American Fear

[78th Degree]

I will wager that, aside from myself, not one Literotica member has ever read the book.

I read it some number of years ago, before I could really understand much of what it was about. That's one that I need to pick up again.

Thank you for the reminder.

 

[78th Degree]

Well I have no concept about what I read or read. Is not history written by winners, though? Does not that make half a story?

Nice edit.

If I recall correctly (which I may not, see above post) this particular book wasn't necessarily a 'we won!' type of read.

But, as I said, it's been years.

 

[R. Richard]

Well I have no concept about what I read or read. Is not history written by winners, though? Does not that make half a story?

The book is not the usual recitation of " historical facts." The book attempts to explain why the United States developed differently from any other nation on the face of the earth. "The History Of The American Frontier" does not attempt to record detail events in the westward expansion of the country, just to explain the macro effects that said westward expansion had upon the people and the culture of the United States. Strangely, the concept of winners and losers is presented by showing that individual groups always both won and lost at key points in the westward expansion, but that American society always wound up the winner.

If the book could be reprinted, it should be required reading for every high school student in the United States [Well, at least those for who can read].

JMNTHO.

 

[cantdog]

I'd like to think of this post as a bit of a research project, maybe a bit of a qualitative poll. See, I just came across an interesting position regarding American culture and I'd like to hear what, well, Americans think of the topic.

Namely, what is it that makes America function as a society?

It is, to a neutral observer, a bizarre and unwieldy hodgepodge of people of different ethnic, religious, sexual and whatnot backgrounds, speaking a fair medley of languages (tho' mostly American English). So what keeps it from fragmenting and disintegrating?

Now, one element would certainly be that much vaunted American patriotism, which expresses itself in rituals like saluting the flag and ceremonies like the 4th of July and Thanksgiving. This element is not what I'm asking about.

The other element that holds America together is fear. Fear not just of the Other - be it of the Evil Empire, Saddam Hussein, Sars, Tsunamis or Bin Laden - but also fear of each other. Essentially, this position holds that America is a society of fear, maintained and prevented from collapse by pervasive fear which it has to continually manufacture (Note that I'm not saying somebody is scaring Americans, but that they have a continuing need to be afraid in order to be Americans - that is, they scare themselves). It is for this reason that America constantly needs foreign and internal adversaries (muslim terrorists and drug dealers, for example). If it doesn't have them, it manufactures them. It also constantly needs new enemies for new fears, because people get bored of being scared all the time.

Do you think this is so? Are Americans in fear?

In my view, the need for the fear is the result of the way American government thought of the economy, business, and the world in and around the year 1946. Much of America was insular and isolationist prior to the second world war. An intractable depression was finally ended by wartime production requirements. America was the sole possessor of the atomic bomb.

The thinking was essentially to maintain things the way they were. There was a boom because of wartime production-- lets keep that going, they said. We decided as a matter of national policy to remain effectively at war. We have maintained a standing army of millions ever since. The military spending levels are by any reasonable standard quite insane, ever since. And, we began consciously to build our empire in 1946.

The history of America since 1946 is a history of the building of a worldwide American empire. It is good, repeat good, for business. The electorate may not always like it, and that is where the fear comes in.

If the electorate is afraid of an enemy they will pay through the nose to support armament industries. If they fear, they will surrender their right to any liberty. Fear, whether cleverly or clumsily used, will make the sheep cower and give you any support you need.

The Enemy we chose to frighten the populace with first was world Communism. Now it's terrorism and Islam. But any enemy will do, any bogeyman will do. Without fear, with a sense of security and prosperity, people will not allow their government to run around spying on everyone and imprisoning people indefinitely. Without fear the empire would be hampered by considerations of common good, common decency, reason, memory. But fear makes sheep of men and induces them to surrender all prerogatives to the tyrant because he claims to be able to protect them.

Fear is the root of American politics since 1946. Externally, to non-Americans, it is empire. Rapine, theft, callous genocide and murder. Internally, fear.

 

[SummerMorning]

In my view, the need for the fear is the result of the way American government thought of the economy, business, and the world in and around the year 1946. Much of America was insular and isolationist prior to the second world war. An intractable depression was finally ended by wartime production requirements. America was the sole possessor of the atomic bomb.

The thinking was essentially to maintain things the way they were. There was a boom because of wartime production-- lets keep that going, they said. We decided as a matter of national policy to remain effectively at war. We have maintained a standing army of millions ever since. The military spending levels are by any reasonable standard quite insane, ever since. And, we began consciously to build our empire in 1946.

The history of America since 1946 is a history of the building of a worldwide American empire. It is good, repeat good, for business. The electorate may not always like it, and that is where the fear comes in.

