towards a theory of fearism - prism home
TRANSCRIPT
University of Calgary
PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository
Werklund School of Education Werklund School of Education Research & Publications
2014
Towards a Theory of Fearism
Fisher, R. M.
In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute
Fisher, R. M. (2014). Towards a Theory of Fearism (Technical Paper No.51). Carbondale, IL: In
Search of Fearlessness Research Institute.
http://hdl.handle.net/1880/110015
Report
Unless otherwise indicated, this material is protected by copyright and has been made available
with authorization from the copyright owner. You may use this material in any way that is
permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For
uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek
permission.
Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca
Towards a Theory of Fearism
R. Michael Fisher, Ph.D. © 2014
Technical Paper No. 51 In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute
2
2
Towards a Theory of Fearism R. Michael Fisher, Ph.D.
Copyright 2014
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the pub-lisher/author. No permission is necessary in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews, or other educational or research purposes. For information and permission address correspond-ence to:
In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute
507 S. James St., Carbondale, IL 62901
Contact author:
First Edition 2014
Cover and layout by R. Michael Fisher ISOF Logo (original 1989) designed by RMF
Printed in USA
The In Search of Fearlessness Institute is dedicated to research and publishing on fear, fearlessness and emotions in general, as well as critical reviews of such works. Preference is given to works with an integral theoretical perspective.
3
3
Towards a Theory of Fearism
- R. Michael Fisher,1 Ph.D. ©2014 Technical Paper No. 51 Abstract: This is my first systematic publication on fearism. It is a general theoretical study but does not itself remain un-affected. Based on experience and theorizing on fearism, I am convinced it is a deeply terrifying encounter, as would be the encounter critically of any harm-ful violent ideology. Fearism, arguably, is the most terrifying to encounter, which no doubt explains why it has not been spoken about in human history so directly until only the last dec-ade and particularly more so in the last few years. Fearism is the core controversial concep-tualization beneath all my other ventures to create 'Fear' Studies, fearology, and fearanalysis. This paper also acknowledges that this is not the only constructionism of fearism available, with the strongest philosophical articulation of an alternative view found in the recent book in 2014 of the Nepalese poet, writer and philosopher Desh Subba. Like Subba, I am interested in suffering and its relationship to fear as the very most important lens (and motivational para-digm) by which to understand human history and behavior, individually and collectively. I've discovered this is a very complex relationship not easy to grasp without deep and systematic study and very unique methodologies, which ought to involve fearlessness and a fearless standpoint theory. Fearism emerged in the year 2001 as I was turning attention from psycho-logical to the more political aspects of fear and its role in societies and human/cultural evolu-tion. Fearism is defined in this paper but more importantly conceptualized from multiple per-spectives offering a challenging critical lens on any notion of fear and its management/ education. Fearism is a transdisciplinary conception that ensures a more holistic-integral un-derstanding of the phenomenon itself and the theoretical framework by which we can critique (test) and improve (recommend)—fearism as essential to deeply understanding all ism op-pressions (sexism, racism, classism, adultism, etc.). Some 13 years ago, I seem to be the first to have coined the term "fearism" in a formal way for serious academic work. In recent years a small cadre of scholars, several using my conceptualization, are beginning to use fearism, which inspires me to write more in depth on the topic. This paper provides only a brief and general understanding of how we may theorize fearism. In the spirit of nonviolence and libera-tion resistance movements (e.g., Mahatma Gandhi), I wish this general theoretical construc-tion of fearism to begin to open dialogue with many thinkers from diverse domains around the world; however, my own future work will rather specify a particular critical integral theory of fearism.
Introduction
Fear is a power that always attracts us. -Desh Subba2
1 Fisher is co-founder of In Search of Fearlessness Project (1989- ) and Research Institute (1991- ) of which archives can be found at http://www.feareducation.com (click on "Pro-jects"). He is also founder of the Center for Spiritual Inquiry & Integral Education (http://csiie.org), and is Department Head at CSIIE of Integral & 'Fear' Studies. He is a con-sultant, researcher, coach, artist, teacher and Principal of his own company (http://loveandfearsolutions.com). He can be reached at: [email protected] 2 Subba, D. (2014). Philosophy of fearism: Life is conducted, directed and controlled by the fear. Xlibris, p. 46.
