Political Psychology 101-The Politics of Security

In John Dean's book, Conservatives without Conscience, he attempts to explain why so many present-day conservatives are just down-right mean. He concludes that it is because they are not conservatives as much as they are authoritarians. He has a chapter on how Cheney and Bush have used the "politics of fear" to govern and keep the Republican Party in power.

If you stop and think about it, a lot of the appeal of the Republican Party is based on being afraid of something or someone. Whether it's fear of terrorists, fear of gays, fear of blacks, fear of strong women, fear of liberals, or fear of the popular culture, fear is used by Cheney and Bush to keep power. The message is this: "You are afraid of _______ (fill in with approriate Republican bogeyman). Vote for us and we will protect you from this danger."

There are several reasons why this tactic works. First, there is a significant portion of the population that responds to this sort of appeal. According to a social psychologist cited in Dean's book, approximately 25% of the population is comfortable with authoritariansim. So appeals based on fear work with such individuals. Second, and this is something that we tend to forget, one of the main purposes of government is to provide security for the governed. In times of perceived danger, when people are more worried abut security, ( say America after the 9-11 attacks), appeals based on fear find more fertile ground. Finally, such appeals are simple to understand. In a world of increasing bombardment of information, political messages that are simple to understand have a better shot at cutting through the static.

Compounding the problem is that the media is either complicit in the peddling of the politics of fear, (for example, Fox News), or refuses to recognize that such peddling is occurring. An example of this was the refusal of most of the major news outlets in this country to critically examine Bush's claims that a war in Iraq would enhance America's security. From the New York Times on down, most American news outlets allowed Bush's claims to go unexamined until we had invaded Iraq and had not found any WMDs. By that time, of course, we had 140,000 American soldiers mired down in what is looking increasingly like a low intensity civil war.

So how do we counter the politics of fear? We can, of course, practice the politics of fear ourselves. There are several legitimate claims that we can make about this administration's drive to push Americans into economic insecurity. Proposals such as privatizing Social Security, taxing earned income at substantially higher rates than unearned income, turning over Medicare's prescription drug plan to the drug companies, trade agreements that allow American companies to ship American jobs to third world countries, eliminating aid to college students, the list goes on and on. Creative ads could be devised that point out how the Bushies want to create insecurity at home while wasting American lives in the sands of the Middle East.

Another way to counter the politics of fear is to realize it is happening and point out to the media that it is happening. Often we assume that when reporters anc commentators don't critically examine the Bush Administration it is because of their complicity when actually it is often because of their lack of knowledge. We have an obligation to make them aware by writing letters to the editors and, perhaps more importantly, by emailing them information countering the misinformation put out by Bush and his supporters.

A third way to counter the politics of fear is to point out to the American public that it is being practiced. Very few Democratic politicians do this. Most of them are so busy fighting each radical proposal that comes out that they don't have or take the time to look at the big picture. Yet, if they would do so, they could tell American voters what is happening and counter it with the politics of hope.

The politics of hope seeks to unite, not divide, Americans. The politics of hope plays on Americans' dreams, not their fears. The politics of hope takes advantage of the good nature of the American people. The politics of hope was the politics of FDR, JFK, the pre-Viet Nam LBJ, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton. It has been behind every successful Democratic campaign for the presidency since 1932. Why? Because it works. Because ultimately Americans would rather hear the voices of hope than the voices of fear.