If the electorate is afraid of an enemy they will pay through the nose to support armament industries. If they fear, they will surrender their right to any liberty. Fear, whether cleverly or clumsily used, will make the sheep cower and give you any support you need.

The Enemy we chose to frighten the populace with first was world Communism. Now it's terrorism and Islam. But any enemy will do, any bogeyman will do. Without fear, with a sense of security and prosperity, people will not allow their government to run around spying on everyone and imprisoning people indefinitely. Without fear the empire would be hampered by considerations of common good, common decency, reason, memory. But fear makes sheep of men and induces them to surrender all prerogatives to the tyrant because he claims to be able to protect them.

Fear is the root of American politics since 1946. Externally, to non-Americans, it is empire. Rapine, theft, callous genocide and murder. Internally, fear.

Precisely the position I was talking about (admittedly, I believe it has something going for it). That's what I'm interested in - how it functions at the micro level. Does it function, first of all?

One aspect of it is surely the ubiquitous firearm. Many Americans, apparently, own firearms for "protection". Now, you obviously don't need protection if you're not afraid of something. Or someone. Therefore, in regard to firearm ownership (particularly handguns, which were never meant for hunting), I can come to only two conclusions: a) the owners are psychotics who want to kill people or b) the owners are afraid.

Does it show up elsewhere?

 

[SummerMorning]

There's certainly fear in America, but I think that's more a heritage of our Puritan roots. I don't think it has much to do with social cohesion.

What keeps America together is that everyone still believes in the Dream. Whether it's true of not, the idea of success through hard work still is a dominating idea in American society, and most people are too involved in the vertical struggle for upward mobility to get involved laterally in group identity
conflicts. Also, material success demands that you adapt yourself to the prevailing Business model in terms of dress and behavior, so it's a big factor is rewarding assimilation and discouraging separateness through ethnic or cultural identity.

In other words: it's the pursuit of the Almighty Dollar that keeps us together, and there's nothing wrong wth that.

Herr Mab, I agree that a functioning economic system will certainly work to promote a modicum of cohesion. But - just for the sake of argument - why pursuit of the dollar? Why do you need the dollar?

I could argue that the pursuit of the AD is based on existential fear - fear that if you do not have money nobody will take care of you, you will not have food, heating, housing, etc. Could it be that rampant "dollarism" is a symptom of other things - in this case fear?

===

I think most of the places where you have ethnic conflict, you have people fighting over limited resources--land, water, oil, waterever. The USA is so rich in land and resources that these conflicts never really happened.

I'll also comment on this. Ethnic conflict is not usually about limited resources. Most resources are nearly always monopolised by the elites (be they feudal or capitalizt or whatever), regardless of ethnicity. At best, conflicts emerge among elites because of competition for resources.

To cite an example: Bosnia. The Bosnian conflict (as a subset of the Yugoslav one) started out as a bid by Serbian nationalists - supported by the Serb Orthodox Church - to increase their power within the federation. To this end they utilised nationalist-religious mythology to mobilise much of the Serb population. The war was not a result of limited resources - it was the result of a power struggle: Who will rule? What started as a centralist / federatist conflict exploded into a bloody ethnic conflict later on (for numerous reasons).

(I'm simplifying here)

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Herr Mab, I agree that a functioning economic system will certainly work to promote a modicum of cohesion. But - just for the sake of argument - why pursuit of the dollar? Why do you need the dollar?

I could argue that the pursuit of the AD is based on existential fear - fear that if you do not have money nobody will take care of you, you will not have food, heating, housing, etc. Could it be that rampant "dollarism" is a symptom of other things - in this case fear?

===

I'd agree, and I'd use this occasion to dispute Wildcard's contention that what keeps us together is our freedom, because we're not free here at all. We tell ourselves we are--we pat ourselves on the back for it all the time and pay it all sorts of lip service--but we're not free. We're relatively free of political coercion by our government, but we're absolute slaves to our economic system, and there's not a country I know of where people work harder for less than we do here, all the time crowing about our freedom.

You're not free to not work here. You're not free to live where you want. The beaches near my house aren't even free anymore. Everything costs money, and money is just as enslaving as political coersion. There's only one sin in America, and that's being a financial failure.

If we were really free, we wouldn't have to worry about being thrown out in the street if we lost our jobs. We wouldn't have to live in fear of getting sick with no health insurance. We wouldn't have to worry about victimless crimes. We wouldn't have to worry about having our heat shut off in the middle of winter. We wouldn't have to sweat bullets and bow and scrape to keep the paltry jobs we have, only to be downsized at the first opportunity.