4
4
Fear, no matter how we may try to define it or reduce it to stereotypical and familiar notions, inevitably eludes and escapes our gaze. It slips-slides-evolves. It is mysterious beyond all our rational logic and empirical meth-ods of analysis. It is a formidable force that is unique—and as many critical thinkers have said throughout time and around the world, fear is very pow-erful and important—and, can be very attractive and very repugnant to hu-mans. It is an ominous meta-motivational source behind most everything humankind does. "Fear brings out the best and worst in human beings," says Dozier (1998).3 It is this unique and paradoxical aspect of fear that ought to encourages us to think more intensely and critically about its na-ture and role than we already have as a species, especially in the danger-ous 21st century we are entering. Fearism, as a new philosophy (e.g., Subba) calls us to attend anew and see fear in new ways in order to better manage and transform it for greater ethical effectiveness, sustainability and wellbeing. Not unique to myself, although a rare admission perhaps, I think my project to know anything about life on this planet has always taken a dark bend in the cave, towards investigating suffering in all forms.4 The focus is on hu-man beings here, not that suffering ought to be so restricted. I'll not review (or cite) here the plethora of work I have already done researching and publishing on fear and fearlessness for 25 yrs. That is all readily available on the internet and my websites. To state the obvious perhaps: I intuited long ago, and read voraciously across disciplines to find validation for the basic premise that fear is the root core of all suffering. I quickly became aware on this search of libera-tion, with systematic fear study beginning in late-1989, fear a uniquely powerful enigmatic force in human evolution was (and still is) not so simple to understand, at least, if one did not settle for just anyone's philosophy,
3 Dozier, R. W. Jr. (1998). Fear itself: The origin and nature of the powerful emotion that shapes our lives and world. New York: St. Martin's Press, p. 13. 4 This includes my long interest in studying good vs. evil and liberation vs. oppression or as Erich Fromm was concerned with the growing problem of "necrophilia vs. biophilia." In all my writing on fear and fearlessness, I have been fascinated with the traditional problem in philosophical, religious and spiritual thought, from across traditions, of the problem of "Love vs. fear." In this sense, I have agreed with these framings as important to better un-derstand and assist with human kind in its relations on this planet. Mostly, however, I have focused my research and inquiry into the "Love vs. fear" dilemma, which I think is at the core of all our biggest problems, and it reminds me to construct a wide and deep under-standing of "fear" as a meta-motivational (some call meta-emotional) paradigm (more or less) dialectical and/or in opposition to "Love" as a meta-motivational paradigm shaping human existence. For more on this see my articulation of "15 Bi-centric Paradigms of the Fearlessness Tradition (Movement)," in Fisher (2010), pp. 167-71. Fisher, R. M. (2010). The world's fearlessness teachings: A critical integral approach to fear manage-ment/education for the 21st century. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
5
5
theory, definition or meaning or favorite recommendations of how to best manage fear and educator others about it. As an independent scholar, I want to participate in, research with, and cri-tique the current knowledge and wisdom about fear (fearism) on this plan-et. I see great problems in the very methodologies we use to research and understand fear(ism). For one, the neurological and general biopsychologi-cal and cognitive understandings of fear (e.g., amygdala discourses on fear), useful as they are, are typically reductionistic, distortive—requiring supplemental methodologies and knowledges from other perspectives on the nature and role of fear. Fear is not merely an emotion/feeling, at least one cannot conclude that when one takes a holistic-integral perspective. As early as 1989, I felt a passionate and prophetic calling, accompanied with a vision to do this. I took a radical life-path, which later I understood to be the ancient path of fearlessness, part of the World's Fearlessness Movement.5 I saw we require a "gift of fearlessness" culture today in the West, much like the ancient sacred traditions in the East (see Appendix 1). This loose and pervasive historical and evolutionary movement of the 'spirit of fearlessness' in the face of fear, is rich with knowledge that is core to understanding the roots of a philosophy of fearism (like Subba's, 2014)6 or my own. Eventually, I jokingly called myself a fearologist, of which col-leagues, friends, allies, distractors and enemies in my life would nod, smile or snear. Most however, just ignore this is a needed serious profession. For me, it's more a vocation than profession. I am delighted to see Subba (2014) also has acknowledged seriously, "It is time for 'fearology' to be a study" (p. 159), as part of his philosophy of fearism. I looked across cultures and through time, in popular and secular thought and in disciplines and sacred literatures, and I found evidence for this ex-traordinary correlation of fear to suffering and our avoidance and manage-ment of suffering. I found also no one definition of fear or fearism is ade-quate to understanding this phenomenon of fear-suffering. Fear is unique among the emotions7 and simultaneously not reducible to emotions or feel-ings alone.
