsch]

Most politicians use fear.  I've spoken to countless Europeans who are deathly afraid of anybody who owns a gun, for example.

[Platypus]

Yes, US Politicians use fear tactics, but so do Australian politicins. Hioward is using the fear tactic of high interest rates under Latham; Latham is using fear tactics of medicare being screwed up by Howard. Both are using other ones of course, as well. They both also have positive campaign positions.

[DA]

How about this one, "If homosexuals marry, families will be ruined"? I mean lets look at how many Christian homes end in divorce and compair how many homosexual homes end similarly (per capita of course).

[Gabu]

I would say yes to the poll question, but honestly, I can't really blame the politicians for doing so.  There's a simple reason why they do it: it works.  People respond to and change their minds over fear.  If this wasn't the case, politicians who use fear campaigns would lose drastically and the tactic would go away.

Until people stop listening to fearmongering seriously and start identifying it for what it is, it will continue.

[Lunar]

Fear of terrorism
Fear of crime
Fear of losing social security
Fear of economic collapse
Fear of the rich
Fear of corporations
Fear of socialism
Fear of guns
etc.

Politicians exaggerate to make points.  This naturally makes all potential threats and dangers about ten times what they are in order for rhetoric to be interesting and persuasive.

[Nym90]

I agree, both sides play the fear game, but I think that Bush has done the best job of it with terrorism. Yes, it is a legitimate threat, but it is far from the number one threat that most people have in their lives, or the thing that affects most people the most in their daily lives.

We have nothing to fear but fear itself. I'm not afraid of the terrorists. I do not fear death myself; I refuse to live my life in fear. No terrorist will ever alter my way of life or my daily routines. I'm not willing to sacrifice freedom for security; doing so often gets you neither.

[DA]

I agree, both sides play the fear game, but I think that Bush has done the best job of it with terrorism. Yes, it is a legitimate threat, but it is far from the number one threat that most people have in their lives, or the thing that affects most people the most in their daily lives.

We have nothing to fear but fear itself. I'm not afraid of the terrorists. I do not fear death myself; I refuse to live my life in fear. No terrorist will ever alter my way of life or my daily routines. I'm not willing to sacrifice freedom for security; doing so often gets you neither.

Living in fear and terror of "terrorists" gives them power, it's foolish for our government to expand this.

Also, when people become used to certain fears, those who want to manipulate them (movie makers, writers, poilitcians, video game makers, amusement parks, etc.) have to go to greater lengths to satisfy the demand. Susequently people are able to tollerate more and the process spirals ever downward. If we are going to choose to be entertained by fear we need to learn to seperate entertainment from reality.

[English]

As an example of how afraid many Americans are, I've even read lots of comments from Americans about the UK. They're terrified of being attacked here because of anti-american sentiment!! Who on earth feeds this stuff to people?
I've been to New York several times and couldn't understand what all the fuss was about, not once did I feel intimidated, even on the subway at night. Listen to the average American and they would probably tell you it's near certain death to ride the subway in New York after dark! OK, there were a few drunks, but nothing scary.
By and large NYC is not dangerous at all, in fact most people there are very friendly!
Seems to me, the US media and US politicians like to make out the US is a horrendously dangerous nation full of terrorists, murderers and rapists. This is simply untrue. Similarly all muslims are not psycopathic American-haters. I've been to Islamic nations and found the people insufferably kind, polite and friendly!

[Democratic Hawk]

I'd like to think they don't - but if I were American and voting come November 2, I'd be voting on domestic issues rather than national security issue.

We haven't had anything like September 11 in UK, but I do think that al-Qaeda are as much a threat to us as they are to the US - but it wouldn't affect how I cast my vote.

Dave

[Keystone Phil]

There are many prime examples of fear poltiics.  The biggest one nationwide is terrorism and the Bush/Cheney agenda.  I'm sure there are many on local levels I don't know about, but if you have been reading the PA-13 thread in the Congressioanl districts, fear tactics are being heavily used by Melissa Brown into scaring white voters in a transitional area into voting for her.  KeystonePhil will deny this of course.  

Of course I will deny it. Melissa Brown has stated over and over again to the voters this is not about race. However, you dismiss it.

Now if a Dem was doing exactly what Brown is doing, you'd hail him or her as a hero. No way would that elected official/candidate be using race because...well..that person is a Dem. I love the double standards within your party, especially in Philadelphia.  That's exactly what you're about, too. You want to be a "Section 8 reform Dem" but once a Republican wants to do something, in your eyes it's racist.  

As for fear politics, one that comes to mind is the old Dem line about how the GOP wants to take away social security.