What keeps us going is the dream each of us has that we'll earn enough money to really be free, because freedom costs big bucks here. Very very few of us actually make it, but we all worship those few who do and hold them up as examples of what "freedom" can do.

No. Mexico--when I was there years ago, there was a country that was free. You did what you wanted and no one fucked with you. You try that here and someone comes along and tries to squeeze money out of you.

 

[cantdog]

I think that, as a general rule, you may be correct. In many places there is a desperation to keep a sense of community. The old saying about keeping your enemies closer than your friends comes to mind.

However, there are the few that don't rely on gossip or sensationalized media. We look at things and make our own judgements. I, for one, won't do so much as read a newspaper or watch a news program. If something is going to have an effect on me it will happen either way, and it's simply best to roll with the punches as best as possible.

Once in a while I am a part of an event which gets reported by the news. I see the account of that event in the paper or on the television, and it always amazes me how wrong they have it.

They miss the point, or they skew the facts, or they fasten on some aspect of the event which I certainly would never have thought worth a second glance. Every time there's a news story and I happen to know what happened, they have twisted it all out of shape somehow.

The first two or three times I thought I should call them up to help them understand that the event was not as they had perceived it. But it happened each time, and the calls made little difference unless a number or a date (something quantifiable) was wrong. Those they ran a correction on, for all the good it did.

I have come to the conclusion that every news story does this. They all see events in a way that's just a little haywire. Not just sensationalized. Not always biased, either. Just screwed up.

A cynic knows what do do about this, no problem! Just quit watching the news, and don't buy a paper. Why pay money or expend time in order to be misinformed, when you can do that perfectly well for free?

But I have become older. I decided to drop cynicism. Cynicism is very satisfying and a very good defense mechanism. But eventually you need to put down the crutches and walk on your own feet.

 

[yui]

I am always interested in opinions. Vella knows I respect her greatly, and I ADORE when she posts on a thread like this because she never does.

To understand me? LOL Unfortunately I write like I talk, but without banter it can make no sense. I LOVE metaphor, I post sometimes that is specific to a person? Shall I start sending you pictures with my posts?

Noted. I will begin compiling Charley's Book of Metaphors immediately. And yes, send pictures.

Great post. Still if there was an ideal, would we need to rip it? Don't we all have the same ideals when it comes down to it. Whats to rip but semiotics.

Thanks. People will rip it because that's what people do, eh?

Yui:
In order to understand what holds the United States together, a person needs to understand the real history of the country. The only book that I know of that even attempts to analyze what built the United States and what holds the United States together is a tome entitled, "The History Of The American Frontier." The book was written by J. Frank Dobie and is out of print. The book is a master work and was written many years ago so it has no current political agenda. [By the way, the book is NOT about cowboys, indians and shoot 'em up.]

I will wager that, aside from myself, not one Literotica member has ever read the book.

Thanks, for the title, Richard. I am very interested in American History … to the point that I minored it; but I have forgotten so many things! I will look for the book. Thanks!

One aspect of it is surely the ubiquitous firearm. Many Americans, apparently, own firearms for "protection". Now, you obviously don't need protection if you're not afraid of something. Or someone. Therefore, in regard to firearm ownership (particularly handguns, which were never meant for hunting), I can come to only two conclusions: a) the owners are psychotics who want to kill people or b) the owners are afraid.

No insult intended, Summer, but you are going to have to look a bit deeper than that. The right to keep and bear arms, for better or for worse, is guaranteed by the Second Amendment of The Constitution. The Second Amendment was initially intended to preserve the concept of the minuteman soldier, the same minuteman soldier that was so instrumental in the American's defeat of the British in the Revolutionary War.

Undoubtedly, society in America was shaped by that frontier mentality. Currently, you have a proliferation of firearms in America, no one can deny that, but historically, in the absence of a highly centralized political system, "frontier justice," as served by firearms, was a necessary evil.

The situation has certainly spiraled out of control in recent years—I hate guns—however, to say that some American's own handguns; and therefore, fear is what holds American Society together is not even an oversimplification, it's erroneous.

I'd agree, and I'd use this occasion to dispute Wildcard's contention that what keeps us together is our freedom, because we're not free here at all. We tell ourselves we are--we pat ourselves on the back for it all the time and pay it all sorts of lip service--but we're not free. We're relatively free of political coercion by our government, but we're absolute slaves to our economic system, and there's not a country I know of where people work harder for less than we do here, all the time crowing about our freedom.

You're not free to not work here. You're not free to live where you want. The beaches near my house aren't even free anymore. Everything costs money, and money is just as enslaving as political coersion. There's only one sin in America, and that's being a financial failure.