5 See my Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fear_educator/sandbox 6 See also the Fearism Study Academy, based on his work, in Dharan, Nepal.
7 Many people, some scholars, other laypersons, have written about this uniqueness, for example from one website (Josh Bean, 2012, "Men, What Are We Afraid Of?": "Why are we slaves to our fears? According to those who study the subject, it's not some neurological hiccup. Fear is a deeply ingrained by-product of evolution. And in our current context, that adaptation has gone haywire." .... "Of the six so-called basic emotions—the others are an-ger, sadness, surprise, disgust, and joy—fear is unique and arguably the most powerful, because our survival literally depends upon it" [quotes from UCLA's Brain Research Insti-
6
6
Fearism, as a construct and theory, is a signification of my great dissatis-faction, my searching, my best thinking for something better—a critique of virtually everything we humans think we understand about fear. Fearism is in some sense all about fear ('fear')8 without a feeling, yet it may also in-clude emotion and feeling. Fearism is definitely involves consciousness (the way we perceive, imagine, think, act, talk about reality). But let's not go down that road of analysis yet. My point, is that a new emancipatory language has been critical to my investigations of fear and fearlessness since the beginning of my commitment in 1989. I agree with Subba (2014) that we as a species have come to such an Extreme Fear Age where major transformation is required. And for Subba, a new philosophy of fearism re-interprets human existence with new definitions and linkages as we are required to better understand the nature and role of fear. He concludes, People fear the people [i.e., ideologies, hegemony] who interpret life and the world in their own words. It has created a threat among peo- ple. It's a threat to the world. So, it demands new definitions and inter- pretations because the world's becoming the victim of a great fear. To rescue the world from such quicksand, its sources have to be identi- fied and they have to be reinterpreted. Doing all this minimises fear a little. It can be a great achievement. I have [re-]interpreted some sources [of fear]. (p. 65) Humans (like animals) are always dealing with fear. At the same time, we are trying to manage it and improve on this fear condition. That is an un-derlying premise of a theory of fear management in the broadest evolu-tionary sense. I won't articulate this here but I also hear this same kind of premise underlying Subba's philosophy of fearism. The point of the quote above brings me to further analysis of fear(ism) in this world. This sense that the world is becoming a victim of a "great fear," is something that we have to study in images and representations (as well as texts, ideas, and behaviors) that are created by artists and those who imagine this great fear in diverse ways. Arts, dreams, fantasies, stories (e.g., folk tales, myths) and images provide great insight for interpretations of our relationship to fear, according to psychoanalysis. Fear isn't always conscious; it can be unconscious. All these images of fear and our relationship to it, like the one I collected below (Figure 1) in my graduate studies, are interpretations and require re-interpretation for awareness, healing, and potential change and transformation beyond the victimhood we now seem plagued with.
tute, according to Dr. Michael Fanselow). Retrieved from http://www.gq.com/news-politics/mens-lives/201210/how-to-get-over-fear
8 'Fear' (with inverted commas) is my way of signifying that fear as we ordinarily define it and make meaning of it, is under deconstruction and reconstruction.
