Beware the Politics of Fear
With Bernie Sanders’ recent withdrawal from the Democratic primaries, the moderate branch of the Democratic party has begun its courting of his supporters. But the courting — if this term can even be used — has taken on an odd shape. Indeed, instead of appealing to Sanders’ supporters’ aspirations, either by making concessions to the left or by concretely explaining how Biden’s own proposals would satisfy leftist goals, the Biden camp and its surrogates have attempted to fear monger Sanders’ supporters into submission. Rather than detailing what would happen if Biden does win, they focus almost exclusively on what would happen if he does not win. Forget about promises of improved health-care and education; listen instead to horrific accounts of what will happen with another Trump term. Can’t Sanders supporters understand, they plead, the blood on their hands if they abstain? We won’t escape this pandemic; our foreign policy will remain incoherent, a war lurking around the corner; and racist, Trump-loving white men will continue their rampage of mass shootings unabated by gun control. In general, Biden surrogates do not highlight what he might accomplish in office, but rather what he might prevent.
This is not to say that these are invalid points. Indeed, the absence of all these objectively awful things is, by virtue, a good thing, much in the same way that the absence of what Sanders supporters pine for is, for them, a bad thing. Thus, this is not a judgment on the policies being promoted themselves, but rather on the political rhetoric used now almost universally to communicate and convince, and its overall effectiveness for the Democratic party.
It seems now more than ever that our politics is guided by fear. It even seems near-certain that one’s political affiliation can be determined merely by asking them about their general societal fears and anxieties. Are you scared of an ISIS-inspired terrorist attack? Or, rather, do you fear the prevalence of AR15’s and the ease with which angry men — perhaps even with a history of violence — can purchase them? You can see where this is going; clearly, Republicans would claim (probably truthfully) to be more scared of the former, and Democrats (also truthfully) of the latter. The same exercise can be replayed with myriad other themes. Scared of MS 13? Transgendered men in your bathrooms? Republican. Climate change? Russian interference? Democrat.
Now, again, this is not to equate all these fears; there are rational and irrational ones, and varying degrees of reasonableness involved. Still, the degree to which our fears expose — or perhaps even determine — our politics is troubling. There is nothing inherent in Republican or Democratic ideologies that would automatically suggest such partisan alignment of our fears. Rather, ideologies should — theoretically — focus on particular aspirations. And yet, it seems abundantly clear that fear is the glue that currently binds each of the two parties, and that this is despite, not because of, disparate, if not contradictory, aspirations within each party.
True, the Republican party in particular has thrived through demonizing and creating anxiety about the “other” for decades. There is a direct line between Nixon’s “law and order” agenda and Trump’s “they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists” rhetoric. The fears the party has managed to exploit have earned them the support of voters frequently voting against their own economic self-interest. Still, Nixon era Republicans had a common set of values (for better or worse) about which they also spoke: specifically limited government and federalism domestically, and the Nixon Doctrine internationally. No such common aspirations exist in the Republican party of today. Trump has voiced support for universal health-care, while half his party believes that to be a gateway to socialism. Trump advocates military withdrawal from combat areas, neoconservatives believe we need to engage our armed forces even more. With such differing goals, the Republican party manages to remain united and win elections by appealing to their entire base’s fears: retreat of Christianity, hordes of migrants, dangerous Muslims, all manifesting in Donald Trump’s “I alone can fix the system” speech. And in 2016, clearly, this Republican brand of boogey-man politics worked, at least sufficiently enough to win the election.
However, what is novel is that Democrats now find themselves in the same position. Similarly to Republicans in 2016, there is a dearth of common aspirations in the current party. Biden and the establishment have taken firm stances against the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and the abolishment of student debt, while a sizable portion of the party’s base is in favor of all three of these policies. Other policies — such as UBI, ending regime change wars, getting rid of the electoral college system — are immensely popular in some quarters, and utterly ignored in others. As a result, the Democratic party has been seeking to find a way to hold its proverbial ship together despite an iceberg of differing, and at times even mutually exclusive, objectives. And much like the Republican party, they have settled on a politics of fear, albeit different ones.
Indeed, particularly amongst the lesser known candidates looking to make a splash, the Democratic debates often became an exercise in who could convey to voters just how scared they really should be. Consider Eric Swalwell, who prior to running said he would have a “largely economic message that appeals to voters who feel left out and left behind,” and instead is likely most remembered for saying that he wants to buy back every assault weapon in America, because he is a “parent of a generation who sends our children to school where we look at what they’re wearing so we can remember it in case we have to ID them later.” Of course gun violence in the United States today is frightening, deadly, and a scourge on our nation. However, Swalell engaged in unmitigated fear mongering in an attempt to scare people into voting for him. It was the Democratic counterpart of the time when a bombastic Chris Christie cited the undeniably tragic terrorist attack in San Bernardino as proof that “every place in America is a potential target for terrorism,” proceeding, like Swalell, to focus on the threat to children at schools. Both of these men spoke about real fears and real threats, but instead of rational and even-keeled policy-based discussions on the topic, focused exclusively on reinforcing the fear in voters minds so as to win their vote.
Democrats are now banking on the hope that these same fear-based politics can help deliver the presidency to their currently fractured party. Instead of appealing to the goals of Bernie supporters — and framing the possibility of Biden winning in a positive light — the rhetoric of establishment figures has been almost wholly on avoiding Trump’s darkness. For example, responding to a tweet by a leftist voicing their plan to abstain in the general election, MSNBC anchor Joy Reid tweeted that not voting threatens us with “the endless torment of Trumpism. Caged children. Viral death. Poverty. Want. Voter Suppression. Muslim Bans. Of course none of this harms or impacts them” (This begs the question: is Reid under the impression that those who would abstain from voting are somehow immune from viruses or, even more broadly, “want”?). Indeed, it would be a terrible fate for this litany of legitimate fears to become reality. But that doesn’t mean we should allow these fears to dominate and dictate our means of political persuasion. The Republican party has long ago decided to be a fear-based, and not a hope-based organization. Democrats should be wary of following the same path; it is not the history of its party, has generally not worked well in the recent past (see Hillary Clinton’s notorious and performatively scary 3 am ad), and seems doomed to fail this time around as well.
Bernie supporters know of Trump’s inherent awfulness and the damage his policies can induce on the American populace; they have lived it for the past four years. Whatever choice they make, it will assuredly not be because they were unaware of the danger Trump and the Republican party pose. Thus, it serves minimal political use reminding Sanders supporters of this fact constantly, beyond attempting to condescend and coerce. What the left feel that they have yet to hear, rightly or wrongly, is an uplifting message from the Democratic establishment about what Biden and his policies will offer them.
Warts and all, Obama campaigned almost entirely on hope. Bernie on systemic change. These were inspirational campaigns that galvanized and captivated generations of Democratic voters. Let us be aware of potential dangers and fears without letting them consume our politics. Let us speak about the positive change Democrats could usher in, rather than the “torment” Republicans would bring.
