On the Nature of Fear. Part Two: Fear and the Demon

By March of 1933 the United States was in the throws of the greatest economic disaster in its history. Half the banks had closed. Unemployment had passed 25%. Personal income had dropped in half and bread lines had formed across the country. Many people felt that they were witnessing the end of civilization, the final descent from American prosperity into a new Dark Age. It was in this atmosphere that Franklin Delano Roosevelt stood on the capitol steps and spoke, what would come to be, the most famous words of his presidency.

“So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror, which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.”

It is one of the most often repeated phrases in the history of political speech but what exactly does it mean? “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself” There are certainly many things worth fearing. Death, disaster, starvation, war. When Roosevelt said those words people were literally starving in the streets. Isn’t that a cause for fear?

But why were people starving? All records show that, despite the disastrous blows to agriculture, there was still plenty of food in the US to feed all its citizens. Thousands of banks failed and much of the population lost their life savings, but, according to their balance sheets most of the banks that failed were solvent when the crowds started lining up outside their doors. Why did the stock market crash? Why did factories close and businesses lay off long time employees? The United States, had as much food, resources, workers and talent in 1935 as it had in 1925 and yet the twenties were a time of great economic prosperity and the thirties an era of economic desperation. Why? What had changed?

The answer is that people became afraid. Of course, there were other causes, poor business planning, insufficient, banking and securities regulations, and a corrupt agricultural system. But those factors only made the system more vulnerable to the panic. If the panic had been avoided, if no one had sold their stock or lined up to withdraw their money from the bank, there would have been no depression.

“The Only thing we have to fear, is fear itself”

A few years ago I worked on a documentary on great white sharks. Sharks are among the most studied ocean creatures and great whites are probably the most studied sharks. Is this because the mating habits or migratory patterns of great white sharks are somehow more interesting than other animals? No. What makes white sharks interesting is fear. They quite simply scare the hell out of us. After all, there is no dolphin week on the Discovery channel.

However, as I worked on the documentary it became very clear that fear was not something inherent in the white shark; it was something inherent in us. The reality is, sharks represent a nearly, insignificant threat to human beings. Of the millions of humans who die each year fewer than 20 are killed by sharks. Compare this to the thousands that die from bee stings or tens of thousands that are killed in car accidents. The truth is you are far more likely to die slipping in your bathtub or falling down your own stairs than you are to be killed by a shark but none of us live in mortal terror of our bathtubs. (At least not as far as I know)

Mark Marks, the shark expert we worked with on the documentary once said, “When you demonize an animal, you elevate its status with fear.” In other words, by demonizing the shark we give it far more significance in our mind than it has in reality. This new status does not change the shark. It changes us. Demonizing the shark or the bee, or the terrorist gives us the right to become the demon ourselves and begin the slaughter because morality, justice, and mercy don’t count for much when your life is on the line.

We are currently hunting sharks to extinction, killing over 100 million animals a year, not for food, but for their highly prized fins and tails. After the appendages are cut off, the sharks are thrown, still living back into the sea. This despicable practice would not be tolerated on an animal that wasn’t so universally feared.

Of course, as in the parable of the bee, sharks do not exist in a vacuum but rather as part of a complex ecosystem. As we destroy them, we are irrevocably damaging the delicate balance that we depend upon.

We are afraid of sharks so we destroy them and through that destruction we destroy ourselves.

Fear isn’t listed among the seven deadly sins, but I think maybe it should be. Like the other sins at it’s heart is something which, far from being evil, is actually part of a healthy life. Lust comes from the desire to propagate the species. At the heart of gluttony is the basic need for sustenance. Work hard and try to improve the trappings of your life and you’re admired, become obsessed with possessions and it’s greed. The same can be said for fear, which is a valuable instinct for survival but, taken to extremes, fear itself becomes the real enemy.

Today, the fear is all around us. We are in a war on terror. Each night on the news we seem to be bombarded by a new danger, or disease. Crime rates have actually gone down in the last fifty years but we feel less safe. In our minds, our children have become more fragile, susceptible to every disease, prone to every accident and surrounded by the worst kind of predators. In short, we have become fear junkies, unable to turn away from the things, which terrify us yet willing to sacrifice almost everything, our civil liberties, sense of social justice, and even our future for the illusion of safety.

I recently saw an ad for a home security company. They were selling a high tech system complete with motion detectors, security cameras and panic buttons. The tag line was, “Making your family feel safe for over thirty years.” Notice it didn’t say, “Making your family safe…” It said, “Making your family feel safe.” They weren’t selling security at all. What they were selling was the illusion of security. Not freedom from danger but freedom from fear. This has become a common practice in everything from politics to medicine, to technology. First terrify us with the most disturbing aspects of life, then, sell us something, an idea, a pill or a law, to make that fear go away.