7
7
Figure 1. Art Young's9 cartoon, 1927, foresaw the world into which we are mov-ing. [drawing adapted by myself in photoshop by adding "ISM" to "FEAR" in the original published in a political magazine, which I never wrote down the reference at the time] Great fear, at least in a historical, cultural, and sociopolitical sense, can only be maintained as a chronic condition, and become so controlling (as Art Young's image)—if fearism is operating. That is one of the basic prem-ises behind my own theory of fearism, a theme I'll take up in more detail below. I've sensed a counterhegemonic emancipatory language of, about, and around fear is essential to undermine the hegemonic oppressive language around fear (in general) that has been constructed throughout history and perhaps globally. The World's Fearlessness Tradition/Movement (Fisher, 2010) has been the base of my counterhegemonic fearlessness philosophy and theorizing (see Appendix 1). I am a Westerner, so I'll generally keep my scope of critique aimed here at the Western traditions, which I know best and have for the most part lived experientially. I believe there are generalizations from my W. perspective that are universal, but I suggest we remain as postmoderns vigilant and cautious to the problem of overly uni-versalizing what we think we know about fear or anything else that has to do with human behavior. Fearism is one of those terms in the lexicon I've created and it is very re-cently being used more by scholars than any of my other terms (see Ap-
9 Art Young, left-wing, among other young political art criticism, of ideological base pub-lished in magazines, among young radicals, "Young's work, combining political satire with social criticism, was most widely distributed." (from: K. Goldstein, "American Political Cartoons and Comics" p. 125, in ed. M. Charney, Comedy: A geographic and historical guide (2005) Westport, CN: Praeger (121-134).
8
8
pendix 2 for my additions to "Fearism" on Wikipedia10 beyond what was started there by someone else who wrote the first paragraph of the entry on Subba's version). So, I want to follow that practical interest of scholars in this technical paper, towards a theory of fearism, in the general sense. This basic overview will be limited in part by my not reading substantially everything there is on fearism, especially I have not read in any sufficient detail Subba's recent articulation of his philosophy of fearism.11 However, I will cite some of his points later.
Fear(ism): Emphasis on a Critical Political Theorizing
We are undergoing an extreme fear age. -Desh Subba12
In my experience, the use of fearism is inherently driven by the necessity to understand fear in its gross and subtle political aspects. I am a critical (con-flict) theorist (and integral theorist), not interested in only a supposed val-ue-neutral functionalist meaning to reality.13 Some say my critical fearanal-ysis14 is too dark, negative, even somewhat nihilistic and pessimistic. It depends on what they mean and what reference they judge my work, com-pared to others they find more optimistic. I won't go into that debate here. But I will say at the outset, I am a critical thinker and am not looking to make people feel happy and feel hopeful.15 That is not my task. My task is to do an honest and rigorous scholarly assessment of fear(ism).
10 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fearism 11 Subba, D. (2014). Philosophy of fearism: Life is conducted, directed and controlled by the fear. Xlibris Corp. [he is Nepalese apparently writing in English-as-a-second language; translated by other, apparently non-English-as-a-first-language speakers, R. Subba with B. K. Rai; I find this writing-translation dynamic a bit challenging to read and understand, as I am a born English-as-first language speaker] 12 Ibid., p. 45. 13 An excellent summary of the oppositional (political and ideological) tendencies of func-tionalism vs. conflict theory, in relation to integral theory, see Fisher, V. D., and Nicholson, S. E. (2014). Developing a critical integral praxis for sex, gender, and sexuality. In S. E. Nicholson and V. D. Fisher (Eds.), Integral voices on sex, gender, and sexuality: Critical inquiries (pp. 1-12). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. 14 I use this term fearanalysis in a way analogous to psychoanalysis but not reducible to psychoanalysis. Likewise, one could add Deleuze and Guattari's schizoanalysis as an analo-gy to how I am envisioning fearanalysis. 15 This ought not be misconstrued, for e.g., that I don't take it as my task to help liberate people. Elsewhere, I have make a strong case, based on my studies of the fear/hope problem in North American societies, that "hope" is not the way to go, nor is "happiness" because these are horribly embedded notions in the very fearism that I am attempting to undermine. I promote fearlessness as the better integral alternative path.
