|
Edited on Tue Jan-05-10 08:10 AM by HereSince1628
DU has been peppered with similar posts, often in flurries surrounding news events, since 911.
Fear is not only a natural self-protective behavior for individuals, for social beings, like humans, it is communicated to others who quickly percieve it (even if they have no understanding of the cause). Having and sharing fear is a part of being human. It is so pervasive in humankind that it is tempting to say, as evolutionary psychologists sometimes do, that its wide biological penetrance in the human population is an argument for its past evolutionarily adaptiveness.
Fear, particularly fear of death, is a very powerful motivator. It is such a strong motivator that it has been exploited by radical, often right wing, political movements for centuries. When paranoid personalities, like Dick Cheney, achieve leadership positions, they can project that paranoia into society with the help of what the population sees as supporting events. Those events may be real or not, they just have to be percieved as when the hopeful war-starters in the US military and intelligence did for Operation Northwoods. And as the incubator baby-killing stories did for the first Gulf war.
Once primed to be fearful, as the US citizenry was following 911, it only takes infrequent reminders to re-establish that fear. The NW underpants bomber's failed attempt was actually sufficient to restore the general fearful state. (It's probably a mistake to think that Al Qaeda doesn't have at least a common street level e understanding of such a common part of personal and social behavior). Societies react to fear collectively, particularly when there is historic evidence that suggests continuing threats. That's how we came to institutionalize militaries, police and fire forces, medical institutions, and even public hygiene (water, sewage, pollution control). Reasonable reactions to fear of reasonable levels of threat? Maybe, but it seems that reasonableness depends upon aculturation as well as individual variability.
Disabusing people of their fear is no simple psychological task. One of the best ways is through recognition that the proponent(s) of fear are 'crying wolf.' One of the worst ways is to simply tell people that they are cowards. While those person's level of the fear may not be valid, telling someone to suck it up, to get a pair, to quit being a wuss isn't going to get rid of their fear. It just makes them angry about being called names. Dick Cheney is a classic chickhawk, many of us a DU assume it is his personal fear rather than his 'having better things to do' that motivated him to 5 draft deferments. Cheney's been called a coward by millions and it has made him angry but not free of his paranoia.
So, obviously it's just my opinion, but if fear is an emotion that is a powerful motivator and probably an evolutionarily adaptive psychological function, no amount of derision of the fearful is likely to extinguish it. Rather it is the behaviors that individuals, and society set in motion because of fear that must be argued about. The behaviors must be examined and scrutinized at both practical and ideological levels. For although we wish our fellow citizens safety, we also wish them liberty.
|