Once again, fear has played a decisive roll in presidential rhetoric. Only this time, rather than helping us to face our fears, our government, and our media has fed them. We have been told that the world is filled with “Evil doers” who, “hate us for our freedom” and that someday soon, “the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud”. Terrifying words. And once people believe that their life and the lives of tehir loved ones are being threatened they will protect them by any means necessary. Who would’ve imagined, just a few years ago, that the United States, one of the staunchest supporters of the Geneva Convention, would be openly and brazenly advocating the use of torture? Just as demonizing sharks transforms us into far more dangerous predators. Demonizing the Muslim has transformed the United States.

Like the stock market crash of October 1929, September 11th, 2001 was a transitional moment in history. Before 9/11 the economy was booming, we had the first budget surplus in 2 decades and, although not everyone agreed with our policies, the United States was a respected member of the world community. Since then, the economy has crashed on the hardest working Americans, we have wracked up the largest budget deficits in history, and seen the US transformed in the eyes of the world from a bastion of democracy to an imperialist power who’s only interest is self-interest.

The tragedy of all of this is that, far from hurting our enemies, our actions are playing right into their hands. Like the man in the parable of the bee, we cannot lash out at the world without, in the long run, destroying ourselves. The more innocents we round up and torture, the more dictators we support, the more unwinnable wars we force our troops to fight, the weaker we become and the more enemies we have to fear. September 11th was a devastating attack but the disasters since then have been almost entirely self-created.

Sun Tzu, the great military philosopher, once said that, “A general with 100 men can defeat an army of 10,000, if they can manipulate the larger force into defending 1000 positions.” In other words, a weaker army can destroy a stronger one if the stronger army is afraid. How many positions are we trying to defend? Why is America, unquestionably the most powerful nation on earth, also the most fearful?

President Bush says we are in a war on Terror but what we seem to be fighting is of war of terror. The world has been warned that either they are with us or against us. These are words whose purpose is to control with fear just as the terrorists have controlled us. The real power of terrorism isn’t dirty bombs or biological weapons. The real power is that terrorism transforms the victim into the victimizer.

A frightened animal is a dangerous animal not only to others but to itself. If humans are the most powerful animals on the planet, how dangerous, then, is a frightened human? How dangerous is a frightened America?

We are in a War on Terror, or at least we should be, because the greatest enemy we face is far more powerful than the suicide bomber or Islamic Extremist.

The greatest enemy we face, is fear itself.

On the Nature of Fear. Part One: The Parable of the Bee

Here’s a story.

A man was working in his vegetable garden when he accidentally put his hand down on a bee and got stung. The man had never been stung bee before and he was shocked by how painful it was. His hand throbbed and throbbed all night.

The next day, the man was supposed to be pulling weeds but he was nervous. “What if a bee stings me?” He thought. “How am I supposed to protect myself?”

The man decided not to work in his garden that day; instead, he began doing research on anti-bee measures. He ordered bee poison from an insecticide company and protective clothing from a beekeeper society.

The next day, armed with his insecticide and covered head to foot in his, protective gear, the man returned to his garden. However, he hadn’t pulled two weeds before he noticed a small yellow jacket buzzing around the cucumber patch. Then he saw more bees eyeing his tomatoes, and what looked like an entire swarm hovering over his flower-bed.

Terrified he began spraying insecticide right and left. He emptied a can on the eggplants, covered his cantaloupe and dowsed his daisies. When he was satisfied that his garden was finally free of bees, he put down his spray can and walked back to his house. That’s when he heard it, a single plaintive buzz rattling brokenly from the screen door. A tiny wasp had somehow managed to make it inside his own kitchen.

The man was justifiably shaken. After all, it’s one thing to face bees in his garden but to find them inside his own house? What if they should sting him when he sleeps or eats his breakfast? Even worse, the man had a wife and family, what if they should be stung. What if they were allergic? This was literally a matter of life and death.

The man ordered protective clothing for his whole family which he insisted they wear day and night. You can’t be too careful when lives are on the line.

The man didn’t return to his garden. Instead, he watched from his window as weeds shot up between the rows and the vegetables began to wither from lack of water. And, no matter how much he sprayed, a few bees still managed to find their way inside his house. The man realized that it was only a matter of time before he or his family was stung again.

As far as he could see, there was only one reasonable decision left to him. If he couldn’t keep the bees away from his house, he’d have to stop the problem at the source. Dressed, in his most protective gear and armed with the latest insecticides, he tracked every bee in the area to its hive. It wasn’t easy, and he was stung more times than he cared to remember (proving, once and for all, just how much the bees had it in for him) but by the time he was done there was not a single bee left living in the county. The man walked back home sore and swollen but confident that no bees would bother his family again.

