GuidoWorld

Democracy: Inspiration, Fear and Sympathy

January 16, 2008 on 3:41 pm | In General |

More than a few social thinkers, philosophers and sociologists have noticed a rather dramatic change in how power is maintained and held in modern societies. While the old fashioned method of brute force and dictatorships continue to exist, relatively new methods of acquiring and maintaining power have manifested themselves in democratic societies.

Acquiring and maintaining public support is essential for a government in which its leaders are elected. Not only is it necessary to get elected, but public support is vital to the successful implementation of any social program or international policy.

When a democracy is young it is highly interested in change, invention and improvement in the quality of life. Yet, as a democracy ages it becomes more interested in maintaining the status quo and keeping those of wealth and power happy.

Leaders in a democratic society sought ways of getting popular support through finding slogans, ideas and platforms which the bulk of the populace would enthusiastically endorse. Leaders in democratic societies showed how their policies created a higher standard of living while increasing and insuring freedoms. They fostered the concepts of national pride and rugged individualism. All citizens shared in the bounty of the empire and could be proud of the values and goodness of its way of life.

Social thinkers were realizing the importance of positive public relations and teaching its leaders how to use images and ideas to forge and galvanize public support. Politicians began to realize that how you said something was more important that what you said. Presentation became as, if not more important, than substance. Beautiful words and ideas which motivated and inspired the public became the means of not only getting elected, but also for getting support for programs and government actions.

Yet, as we said before, as a democracy ages it becomes less interested in change and more interested in maintaining the status quo. It is easy to inspire people when their standard of living is on the rise, but it is harder to get public support when it’s citizens standard of living is stagnating or declining. It is also hard to get people excited when they see the gap between the haves and have nots increasing. This is standardly the case in aging democracies such of ours.

So how does a political or business leader garner and maintain support in a democracy under such conditions. Well, social psychology adds two more weapons to the public relations arsenal. First, instead of inspiring the electorate you get their sympathy, and second you get them to desire the status quo by making the alternative scary and unappealing.

Since the 50’s the political leaders of the US have consistently used fear as a way to maintain the status quo. The US exited WWII as the undisputed economic and political leader of the world. Even while the standard of living was on the incline the methods of maintaining the status quo were apparent. Political conservatism was insured by the great red scare and war against internal as well as external communism. The cold war dominated the hearts and minds of most US citizens for the next couple of decades. Yet, even before the downfall of the USSR we had broadened our fear base to include the middle-east OPEC nations who were held responsible for the great stagflation of the late 70’s.

In the late 80’s through current times the threat of the middle east has grown into a full fledged war on terrorism. Many have made this a war of religious beliefs and ideals, making the battlefield extend to the after life as well as our daily survival.

Creating a social environment dominated by fear has two benefits for those in power. One, as already pointed out, it helps people become more enamored with maintaining the status quo. Two, it fosters emotional support for the government to engage in brute force means of defeating the evil which threatens the existence of a free democracy.

Yet, emerging from this fear mongering is an alternative way of getting public support. In fact this alternative method has firmly replaced inspiration as the dominant method to win elections and get support for political platforms. This method not only dominates public relations for politics, but business as well.

Instead of inspiring people with visions and dreams of a better life the politician and corporate head poses himself as the defender of good who is vigilantly battling the enemy. This embattled leader inspires and exploits our sympathy. His method of getting elected and maintaining public support is through having us view him/her as a just and good person taking on the immoral and evil opponent.

Social psyhologists had long ago identified the power of sympathy as an easier way to get support than admiration. In modern society power is often attained in this way. In the next post we will continue this discussion. The emotion of sympathy is very important in the power of victimhood. It is my contention that being a victim is not only a prevalent means of getting support and power in the political and business worlds, but also in daily life in mature democracies.

Jim Guido