Fear and anxiety are part of human experiences as they interact with their environment on a day-to-day basis. People keep on hoping that life will somehow become better but this is a mirage or a dream that cannot be achieved especially with the current political and social atmosphere. Politicians, for instance, have mastered the art of inflicting fear and anxiety into the population so that they can manipulate them. Social media and the mainstream media that are either left-leaning or right-leaning compound this fear and anxiety based on their reporting. In actual sense, this fear and anxiety become a political capital, which political players harness at will to advance their agenda. Franz Neumann, Tom Pyszczynski, Neil Strauss explains and other theorists have come up with theories to explain how the political class advances fear and anxiety into citizens. An analysis of their perspectives helps one to have a unified outlook since their theories are highly interrelated.
Why, How, And Under What Conditions Do Fear And Anxiety Become A Significant Force In Politics?
Fear and anxiety have become a significant force in politics as it determines how citizens vote or participate in other political affairs. The political class is aware that they have the ability to manipulate the citizens so that they fall in line in any political issue or process they so desire. Franz Neuman establishes politicians are aware that anxiety plays a significant role in impairing citizen’s freedom to make decisions since only fearless individuals can decide freely. With this knowledge, the political class is keen on creating fear and anxiety so that the citizens fear to make decisions thinking that the decisions will worsen the situation. Neumann (2017) goes further to establish that true anxiety becomes apparent when individuals feel threatened by external objects that are beyond their control. This view according to Helminen (2018) is fueled by the right-wing authoritarianism, which supports the view that the world is ‘threatening and dangerous place.’ (2) This kind of fear and anxiety forces people to identify with political leaders who are dictatorial in the hope of finding relief. This kind of identification with such political leaders is what Neumann (2017) refers to as ‘caesaristic identification’ (3). The political leaders can then harness this form of fear and anxiety through manipulation and then gain political capital for use whenever necessary.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Tom Pyszczynski’s terror management theory (TMT) brings another perspective on the aspect of fear and anxiety as it relates to politics. Tom establishes that ‘fear and anxiety are two of the most intolerable emotions we humans are capable of experiencing’ (3). Humans will do anything to avoid being afraid but their efforts amount to nothing, as these feelings must break out in the end. TMT asserts that self-esteem and the cultural belief system plays a crucial role as it provides humans with the protection against human fears most specifically the fear of death. Tom exemplifies this theory by revisiting the 9/11 attack that left most Americans feeling threatened and feared for their lives. The once safe nation was now under threat and now more than ever, Americans went back to their cultural beliefs to find solace and relief. The media worsened the fear as they kept on replaying disturbing videos depicting people in their worst nightmare. The Americans took solace in their cultural worldview as it provides ‘a meaningful, orderly, and comforting conception of the world that helps us come to grips with the problem of death’ (13). The theory further states that when humans are faced with death they tend to become more nationalistic and group-oriented something that makes them to political manipulation. In the wake of the 911 attack, the approval ratings for the then government were in their time high and Americans donned American symbols. Anyone who questioned the government was criticized and treated with hostility considering that the government was best-suited to deal with the fear and anxiety that was present then. From this example, it is clear that politics has a way of reassuring people that their fears and anxieties will be dealt with something that makes the population prone to population. It is possible that at this particular time, citizens would do anything they are told to be on the right side of the political divide.
Neil Strauss explains why people are living in the age of fear, in spite of industrial, technological, and political advancement. Neil establishes that Americans are living more improved lives than a few decades ago as crime has reduced, the air is cleaner, and life expectancy is much higher. In spite of this progress fear and anxiety has gone up and is now worth billion going by insurance companies, mass media, politicians, and advocacy group who instill and propagate fear and anxiety. Zevnick (2017), who claims that these groups promise to end these fears by formulating new laws or policies, seconds these views. However, these policies do little to assure the people that the future uncertainties will be over soon. Strauss adds that the reason why people are so susceptible to fear is the fact that the brain is ‘a stress-reactive machine’, which then allows for a ‘litany of cognitive distortions and emotional overreactions’ (12). In particular, humans draw fear and anxiety from uncertainties in the future, as they do not know what the future holds. The politicians being aware of this fact use social media and mainstream media to create uncertainties to influence fear and anxiety into the citizens. The citizens then find themselves discussing and delving into the issues without realizing that they are making their fears and anxieties to be extreme. The politicians then fuel these fears by making distressing news and events a part of everyday American life. As a result, the citizens turn towards the political class, which seems to have the answers to their anxieties and uncertainties.