9
9
Of course, such as I prefer, is not to limit the construction of or impacts of fearism to only the political sphere either. I'll return to that later. Terms like "politics of fear" (or "politics of emotions" or "affective politics") have been arising more and more in the literature since the mid-1990s especially, with the "culture of fear" (sometimes "climate of fear") being the major construct used the most by scholars and others. I too have focused much of my work on these terms, especially the culture of fear, which I define (most simply) as: the attempt to manage fear by fear-based means, creating more fear not less. When that strategy becomes a cultural norm (under the aegis of fearism), we have what I'd call a "culture of fear." Many others have written about this phenomenon, as well as "climate of fear" or "fear culture" etc. Here is my quickie definition of fearism, which I'll come back and elaborate on later in this paper (although, it would take a whole book to do this jus-tice): fearism- the pathological ideology that keeps a fear-based culture (i.e., culture of fear) as the hegemonic way of knowing, being, and thus over-determines the very understanding of fear itself. However, when I think of conveying my rather conflict-oriented position on fearism, and on the many authors who write about fear and fearism, I want to be bluntly honest about one of the reasons I began to craft a theory of fearism right after 9/11, 2001. Emphasis here is on a general theory of fearism, not so much a general philosophy of fearism (a la Subba). It all started when I was painfully struggling with why after decades of reaching out to other writers on fear, that they would not or would barely engage me and my work on fear and fearlessness. I cannot tell you the hundreds of attempts I have made to connect with others concerned about fear in a serious (often scholarly) way. I suffered with my desire, unsatisfied and depressed—often because of their seeming lack of interest to form a coali-tion of thinkers and writers from diverse backgrounds. I even attempted to initiate a global conference on The Fear Problem in the mid-late 1990s. To shorten this story, none of it came to fruition; (an apparent) lack of interest from others was and still is chronic. I searched to find some way to explain this 'lack of interest' to collect our works and intelligences on the nature and role of fear. First, I thought, well each of them, in various ways, is more interested in "doing their own thing" and "building their own career" using fear as a subject matter. Fine. I know that is a powerful seduction to do so (e.g., bourgeoise, middle-upper class privileges), especially in a North American culture of celebrity and fame, fortune, and status. I was not interested to play that game, and wanted a serious continuous body of researchers and thinkers to co-participate in a Fearlessness Movement and something I labeled post-postmodern 'Fear' Studies. No such interest could I inspire in others, not with any real depth or energy input and/or funding.
10
10
I stirred up more explanations for this lack of interest in collective organiz-ing. Most pointed, and I think most accurate, is a theory of fearism to ex-plain this problem I was encountering in my communications with so many people around this topic of fear and later, fearology. I theorized that fearism was like racism, sexism, classism, etc.—an 'ism' (dis-ease/pathology) that violently embedded itself in the dominant discourses of society (especially, in the West, I contend). This is caused by trauma (unhealed painful memo-ries) and the accompanying fear-based ('fear'-based) patterns which im-pact our knowledge formation etc. I saw fearism as a theoretical construct, and also a reality, operating to make us "demean" or "forget" the best (i.e., emancipatory) knowledges available that would assist our liberation from an oppressive society (i.e., a culture of fear). Fearism (the more recent concept in my theorizing), as part of a larger 'Fear' Project (and 'Fear' Ma-trix) conception I had in late 1980's, is the ideological discourse formation of hegemony to systematically eliminate possibilities of uncovering the de-structive forces of how fear is (mis-)used in regimes of power-knowledge-fear (a la Foucault). One could include fear-appeal advertising in business, governments, etc. in such mis-use. Fearism, in otherwords, was allowing some knowledge gain in understand-ing the nature and role of fear in shaping human lives. But only "just enough" knowledge, "just enough" clarity and wisdom, but not any more than that; and any individuals or groups that transgress that boundary of only "just enough" knowledge about fear and overcoming its harmful ef-fects, would be a transgression against the hegemonic discourses (politics) of the society. It would thus be punished, eliminated, or disappeared—a common set of terms and processes by which any dominating regime is known by. One form of this is of course, is to create an imaginary ("real") threat of such a transgression of knowledge (i.e., to challenge the status quo formal institutional knowledge)—by making sure that such a transgressor will not get 'rewarded' (e.g., via money, jobs, status, power) in such a culture of fear. All this begs the question: What would it take for an entire culture to become so ideologically fear-based? That is beyond the scope of this short paper on fearism. However, I hope in this brief introduction, at least, one will see that fearism is built on the design of a cycle of violence (oppres-sion), and/or cycle of fear16—and thus, is trapped in its own reification pro-cesses and discourses of maintaining control and domination (under the name of "safety and security" or "order") of its own 'prison'—a strange (if not schizoidal) paradox of using the power of fear to control but using it in ways that restrict healthy growth and development for the controller as well. We are all victimized by this excessive ideological "organized fear
