Is hate a political tool? How powerful?

Question

Wave a flag, Say somebody started the fight, look inwards not outwards. Any comments /other than Iraq/?

Skalzun, thanks, but the additional element makes sense if your not necessarily amerocentric in your views. I mean this as a guide to others and not as a repremand to you. Thanks for the great answer and the time it took to write it.

Answer 1

YES!~!

Answer 2

I'm ignoring your "detail" part, because it doesn't make any sense.

So, in answer to your "main" question: hate, fear, and "mud-slinging" of any kind are "legitimate" political tools. Although most sensible people deplore it, the ignorant find it alluring.

You need only look at American history to see a famous example of this: the senior Bush's "revolving prison door" ads against Dukakis were stretches of the truth, but that (and a ridiculously-looking "Dukakis-in-a-tank") got him elected. JFK's campaign set out to destroy Nixon, based pretty much on nothing more than his looks, although it could be argued that Nixon did that to himself!

Saying that one's opponent is pro- or anti- anything you allegedly stand for may be enough to get you elected.

Haven't you ever noticed that we rarely hear about the candidates qualifications during debates? Only highly theoretical, and arguably debatable questions, all of which have been pre-screened and pre-responded to? (which, of course, doesn't explain how the Junior Bush failed to respond to a few questions during nationally televised debates, but, got him elected, nevertheless). Whom would you rather elect? Someone who has been in the political arena for a while, and earned his/her "stripes", or someone who talks a good game? (again, how in the world did Bush Jr win either election based on either of these?!?!)

Okay . . . I went on a little rant, there . . . I'm much better, now! ;)

For more examples, you need only view the pseudo-news programs where one person is allowed to voice his or her personal opinions in the guise of legitimate reporting. It is called "grandstanding" and does wonders for the network and its advertisers, because people on both sides of the political coin watch it: some to cheer the guy/gal on, some to razz him/her.

History has proven that voters will tend to "sympathize" with the person who yells the loudest (think: Hitler, Mussolini, and even any of the aforementioned grandstanders, who will interrupt, yell at, and otherwise bully the very people they asked to be on their shows!). Why do you think so-called professional wrestling, no-holds-barred fighting, and even cop-reality shows are so popular? Not to mention, ultra-violence on TV and movies? You think people want to watch "Bambi" 24/7?

I'm sorry . . . I digressed, again! ;)

It is up to intelligent people to do the research, and see through such hate-mongering, and other political devices, and vote for the best qualified candidates, though, if the last two Presidential elections are any indication, this country, if not the planet, is in serious trouble! ;)

Thus endeth the rant!

Answer 3

"Us and them" is a time-proven formula that can be applied to promote pretty much anything and its opposite, whether you're talking about the political arena, organized religion, money, the importance that people attach to things like race and ethnicity, etc.

Answer 4

Yep Hatred and Fear....gets all the girlies to vote for you enmasse, who want to be "protected"... Thats 50% of the vote right there...

If you can get a tv show actor to spout it - all the better.

No offence girls..

Answer 5

Very much so and Revenge even more powerful. i see allot of this in the Yahoo forum.