• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The politics of fear

ted_bloody_maul

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
May 23, 2003
Messages
4,580
The title of the thread is a reference to a book I've just finished reading which argues that much of modern politics is dominated by sentiments of fear about various things (worthwhile but could have been much better, imo). Anyway, this argument seems to tie in quite nicely with this little piece of research. I think there might be something in it although I think it proceeds on certain assumptions and the fact that the research was done in America, with the different factors which determine political stance there, means it might not be directly applicable here.

Right-wingers more startled by sudden noises and spiders than liberals, study finds

If you want to know where someone stands politically, forget asking them their views on Thatcherism or the European Union. Just burst a balloon behind their back.

It may sound bizarre, but researchers claim that conservatives are more startled by sudden noises than liberals.

The American team's findings - published in the respected journal Science - suggest that our political views are closely linked to our biology.


Anyone whose brain is hard-wired to be anxious about 'external threats', such as loud noises or unpleasant images, is more likely to support hawkish policies such as high military spending and the Iraq War, they said.
In contrast, those who are less jumpy will tend to support more liberal immigration laws, pacifism and gun control.

To test their theory, the researchers recruited 46 adults with strong political beliefs.


Each was shown three threatening images - a large spider on the face of a frightened person, a dazed individual with a bloody face and an open wound with maggots on it - interspersed with 33 less disturbing pictures.

Sensors measured how much the volunteers sweated.

It was discovered that those with conservative views reacted more strongly to the disturbing pictures than those with liberal opinions.

The researchers also measured how hard participants blinked when suddenly played a loud noise.


Again, conservatives tended to be more easily startled.

The University of Nebraska-Lincoln team were unsure whether people who are naturally more sensitive to threats are drawn to Right-wing politics, or whether conservatives become more jumpy.

Social scientists previously thought that political tendencies were shaped by experience, with most people getting more Right-wing with age.


But a growing body of research apparently shows that our views are inherited.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... finds.html
 
I have a fear of politics...

and maybe for the same sort of reason - political attitudes in most people don't seem to be based on reason, but on irrational attitudes and fear.
 
While politics should be based on reason, facts and economics, it has always been based on the emotion of the voters. How many politicians have got into real power not by sound policies but utilising fear?
 
Watch "The Power of Nightmares" and this will come as no surprise...
 
Stormkhan said:
While politics should be based on reason, facts and economics, it has always been based on the emotion of the voters. How many politicians have got into real power not by sound policies but utilising fear?

George W Bush?
 
I'd rather hear about the politics of dancing. The politics of oooh feelin' good.
 
I'm fairly liberal politically and I'm VERY easily startled by noises, spiders, and other unexpected things :shock:
 
Fear, on all levels, is used to great effect in the media to control peoples actions. Advertising is based on social fears. Even the politicains react to fear, of loosing power.
 
Which is what I was getting at. Once apon a time, a political contest was about which group or contender could do the most for their polis. Fear - of the unknown or foreigner - was used to secure their power on the voting masses.

It isn't "Media" or advertising - they themselves are tools of the "Powers That BE". But the use of media to influence political strength has been around for ages - and scare tactics, while obvious, have always been effective.
 
Two phrases which I have long advocated banning from political discourse are "I'm afraid of Senator Claghorn" and "I'm frightened by Governor Bombast."

In general, the North American and British democracies don't produce national candidates of whom the people need to be frightened. We can campaign against one or the other until our lungs collapse, but there's no need to be scared of them.

I will vote for either Senator McCain or Senator Obama but I am not the least bit frightened by either one of these two decent men.

Another phrase up for ejection - "special interests."

Every United States politician opposes "special interests," while his opponent is of course their most willing slave and tool.

The phrase has long-since ceased to have any meaning, if it ever had one in the first place.
 
I'm not frightened by Senator McCain, I'm frightened by the state of his heart and Gov Palin...
 
I'm not afraid of Governor Palin either. As one of the NBC commentators said after her debate, "Nobody's spoken this directly to the American people since Harry S. Truman or maybe even Andrew Jackson."

And I like Senator Biden, too. Although I was a little surprised by his belief that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was President when the Great Depression struck in 1929 and that the standard form of mass communication that same year was TELEVISION. What does he prepare his speeches from, THE SCHOOLBOY'S BOOK OF CLASSROOM BONERS? <g>
 
oh yeah, classroom boners...

This is actually quite interesting. Although a lot of radical/anarchist types i know IRL seem to be pretty enormously paranoid of external threats, too.

One trend I've noticed among young american conservatives (on the internet) is a disproportionate love of car porn/gun porn.
 
Back
Top