16 Elsewhere, I have articulated this as Domination-Conflict-Fear-Violence theory.
11
11
trade" (i.e., fearism, culture of fear) as the postmodern cultural critic Mas-sumi (1993)17 articulated so well. Back to my own experience and speculations: I theorize that some phe-nomenon (call it fearism) is systemically acting to structure, reproduce and maintain excessive fear (visible or invisible, felt or not felt) in oppressive ways in order to look like it is not an oppressive system that we live in. This 'trick' (illusion, if you will) is, I believe, so deep/unconscious (shadowed) in the cultural discourse (e.g., of the West) that it is normalized and reified in the behavior of even the most critical writers on fear. At the time of my rampant dissatisfaction with colleagues, this was the only explanation that seemed feasible to make sense of why all these writers on fear (generally) were not wishing to connect with me and my work in more systematic ways. I did notice that these writers on fear would connect with some others, at times,18 but I also noticed that some of the most powerful critics of fear (implicitly of fearism as well) were not continuing to research and write on the topic after they spun-off a single good-selling book or a journal article, etc. It seemed they just didn't stay on the course of helping us liberate from fear, or they moved-on and justified there were more important topics. I don't know for sure their motivations. I do suggest however, fearism was acting on/in them, as they were 'agents' of fearism in some manner, and still may be. This fearism, like say racism, does not want to be unveiled and trans-formed or eliminated, for lots of reasons typical of any hegemonic dis-course/system ('ism') of power and domination. Fearism, like racism, for e.g., works continually on all levels of a society and its institutions, within its embedded discourses, to maintain itself, often 'unseen' or at least, within limited boundaries it may be seen and criticized—but, usually, only just within restricted limits of exposure; and, there will be little funding and sup-port to go further to transgress those limits of knowlege about any of the major 'ism's—of which, arguably in my general theory of fearism, one can
17 See the Preface and Introductory chapter by Brian Massumi, in Massumi, B. (ed.) (1993). The everyday politics of fear. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. 18 How they connect is important, for e.g., in series in some journals, or conferences, where many experts are gathered to share what they know about fear and its nature and role today. There also however, is a more interesting research to be done on "who cites who" in the literature across the disciplines, on websites, and so on. This is also a political way of legit-imizing some authors and not others. There are radical, and then there are radical radicals in terms of how "fear" is being researched and written and published and taught to others. I have grave concerns about the biases and oppression of fearism working in these 'circles' of authors/teachers. Such analysis, with more depth, is beyond the scope of this current paper.
12
12
say fearism is at their core root (this is also somewhat part of Subba's no-tion of fearism19). Contra Subba's (2014) lighter and optimistic accounting for fearism, I am less confident than he is that fearism is so easily overcome or transcended across the integral dimensions of Reality (or culture and history, for that matter). I don't think changing our "thoughts" is enough,20 nor developing "consciousness" either, as he asserts throughout his book; but I do agree with him they will be helpful on the path of fearlessness. Subba's optimistic philosophy and vision of fearism, which is one that is meant to improve our understanding of fear and its management and minimise fear and increase comfort and happiness for people, imagines a supposed entry of a "Fear-less Age" (developmental stage), and he says this is near and already with us—where we are as a species in his evolutionary historical map of "Fear Ages" as he calls them through time. He argues particular "thoughts" (positive and virtuous values) will "lead us to a fearless stage" —he concludes, "Human beings will feel less fear in this stage" (p. 45). I could make a long set of arguments, based on the evolution of consciousness in Ken Wilber's integral philosophy/theory, that would contradict Subba's rather simplistic vision/philosophy (speculation) around this particular claim. That is not my intention here, because I would
