Is it possible that fear of the coronavirus is being used to manipulate and control — not for our well-being, but for the benefit of people in power, whether corporate or political? Many people I talk with find this possibility inconceivable. They insist that our leaders (or at least those who share our political affiliation) must be looking out for our safety and interests. That is their job, after all, and these leaders are guided by experts, right? That is certainly what much of the mainstream media is telling us.
The fear is palpable. In 1933, in the depth of the Great Depression, Franklin Delano Roosevelt said to the American people “The only thing we have to fear is … fear itself.” The U.S. was poised to potentially slide into European-style fascism or Russian-style totalitarian communism. FDR understood the corrosive effect of fear: it renders people more susceptible to propaganda and can be used to turn people against one another.
Chillingly, Nazi leader Herman Goering understood this too well. At the Nuremberg Trials, he explained how fear can be used to manipulate, control and divide: “The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
The media is delivering a steady stream of fearful reports daily, relentlessly. Governments are taking increasingly coercive actions that have their own devastating effects, especially as isolation, lost jobs, food insecurity, homelessness and a shuttered Main Street America continue to escalate. Cultural institutions are struggling to stay afloat — the kind that bring us the arts, education, community, health, protected natural spaces and inspired ways to reach out to and lift up one another. Is this “for our own good?” Can’t an action that may have served a good purpose temporarily become harmful over time?
Not so long ago, in the wake of 9/11, the Bush Administration utilized fear of terrorism to push through the so-called “Patriot Act,” a law that led to widespread, illegal spying on American citizens, and the establishment of Homeland Security, under which ICE operates with cruelty and violence towards immigrants and asylum seekers. This “War on Terror” was also used to justify torture and led to the passing of the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) that allowed for the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the latter on the pretext of “weapons of mass destruction.” The New York Times and other respected news sources — the ones people count on for information today — gave widespread credibility to this false, fearful narrative. And these ongoing wars have cost thousands of lives and upwards of $6 trillion of money that could have been spent on healthcare, education, and rebuilding our infrastructure. Only one member of Congress, Barbara Lee of California, had the courage to vote against the AUMF, and for that she was called a “communist” and “traitor” and received death threats.
The Patriot Act, Homeland Security, ICE, the AUMF and sanctioned torture were measures, we were told, to deal with an “emergency” situation, yet they continue to this day, eroding civil liberties, wasting money, and causing needless destruction. Mark Twain said, “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.” At least Representative Lee took a moment to reflect.
So here we are again: a nation afraid, terrified even. Some are fearful of and angry towards immigrants, Muslims, terrorists, or whomever the perceived enemy may be. Others are terrified of predicted second and third coronavirus waves. As a result, the sense of community is rapidly eroding even further, and intolerance, incivility, name-calling and outright demonization or censorship of anyone with another point of view is increasing. It’s all amplified on social media.
On the state and national levels, unchecked executive power is being invoked to “protect” us from perceived emergencies. This sounds disconcertingly familiar.
As ordinary citizens, maybe we need to exercise some healthy skepticism of the pervasive fearmongering and engage in genuine dialogue with one another, even if that “other” is perceived to be “on the other side” of an issue. Maybe together we can work on developing life-affirming solutions to the challenges we face based on a sober review of wide-ranging information and careful consideration of all the risks. Maybe it’s time to remember FDR’s stirring words, “The only thing we have to fear is … fear itself.”