Unfortunately, for the man and his family, the vegetable garden, which they depended on for food, didn’t have much of a crop that year. The bees, which used to pollinate the plants, were gone and the family had to dip into their savings to survive. In fact, the whole county was in trouble. The economy, which was based on agriculture, had begun to collapse. People were out of work, children were starving but the man could now settle down to his dinner of canned beans secure in the knowledge that he and his family were finally safe from stings.

The End

Gandhi and Bin Laden

In my last blog, I wrote about the tragic consequences of failing to recognize paradigm shifts in military conflicts, and I discussed how such a shift has occurred in our so-called war on terror. It is our inability to understand the true nature of this conflict that has resulted in both the tragic loss of life on both sides and our failure to achieve anything remotely resembling victory.

But what is the nature of this paradigm shift? How does terrorism differ from conventional war and what counter measures are the most effective in combating its spread? These are not easy questions and as I sought answers something very offensive popped into my mind. “Mahatma Ghandi and Osama Bin Laden have a lot in common.”

The moment I had the thought I felt bad about it. Gandhi is one of the most revered pacifists in history and Bin Landen one of the most reviled villains. One man, was willing to sacrifice his life rather than lift a finger to hurt another soul. The other is willing to kill thousands to achieve his ends. However, the more I thought about it, the more I realized that once you let go of the moral considerations, there are, in fact, many similarities. Not in goals or philosophies but in how their tactics manipulate the world.

Gandhi, a native of India, began his exploration of non-violent resistance, in South Africa and rose to world prominence when he brought his movement into direct conflict with the British Raj in India. The expression, “The sun never sets on the British Empire.” Was not an exaggeration. They had prosperous colonies all over the world and their power, both militarily and economically, was unrivaled.

Bin Laden, a native of Saudi Arabia, began fighting in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union and rose to world prominence when he turned his attack on the United States whose Military and Economic eclipses that of the former British Empire.

During Gandhi’s time, the powerful British Navy, disciplined army, comparatively fair justice system and efficient bureaucracy made them uniquely suited to control a world empire. The fact that the empire was built on the backs of a hundred conquered nations did not concern them. In the minds of the British, what we would call imperialism was merely their way of brining civilization to the savages. After centuries of colonization the British had become experts at controlling native populations, whether through direct use of force or by bribing or coercing local leaders to do their bidding.

Today, the United States military is the most powerful the world has ever seen and the US/Western Capitalist Economy has become an almost unstoppable force, spreading across the world along with American Culture, and Values. What some would call American Imperialism we think of as spreading democracy and freedom.

Gandhi believed that only through the removal of British rule and the establishment of a free and independent India, was it possible for the Indian people to live the lives that they deserved. Bin Laden’s, beliefs, although perhaps less appealing to the western mind, are similar. He wants an Islamic world free of American interference, which will govern itself based on Islamic principals.

To achieve their goals both men had to overcome a seemingly unbeatable foe. One who’s power both militarily and economically is way out of their league.

Most people would conclude that this is where the similarities between the two men end. However, in my opinion, although their methods are diametrically opposed, the ingredients necessary to produce them and their effect have much in common. To explore this idea I have come up with, what I consider to be, five crucial ingredients in the non-violent revolution which we can compare to Islamic Terrorism.

1. Desperation. The risks of any revolution, non-violent or otherwise, are tremendously high. Lives will be changed, if not lost. Wealth will be shifted and society will be irrevocably transformed. Nobody would take those kinds of risks unless they saw no other choice.

2. Lack of Representation. A well-run government does not guarantee that its citizens won’t be put in desperate situations from time to time. What a well-run government should guarantee is that when the desperate situation arises there will be some mechanism to air grievances and attempt to gain justice. This is not to say that all people are taken care of at all times, merely that opportunities for social change are possible within the system. When Justice is absent, when desperate people have no established voice in the halls of commerce or government their only choice is to move outside of the rules and fight back (peacefully or otherwise) against the system that has betrayed them.

3. Courage. What does it take to face down a squad of policeman armed with shotguns and fire hoses? What does it take to march unarmed through 1000 miles of enemy territory knowing that an attack could come at any moment? What does it take to stand alone in front of a Chinese tank? Non-violent resistance takes courage and more. It takes a belief in something greater than yourself because in this kind of struggle there is the very real possibility that you could die. Nobody, who is only interested in their own worldly advancement would become a non-violent resistor. This is why so many of the great pacifist movements were inexorably linked to religion. Faith is part of what gave the followers of Gandhi and Martin Luther King the courage they needed for their struggle.

4. The Media. I wont go so far as to say that non-violent resistance cannot succeed without media attention but it is incredibly difficult. A Buddhist monk burning himself alive to protest the South Vietnamese government would only have effected those who actually saw the event, were it not for the photographs which were seen all over the world. We all remember the images of Tiananmen Square, and the protestors being attacked at Kent State. Without media attention, non-violent resistance is like a gun without bullets because the true weapon of non-violent resistance is not the boycotts or sit-ins it is the reaction those incidents have on the rest of the world. Which brings us to the fifth and most important factor in a non-violent revolution.

