elpais.com
Fear in Politics: Hindering Progress and the Need for Societal Change
British historian Robert Peckham, author of "Fear: An Alternative History of the World," discusses the overwhelming influence of fear in current sociopolitical discourse, hindering progress and highlighting the urgent need for societal change and mobilization.
- What historical shift in the role of fear, from protector to obscurer of liberal values, explains the current political landscape's focus on fear-mongering rather than progress?
- Peckham's analysis traces the historical shift of fear from a protector of liberal values to an obscurer of them. He emphasizes the current imbalance, where fears outweigh values, hindering forward-looking progressive movements. This is further complicated by the perceived comfort many find in relinquishing freedom to authority, driven by fear itself.
- How is the pervasive use of fear in contemporary sociopolitical discourse, as exemplified by leaders like Trump, hindering societal progress and the development of aspirational agendas?
- Robert Peckham, a British historian residing in Bronxville, New York, argues that current sociopolitical discourse, exemplified by figures like Trump, Putin, and Kim Jong-un, is excessively focused on fear, hindering progress. He notes the absence of aspirational agendas in both Democratic and Republican platforms, replaced by a focus on invalidating opposing fears.
- Considering the societal exhaustion and political polarization impacting social movements, what strategies can effectively mobilize populations and drive necessary systemic changes, even amidst widespread fear and apathy?
- Peckham suggests that while fear can provide clarity and highlight urgent issues, its impact is often transient. He posits that societal exhaustion from events like the COVID-19 pandemic and political polarization has diminished the energy for social movements. He connects this to the rise of right-wing extremism and growing societal issues, such as homelessness, requiring broader societal change.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the historian's personal experiences and reflections on fear. While this provides a unique perspective, it centers the narrative around Peckham's views, potentially overshadowing other relevant analyses or data on the topic. The headline and introduction could have been framed more neutrally to present a broader range of perspectives on fear instead of exclusively focusing on Peckham's experiences and opinions.
Language Bias
The language used is generally neutral, although phrases such as "lujosa casa" (luxurious house) when describing Peckham's home could be considered subtly loaded, potentially implying a sense of privilege or elitism not directly relevant to the interview's core subject matter. However, this is mild and not pervasive throughout the text.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the historian's perspective and experiences, potentially omitting other viewpoints on fear in the sociopolitical context. While the interview format inherently limits perspectives, the lack of diverse voices beyond Peckham's could be considered a bias by omission. The article also does not delve into specific examples of Trump's policies or actions that created fear, instead making generalized statements.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat false dichotomy by framing the political discourse as solely focused on fear, neglecting other motivating factors such as economic concerns, social justice issues, or ideological differences. While fear is a significant element, reducing the complexity of political motivations to this single factor oversimplifies the situation.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights growing inequality in the US, with issues like homelessness and the rise of the far-right, indicating a widening gap between the rich and poor and eroding social cohesion. The author points out the lack of focus on social values in political discourse, instead noting a prioritization of fear-mongering and the protection of individual interests, exacerbating inequality.