IN FOCUS : A primal, base emotion

Don Elkins done@nwarktimes.com

Posted on Friday, July 29, 2005

Email this story | Printer-friendly version

"Where fear is present, wisdom cannot be. "- Lactantius

Those words from a long gone poet

While listening to an early morning radio program a few weeks back, I learned something interesting about fear. That piece of wisdom came while listening to an interview with a Japanese film director who specializes in horror films. The director said that no one could look at a dog or cat or any animal and really tell if that animal is happy, sad, bored, and melancholy - but we can tell if an animal experiences fear. Fear is a primal, base emotion and reaction to danger. And, as such, it's a powerful force, a motivator without compare. Fear makes the wisdom, the IQ, depart and makes the fearful into slaves and, in some cases, into tools for those who know how to use that knowledge.

That concept shows up in military basic training. Most recruits find it hard not to fear a screaming drill instructor. However, that drill instructor has a purpose and uses fear as a tool to shape individuals into parts of a cohesive unit, into soldiers, sailors and marines who will fight, and obey orders under combat conditions. It has also been used as a tool by powerful politicians, by the Klan, by cult leaders and those who vend snake oil remedies and the latest pill or cream promised to make the aging process reverse and give us beauty. The power to inspire and profit from fear in others has long been a hallmark of manipulators.

So, with that in mind, one must weigh two current stories in the news against that knowledge. One must put tough questions to those who now would seem to use either our fear, or their own, to make changes in society.

Does local literary puritan Laurie Taylor really worry about sexually-oriented books in the Fayetteville public school libraries out of her own fear and desire to protect her children, or does something else motivate her to use the fear felt by many local parents about the same books? She's told me she only worries about her own children, but has decided she also, by extension, cares about my children as well. Sounds pretty good, but then later, learning that perhaps she's been talking to other people about"battling secular humanism"I no longer know what to think. Does she want to take advantage of my concern for my children to use others and me as tools in some sort of long-standing political campaign? I'm a journalist by trade, and by nature, meaning I'm a skeptic. Some have called Taylor a "hero"; others have written this paper to take her to task for"censorship. "And what of the thing causing all the fear? What of the books? I'm still in awe of the written word, believe the pen can be"mightier than the sword"but still don't actually fear words and ideas, however alien they may seem. After all, as a thinking animal with opposable thumbs, I have some control over the fear I feel in this case, and still don't see the threat of words or thoughts or ideas. Having to answer questions about sex from a child isn't necessarily comfortable in some cases, but it doesn't frighten me because I have many conversations with my children, and have taught them not to fear ideas and words, even ones patently mistaken like racism and the fear of the printed word. Again, I don't want to assign motives to anyone other than myself, and my motive remains suspicion.

Another story this past week had me thinking about fear again. This time, U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln, backed by a centrist Democratic think-tank, jumped on the Internet porn bandwagon. The good senator wants to place an excise tax on adult Web sites and force those same businesses to use stronger methods of verifying a users age. Representatives of the adult entertainment industry spoke out about the proposed legislation in the silliest way possible, with one industry mogul explaining he didn't think teens like to watch "things"they didn't do themselves. I'm still scratching my head over that bit of complete, inexcusable nonsense. But I also have to question the motives of the senator in all this. Her bill really faces some high hurdles. Not many business lobbies want to see Internet commerce of any kind regulated or taxed - it cuts into the bottom line, and if one industry gets an excise tax, which industry comes next? Also, and probably more important here, who will determine, using which standards, which Web sites have to pay the tax? This bill faces almost insurmountable odds against long-standing American jurisprudence on free speech issues, and would probably end up shot down by the U.S. Supreme Court (as it stands now.)

So, I wonder if someone wants to use fear about kids and online dirty pictures to get votes, to get sympathy, to get support. Could it be true? Could the senator have a fear of her own, something along the lines of "I need to bolster my voter base, or I may end up as a constituent, rather than serving them"? Senator Lincoln and the brains in D. C. have to have enough native intelligence to have realized what a long shot this move could turn out to be.

In the end, I can't truly ascribe motives to either of these people, only to myself and my own fear that someone wants to turn me into a"thing," a kind of hammer or chisel to help them achieve some lightly-hidden agenda.

Perhaps, as FDR said,"All we have to fear is fear itself."

Don Elkins is lead anchor at KNWA-TV in Fayetteville. His column appears on Fridays.

FEEDBACK:

Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online

Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact Us