5. The Enemy. In the end, it is the opponent whose actions have the real power. Remember, the resistors cannot change the situation on their own. They need the help of those in power. That help can come in both positive and negative ways. Positive, in the form of help and negative in the form of force. Force used against non-violent resistors can help the movement because it casts the protestors as the heroes of the story and the Government as the villain. The greater the force the more polarizing the effect. It is possible, to scare a non-violent movement out of existence but if the movement remains true to it’s principals and united against the common enemy, perceptions about the situation will begin to shift. Once that perceptional shift solidifies, the powers that be are in an untenable situation. The more openly they pressure the resistors the worse they look.

In this sense, Non-violent resistance is a kind of psychological war. It does not attack the resources or men of the enemy directly. Instead, it attacks their will to continue an oppressive system while at the same time inspiring those sympathetic to join the cause. In other words, non-violent resistance changes the worldview of both oppressor and oppressed by showing them both the courage and morality of the people in the weakest position and the cowardice and immorality of those in power.

This is how men like Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. achieved their goals. These were great men, brave men, men who were willing to, and eventually did give their lives for a cause greater than themselves. To make any comparison between them and the terrorists of 9/11, or the men who planned those attacks, is an insult to their memory. However, it is my contention that much can be learned from just such a comparison. Let’s look once again at my five ingredients for a non-violent revolution, except now, let’s do it in a context of Islamic Fundamentalism and the war on terror.

1. Desperation. Islamic Fundamentalism rises out of extremely stratified, repressive societies, where there is minimal access to education, or representation. The followers of Fundamentalist principals, feel, they have been betrayed, economically, socially, religiously or politically by the modern world.

2. Lack of Representation: We claim to be fighting for democracy but the truth is all of our Islamic allies are dictatorships. If a viewpoint is antithetical to the wishes of the government it simply will not be aired.

3. Courage: Bill Maher was fired from ABC for saying it but let’s not bullshit here. Terrorists might be evil, crazy religious fanatics but they are not cowards. Sacrificing your life for any cause, regardless of it’s relative justice, takes tremendous courage. And, like the non-violent resistors, it is no coincidence that often this kind of willingness to self-sacrifice is built upon belief in a spiritual world beyond our own.

4. The Media: Terror feeds on press. Terrorism has killed fewer than 4000 people in the entire history of the United States. More people are killed each year by Bee Stings but we treat Terrorism as the number one threat to our livelihood. Why? Because the bees aren’t in the news. How may times have you seen the towers fall? How many red, yellow and orange alerts have you heard? How many times have you tuned in to the evening news only to discover that you still are not safe. The Media is the terrorist’s number one weapon.

5. The Enemy: Since 9/11 the ball has been almost entirely in our court. We have entered two wars, gone deeply into debt, suspended, the rights of our own people and openly advocated mass arrests and torture as reasonable methods for the achievement of our ends. We have in short become very much like the unilateral Imperialist nation that Osama Bin Laden claimed that we were. Did the terrorists do this to us?

6. Remember how angry you felt when you watched the World Trade Center collapse 6 years ago? How hopeless? Now try to imagine how an Iraqi feels when he sees the pictures from Abu Ghraib. 2743 people died on 9/11 and in our nation of 300 million, we all felt some connection to the victims of that tragic day. Iraq has less than 10% of our population but some estimates put the death toll there at over 500,000. Imagine how they feel.

9/11 resulted in a few thousand deaths and approximately 30 billion dollars in damage. Our war on terror has resulted in a few hundred thousand deaths and cost over a trillion dollars. After 9/11 America experienced a worldwide outpouring of compassion and support unlike anything in history. Today, the rest of the world has begun to view America as a dangerous power, wholly consumed with the pursuit of it’s own interests. Did the terrorists do this to us or did we do it to ourselves?

Like the opponents of a non-violent revolution, our actions since 9/11 have had a polarizing effect on the world. We, not the terrorists, have sent many of our people to their deaths in impossible wars. We have driven away some of our staunchest allies and we have used the politics of fear to divide our nation. Where once we were seen as the heroes of the story, much of the world now sees us as the villain. This is what we have done, not the terrorists.

Is it my intention to imply, through this comparison, that Gandhi and Bin Laden are the same? No. Gandhi is one of my great heroes and Bin Laden, certainly, is not. What this comparison does hopefully point out is that, in the end, the true weapons of the terrorists are not IED’s and Dirty bombs. The true weapons are the effect those things have on the minds of their targets and the actions that state of mind produces.

Next Week: The Parable of the Bee