Testing the Theories by Applying Them to Other Authors' Examples
Neumann’s Pyszcynski's and Strauss’s theories and perspectives are highly related as each of them could be applied to each other's views on anxiety and fear as they relate to politics. Neumann’s assertion that the masses hope to get their deliverance from distress by ascribing to certain persons can apply to Pyszcynski's terror management theory (Neumann, 2017). Pyszcynski establishes that while people are faced with fear and anxiety they tend to turn to the cultural worldviews, which give them hope for a better nation and immortality. The cultural worldview is highly related to the political leadership, which shapes cultural, social, political, and economic framework. In the example of the 911 attack, the Americans recoiled back to their politicians who were seen as better positioned to offer guidance on the aftermath of the attack. The then ruling government seemed to offer reprieve to the mourning nation and in fact, the governments of the day’ ratings and approval were on an all-time high. This reaction matches Vergani, O’Brien, Lentini, and Barton (2018), research findings that indicate that when people are faced with fear they tend to support policies that fight extremism. It did not matter if this government had been authoritarian or oppressive in the past. What mattered then is the fact that the government was in a position to offer the much-needed, support, reprieve and assurance that America was safe. Anyone who tried to critics is the government was on the receiving end as nothing would sway the citizens’ trust in the political class.
Strauss establishes that humans are prone to manipulation into a state of alarm especially if there are repetitive rhetoric and imagery. This assertion means that constant reference to uncertainties has the ability to create and sustaining fear something, that becomes permanent. Carleton (2016) who establishes that the fear of the unknown, which forms fundamental fears, creates an opportunity for political manipulation strengthens this view. Strauss further uses various examples to show how constant reference to threats has a way of altering one's perspective, which can be associated with overreactions. For example, a Californian teacher's husband who after watching Fox News for a time became indifferent to the government, as it was keen on taking away his guns. Strauss theory can be tied to Pyszczynski’s terror management theory, which focuses on introspection, by looking into them to find the energy to deal with the threats. Introspection helps one to access ‘a set of standards for what is valuable behavior, good and evil, that give us the potential of acquiring self-esteem, the sense that we are valuable… meaningful reality (17). The problem with introspection is the fact that it is possible to encounter individuals with contrary views something that undermines existential anxiety. Dewa, Ireland and Ireland (2014), who state that high self-esteem does not buffer against anxiety or increase worldview defense, affirm this perspective. Pyszcyznski view matches Strauss and Dewa’s view here as he asserts that disagreements just like a constant reference to threats as they only help to increase anxiety levels. The same can be said about Neumann’s theory as people then are then forced to look for a person who they can ascribe their distress to (Neumann, 2017). If other people only help to fuel anxiety levels humans have no option but to identify with a leader ‘an identification which becomes of decisive significance particularly in an anxiety situation’ (6). At the end of it, politicians become the source of reprieve for those individuals who cannot draw hope from themselves or the people who do not share similar cultural worldviews.
In conclusion, fear and anxiety as part of human existence cannot be wished away considering that it plays a significant role in the political discourse. In particular fear and anxiety helps build a strong political capital which can be used to bend people into making choices that are favorable to a few individuals, Neumann, Strauss, and Pyszcyznski have advanced different views on what causes, and sustains fear and anxiety and how it shapes the political arena. Their views establish that fear and anxiety plays a crucial role when it comes to electing and looking up to particular leaders. In as much as the leaders could be authoritarian, people,still ascribe to their leaders in the hope that they will get reprieve from their fears and anxieties. The political leaders understand that they can manipulate the citizens into believing that the future holds many uncertainties, which create constant fear and anxiety. Social media and mainstream media are the best tools to present inflammatory rhetoric and imagery, which is responsible for sustaining a political conspiracy that increases human distress. At the end of it, the people tend to turn to politics to find answers as politics is closely tied to cultural worldviews that present relief to fear and anxiety.
References
Carleton, R. N. (2016). Fear of the unknown: One fear to rule them all? Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 41(2016), 5-21.
Dewa, L.H., Ireland, C.A., & Ireland, J. L. (2014). Terror Management Theory: The influence of terrorism salience on anxiety and the buffering of cultural worldview and self-esteem. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law , 21(3), 370-384.
Helminen, V. (2018). Fear and anxiety as predictors of political attitudes: A prospective cohort study (Master’s Thesis). University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Neumann, F. L. (2017). Anxiety and Politics. TripleC 15 (2): 612-636.
Pyszczynski, T. (2004).What are we so afraid of? A terror management theory perspective on the politics of fear. Social Research, 71 (4), 827-848.
Strauss, N. ((2016, October 6). Why we are living in the age of fear. RollingStone. Retrieved on 25 September 2019, from https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/why-were-living-in-the-age-of-fear-190818/
Vergani, M., O’Brien, K. S., Lentini, P., & Barton, G. (2018). Does the awareness of mortality shape people's openness to violence and conflict? An examination of Terror Management Theory. Political Psychology , 40(1), 133-150.
Zevnick, A. (2017). From fear to anxiety: An exploration into a new socio-political temporality . Law and Critique , 28(3), 235-246.
