The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt
Nothing is so much to be feared as fear. -- Henry David Thoreau
Nothing is terrible except fear itself. -- Francis Bacon
I think we're all familiar with the first of these quotes, if not the others from which Roosevelt may have borrowed a bit. It's no coincidence that these three wise men counseled against giving in to fear, for fear generates panic, bad decisions, and a defeatist attitude. The time is ripe to remind ourselves of this fundamental point, because it seems to me that fearmongers have had the upper hand for too long now.
Our media play the game, with headlines that emphasize the negatives and risks of each "news item," or running purely deceptive film clips like those suggesting bottled major-brand peanut butter is salmonella-contaminated (it isn't). But that's what sells newspapers, and draws the clicks and eyeballs online.
Politicians have found that fearmongering, through negative ads and exaggerating threats, is a quick way to bring in votes. This has always been an element of politics, so I don't want to exaggerate it, but I think the willingness to manipulate people through fear has intensified of late. We don't have to look any farther back than the presidential election campaign of 2008 to see how then-Vice President Cheney, candidate McCain, and others sought, in very literal terms, to convince us that the entire country was going to explode with a multitude of terrorist bombs if their opponent was elected. And Cheney, at least, was still at it as recently as last week. It's cynical because there is no way to prove that the last administration kept us "safe" from any further attacks; while future attacks may very well occur, but not because of which party is in power.
Of course I recognize that some might (and now are) accusing Obama of the same fearmongering. He has been pretty dire in some of his statements about the economy, but I give him credit for running his campaign based on hope and optimism rather than fear (for which the fearmongers ridiculed him). He's said he is making sure we know that full recovery won't come quickly, but yes, probably he is getting a little too far from that fine line between realism and inspiration. Let's have the inspiration.
---
An update: Since writing the above, I see that on Thursday, columnist George Will has also raised the "fear" issue. He splutters over Obama's playing the scare card to get the stimulus package approved rapidly, and he goes back to the administrations of Kennedy, Johnson, and even Napoleon to suggest that we cannot be sure what the real effects of the legislation on the economy will be. Granted; but what he is unable to tell us is how longer deliberation would necessarily have produced a more effective solution. On the contrary, he admits, as most sane observers agree, that the effects of this sort of legislation can neither be accurately predicted now, nor fully known until several years hence. Will admiringly quotes John McCain to the effect that this bill is "generational theft," but he seems to forget the generational highway robbery that occurred between 2001 and January 2009, when a budget surplus became a $10-trillion national debt from which American taxpayers derived no benefit whatsoever.
A propos the question of rush to judgment, Mr. Will might look back to September 2001 and a country called Afghanistan. The rush then was because Pres. Bush realized that the American people would demand quick action, any action (and politically I think that was the correct decision, one of the few Bush made). I don't recall that we spent a lot of time debating it. It's the same here, but more so, because economic recovery will depend not so much on specific economic measures as on a restoration of a mood of confidence, the sense that action is being taken.
Comments