Violence is a deeply entrenched aspect of human nature. On a biological level, the very act of cellular division, which perpetuates life, involves a sort of violence as cells compete to create essential organs. Throughout history, human civilization has progressively learned to redirect these innate violent impulses towards creating structured, constructive social frameworks.
In this evolution, democracy stands out as a pivotal advancement, replacing violence with dialogue and pluralistic engagement. Thomas Jefferson, a founding father of American democracy, once noted, “I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.” This highlights the intrinsic value placed on dialogue over coercion in the democratic ethos.
However, today, American democracy itself is under siege from internal forces that threaten its foundational principles. Despite its historical role in championing democratic values globally, the United States (U.S.) now grapples with profound challenges to these very ideals at home.
As the 2024 elections approach, the American political landscape is increasingly shaped by deepening polarization and a pervasive atmosphere of fear. The use of fear as a political tool threatens the fundamental principles of democracy, such as rational debate and peaceful transfer of power.
From a sociological perspective, the United States has always been a society shaped by deep divisions such as race, class, and ideology. As Theodor Adorno noted in his book “The Authoritarian Personality,” certain conditions like economic uncertainty and rapid social change foster authoritarian tendencies and a propensity for violence.
Today’s highly polarized political climate in the U.S. shows striking similarities to these conditions, further deepening the deep-seated fears of various groups. Republicans’ concerns about illegal immigration and security, and Democrats’ fears about the erosion of civil liberties, create fertile ground for violence. The January 6th Capitol attack, as an expression of these fears, revealed how fragile American democracy is and how easily political violence can erupt when the legitimacy of institutions is questioned.
From a psychological perspective, fear is a powerful motivator that can drive individuals and groups toward violence, especially when they believe their identities or lifestyles are under threat. In this context, the United States stands at a critical crossroads. Both major political parties are using fear not just as a byproduct but also as a deliberate strategy to mobilize their bases.
Donald Trump’s labelling of Kamala Harris as a socialist aim to revive a historical fear embedded in the American consciousness since the Cold War. This strategy not only discredits political opponents but also instils a sense of existential threat among his supporters. Trump’s claims that American democracy will end if he loses the 2024 election resonate with a marginalized and alienated segment, more than just exaggerated rhetoric. This alienation is further reinforced by the belief among Trump supporters that there is a hidden structure working against their leader, significantly undermining the legitimacy of the democratic process.
On the other hand, on the opposite side of the political spectrum, Trump is perceived by Democrats not just as a political choice but as a threat to their way of life. The radical and norm-disregarding approach Trump exhibited during his presidency triggers an existential fear among Democrats. Kamala Harris frequently warns Americans about the potential consequences of bringing Trump back to the White House, underlining this danger with historical examples. Moreover, the concerns of Democrats who support claims that Trump’s 2016 victory was the result of Russian interference also demonstrate how tense the political environment is.
With two months remaining until the 2024 U.S. elections, it is possible to take a deep snapshot of political violence. In this context, the “fight or flight” response becomes significant. Political violence can be seen as a “fight” reflex triggered by the survival instinct of individuals and groups when cornered. A symbolic example of this dynamic was observed in the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump. For Trump and his supporters, the legal proceedings against Trump were a “declaration of fight” long before, and the recent assassination attempt showed that this war has now taken on a physical dimension. Trump’s reaction was to stand up with his bleeding ear, clench his fist, and shout “fight”
On the other hand, Democrats provide an example related to the psychological aspect of violence. Joe Biden’s exclusion from the race due to public and financial pressures, despite his primary victories, can be seen as a form of psychological violence. Moreover, the President had posted a message on the X platform just hours before indicating that he would win the election.
Beyond the bases of political parties, it is important to emphasize that minority groups are also caught in this web of contradictions. Particularly for some African Americans, the legacy of systemic racism, combined with economic disadvantages, continues to be a source of deep anger and frustration. These feelings can easily be channelled into violent expressions. Although the Black Lives Matter movement was mostly peaceful, it sometimes witnessed acts of violence in response to perceived injustices that the political system failed to address. Similarly, undocumented immigrant Hispanic communities live in fear of deportation; this fear can easily turn into despair and ultimately violence.
In this dynamic of violence, the role of traditional and social media should not be overlooked. Social media algorithms prioritize content that evokes strong emotional reactions, often amplifying extreme views and sensationalism. In this environment, the line between reality and perception becomes increasingly blurred, making it easier to justify and rationalize political violence.
To prevent the rise of political violence, it is essential to address the underlying fears that fuel it. This requires a multi-faceted approach. Political leaders must prioritize rebuilding trust in democratic institutions, promoting inclusive dialogue, and supporting policies of hope instead of fear. Media outlets should avoid sensationalism and present political events in a more balanced and nuanced manner. As the 2024 elections approach, the choices that political leaders, the media, and citizens make will determine whether the United States moves toward a future defined by fear and violence or a future where democratic values are strengthened through mutual understanding and cooperation. This issue has become a priority for America, especially considering the high rate of individual gun ownership.