If we were really free, we wouldn't have to worry about being thrown out in the street if we lost our jobs. We wouldn't have to live in fear of getting sick with no health insurance. We wouldn't have to worry about victimless crimes. We wouldn't have to worry about having our heat shut off in the middle of winter. We wouldn't have to sweat bullets and bow and scrape to keep the paltry jobs we have, only to be downsized at the first opportunity.

What keeps us going is the dream each of us has that we'll earn enough money to really be free, because freedom costs big bucks here. Very very few of us actually make it, but we all worship those few who do and hold them up as examples of what "freedom" can do.

No. Mexico--when I was there years ago, there was a country that was free. You did what you wanted and no one fucked with you. You try that here and someone comes along and tries to squeeze money out of you.

Dr. M, I respect you and I respect your opinions, but I have to say that I am confused as to why you think that jaded ennui is any different from any other group of malcontents sitting around with their heads up their asses whining about how, "we don't have this" and "we don't have that." "Gimme." "I want it nowwww."

No society can exist—and please correct me if I'm wrong—outside of utopia, without an economy of some sort. You could apply any of your statements to most, if not every, country in the world.

I'm not going to get sucked into this, as everything is relative. If you've never been truly hungry, it's easy to complain about your lunch, eh?

I am out of here.

Peace and Love,

Yui

 

[SummerMorning]

No insult intended, Summer, but you are going to have to look a bit deeper than that. The right to keep and bear arms, for better or for worse, is guaranteed by the Second Amendment of The Constitution. The Second Amendment was initially intended to preserve the concept of the minuteman soldier, the same minuteman soldier that was so instrumental in the American's defeat of the British in the Revolutionary War.

Undoubtedly, society in America was shaped by that frontier mentality. Currently, you have a proliferation of firearms in America, no one can deny that, but historically, in the absence of a highly centralized political system, "frontier justice," as served by firearms, was a necessary evil.

The situation has certainly spiraled out of control in recent years—I hate guns—however, to say that some American's own handguns; and therefore, fear is what holds American Society together is not even an oversimplification, it's erroneous.

Dear Yui,

the American Minuteman was 200+ years ago. Americans with handguns today are not needed to defend America - so why do they still have guns? Why do Americans still feel the need to have guns? That's what I'm asking. Are you scared, so you need a gun to help you be less afraid?

As to your last paragraph - you are jumping to unfounded conclusions about my argument. I pointed out guns as one aspect of the fear element in American Society (right in my first post I also pointed out the supra-ethnic element of American patriotism).

Do you want another aspect of the fear? Okay ... I could manage that, but do you really want a 5 paragraph excursion into the unresolved Oedipus complex, the development of the infantile adult and the advent of consumerism all tying into an inability to put morals ahead of pleasure? No, I didn't think so. I could give other examples as well.

But that's not my point - I'm just asking you whether you think fear might be an element holding the heterogenous American Empire together?

 

[SummerMorning]

I'd agree, and I'd use this occasion to dispute Wildcard's contention that what keeps us together is our freedom, because we're not free here at all. We tell ourselves we are--we pat ourselves on the back for it all the time and pay it all sorts of lip service--but we're not free. We're relatively free of political coercion by our government, but we're absolute slaves to our economic system, and there's not a country I know of where people work harder for less than we do here, all the time crowing about our freedom.

You're not free to not work here. You're not free to live where you want. The beaches near my house aren't even free anymore. Everything costs money, and money is just as enslaving as political coersion. There's only one sin in America, and that's being a financial failure.

If we were really free, we wouldn't have to worry about being thrown out in the street if we lost our jobs. We wouldn't have to live in fear of getting sick with no health insurance. We wouldn't have to worry about victimless crimes. We wouldn't have to worry about having our heat shut off in the middle of winter. We wouldn't have to sweat bullets and bow and scrape to keep the paltry jobs we have, only to be downsized at the first opportunity.

What keeps us going is the dream each of us has that we'll earn enough money to really be free, because freedom costs big bucks here. Very very few of us actually make it, but we all worship those few who do and hold them up as examples of what "freedom" can do.

No. Mexico--when I was there years ago, there was a country that was free. You did what you wanted and no one fucked with you. You try that here and someone comes along and tries to squeeze money out of you.

I have to admit that pretty much squares with what I've been thinking. What fascinates me is the great multitude of people who "live the dream" so to speak.

Psychoanalysis would have something to say about this pursuit of freedom at all costs ... in a nutshell, what it comes down to is that many Americans (and Europeans) have the moral development of a three year old, constantly seeking gratification in consumption and never getting it - which is kind of the basis of a "free" market economy.