Relationship Between Fear of Death and Right-Wing Tendencies

In psychological literature, this topic has been extensively examined within the framework of Terror Management Theory (TMT). In other words, it has been revealed that fear of death makes people more right-wing.

In psychological literature, this topic has been extensively examined within the framework of Terror Management Theory (TMT). The short answer to the question: Yes, such a tendency is generally observed, but there are interesting nuances to this situation.

We can summarize the relationship between fear of death and political leaning under the following headings:

1. Clinging to Worldview (Worldview Defense)

According to TMT, when people are reminded of their own mortality (this is called “mortality salience“), they cling more tightly to “cultural worldviews” to suppress the existential anxiety they experience. These worldviews promise individuals a sense of meaning, order, and immortality (even if symbolic).

Conservatism and Right-Wing Values: Concepts such as traditions, religious beliefs, and national identity give individuals the feeling of being part of a structure larger and more permanent than themselves. When fear of death is triggered, people may tend to become more authoritarian, punitive, and status quo-preserving.

2. Need for “Cognitive Closure“

The thought of death creates uncertainty and chaos. Right-wing/conservative ideologies are generally based on clearer boundaries, definite rules, and an “us-them” distinction. This structural clarity serves as a psychological shield to cope with the great uncertainty created by death.

3. What Do Studies Say?

Liberal-Conservative Shift: In many experiments, when both conservative and liberal individuals were reminded of their mortality, both groups were observed to defend their views more strongly. However, the general tendency is for people to shift towards a more security-oriented, distant towards foreigners, and traditionalist (i.e., closer to right-wing values) position.
Search for Authoritarian Leaders: When fear of death increases, the likelihood of masses turning to authoritarian leaders who appear “strong and protective” increases.

4. Exceptions: Adherence to “Left-Wing” Values

If a person’s fundamental worldview is deeply rooted in humanism, egalitarianism, and universal human rights, the fear of death might push that person to adhere more fanatically to these liberal values instead of making them “more right-wing“. In other words, the system works by making the person “cling more firmly to what they believe is right“.

In summary: Fear of death makes people more defensive. This defense mechanism generally aligns more easily with right-wing policies that prioritize order, tradition, and belonging.

Difference Between Right-Wing and Left-Wing Politics

To understand the difference between right-wing and left-wing politics, one needs to look at the “human nature” and “social order” perspectives underlying these concepts. Although this distinction originally arose from the seating arrangement in the parliament during the 1789 French Revolution, today it represents much deeper philosophical divides.

Here are the most fundamental differences:

1. Equality vs. Hierarchy

Left-Wing Politics: The core value is equality. It advocates for social justice. It believes that societal inequalities (economic, class, sexual) stem from systemic failures and should be corrected through state intervention.
Right-Wing Politics: The core values are order and hierarchy. It argues that inequalities are natural or result from individual effort (meritocracy). It believes that the preservation of traditional structures (family, religion, nation) is essential for the survival of society.

2. Change vs. Status Quo (Tradition)

Left-Wing Politics: It is progressive. It argues that the existing order (status quo) needs radical reforms, or even revolutions, to improve. It does not say “everything from the past is good,” it questions it.
Right-Wing Politics: It is conservative. It wants to preserve traditions, institutions, and values that have stood the test of time. It worries that rapid and radical changes will disrupt the social fabric and lead to chaos.

3. Role of the State and Economy

It might be clearer to compare this area with a table:

Feature
- Left (Generally):
  - Economy: State intervention, public services, high taxes (from rich to poor).
  - Individual vs. Society: Prioritizes collective welfare and societal interests.
  - Social Security: “Cradle-to-grave” state guarantee and social assistance.
- Right (Generally):
  - Economy: Free market, private sector priority, low taxes, individual property.
  - Individual vs. Society: Prioritizes individual freedoms and responsibilities.
  - Social Security: Charity organizations and family solidarity (state burden should be reduced).

4. Identity and Belonging

Left-Wing Politics: Generally universalist and internationalist. It emphasizes human rights, minority rights, and global solidarity. It provides a more inclusive (cosmopolitan) answer to the question “Who are we?“
Right-Wing Politics: Generally nationalist or focused on religious identity. It prioritizes the values of its own nation or faith group. Border protection and national security are the most critical issues.

The “security, order, and survival” oriented structure of right-wing politics is highly conducive to turning chaotic elements like terrorism, which trigger fear of death, into political fuel.

We can explain this through the following mechanisms:

1. “Rally ‘Round the Flag” Effect

Terrorist attacks or external threats create intense mortality salience in society. When people feel mortal and threatened, they seek refuge in authority that reinforces the “us” feeling and promises to protect them. Right-wing governments at this point:
1. Elevate the discourse of “state survival” to the highest level.
2. Narrow the field by accusing the opposition of being “not tough enough” or “treasonous“.

2. Trade-off Between Freedom and Security

Right-wing politics is more successful in legitimizing the restriction of individual freedoms in the name of security during times of crisis.
The argument, “We are fighting terrorism, so we must sacrifice some rights,” is much more easily accepted by a fearful populace.
The left’s warnings about “human rights” or “rule of law” can be perceived by the public in this atmosphere as “weakness” or “enabling terrorism“.

3. Construction of “External Enemies” and “The Other“

Right-wing ideologies need a clear enemy to consolidate society. Terrorism concretizes this “evil other” profile.
1. This situation fuels nationalism (right-wing value).
2. Different voices in society (left, liberal, minority) can be marginalized by portraying them as “connected to terrorism“.

Historical and Contemporary Examples:

Post-9/11 USA (George W. Bush): After the Twin Towers attacks, the Bush administration gained extensive powers with the “Patriot Act” and dominated right-wing/conservative politics for years through this fear climate.
Election Periods: In many parts of the world, increased terrorist incidents close to elections have been observed to generally benefit parties promising “order and stability” (typically right-wing/authoritarian) at the polls.

In Conclusion:

The antithesis of right-wing politics is chaos. Terrorism is the ultimate point of chaos. Therefore, for a right-wing state or leader, terrorism can become a useful “governance instrument” to rally the people around them, silence the opposition, and reinforce the “protective father” figure. The left’s job is harder because the right appeals to emotions (fear, belonging, anger), while the left generally appeals to reason and conscience. Neuroscientifically, when the amygdala (fear center) in the brain is triggered, the prefrontal cortex (logical thinking) is deactivated. The left tries to be “the voice of reason” in a climate of fear, but people in terror tend to prefer a “tough shield” to protect themselves, not reason.

colere.blog– Digital Content Platform

Colere

Topics