19 I am less clear to say much about Subba's notion because I have not read enough of his work and studied it carefully; yet, there are indicators on/in the book that fearism "consists of different thoughts and isms" (see back cover of Subba's book, by Dr. Kavita Lama). I think Subba's claim that Edward Said's "interpretation of colonialism. On the whole, it is an attempt to relieve us from postmodern fear" (p. 306) could be interpreted as saying that fearism (in Subba's construction) is underneath (causing) colonialism [add racism, national-ism= all forms of "fear of the Other"]. Of course, from a systems, enactivist or integral per-spective, the fearism-colonialism system is mutually co-evolving, co-causal, and non-linear causal. In some sense, this would lead into a discussion of the postmodern and postcolonial (feminist) conception of "intersectionality" of 'isms' and then we could theorize that fearism is the core/root of all that network meshing of oppressive 'isms'. I have in some of my writ-ing linked the black poststructuralist and postcolonial writer/theorist Patricia Hill Collins's notion of "Matrix of Domination" (i.e., intersectionality) is a 'Fear' Matrix when you get right down and under it, at the meta-motivational level (e.g., "fear of Other" complex or mega-system of oppressions). I don't want a theory of fearism however, to become so polit-ical (and based around identity politics) that it forgets the deep traumatic nature of its vio-lent outcomes as rooted in hurts and trauma (unhealed painful memories = 'fear' pattern virus, as I have written in earlier work). 20 This is the typical strategy of psychologizing liberation by "mind" (or "thought" scienc-es), of which Ken Wilber's Integral Theory challenges somewhat (with some agreement of mind/thought as essential to this task) as over-determined by Upper Left quadrantism itself. This is beyond the scope of this paper, but it has to do with epistemic privileging of mind/thought as the only way to understand consciousness and knowledge for liberation. It is simply, too un-politicized, and thus I think Subba's philosophy of fearism so falls short here as a really good theory of fearism.
13
13
rather use this first paper of mine to lay out some of the general territory of what fearism is or how it could be theorized in the future—again, with my intent at a more generic theory of fearism that the most people using this term could likely agree on. However, to this point, a lot more dialogue would be needed by those using fearism and/or what Subba calls a "fearist perspective,"21 of which I include myself in this category of critical and emancipatory thinkers. One more major interest I have in the political dimensions of constructing fearism as a theory (and phenomena), has to do inevitably with terrorism as a theory (and phenomena). There has in the last three decades or so grown a major field of many disciplines studying terrorism as an important political conception but as well there are collective initiatives under titles like Terror Studies, terrorology, anti-terrorism and so on. They have their own journals specializing on terrorism, of which has not been the case yet with fearism. Why not? I think any good theory of fearism will have to inte-grate a theory of terrorism and utilize that vast amount of scholarship avail-able already, even though it should also be the case that fearism theory will both critique and inform terrorism theory. I will not try to do justice to that integration in this introductory paper. It does raise interesting thoughts in my mind of the intuition I had long ago: Fearism is the subtle and less obvious or visible underbelly of terrorism. Terrorism as we know it politically, with its dramatic "acts of terror" is an ideology of creating fear/terror for manipulating power. It seemed that ter-rorism could also occur in a young man who gets some guns and goes out in a rage and blows many children away in an elementary school, a col-lege, a mall, a theatre. "Terrorists" are not so organized as we used to think. But then, they are all using fear as their major weapon. I quote Sub-ba (2014): "Fear is a superpower.... Fear is a powerful weapon" (pp. 16-17). Although, fear is not only negative in that sense, as Subba and many have argued. Yet, terrorism and fearism have to be closely linked in their (mis-)use of fear for production of violence. Forms of violent thinking, val-ues and attitudes (and ideologies, if not pathologies of dissociation) are also behind this (mis-)use. The "system" of terror/fear and terror-ism/fearism are intimately linked. It takes a fearful (terrified) individual to terrify others. Is that conditioned by culture and traumatic histories? Is that our human nature to (mis-)use fear this way? Do animals do this? Lots of big questions to answer. A theory of fearism ought to help answer these and find solutions to terrorism. Terror Management Theory22 ought to help
21 I am well aware "fearist" or "fearologist" are used in ways not so positively by some people (e.g., on the internet). That is a larger problem to discuss and define, but not here. 22 This TMT (Terror Management Theory) is one of the most empirically sound bodies of research for now near three decades, that provides a great intersection for studying fear and terror on a much broader and deeper existential plane than most of the books I read on fear
14
14
inform Fear Management Theory, and visa versa. At this point, I do not see this happening and I do not see it addressed sufficiently in Subba's work. We have to critically examine how fearism/terrorism is systematically learned in our families, schools, and society in general. That is why I have focused, as a professional educator, on how we design curricula and en-gage pedagogies. We need a better fear education!
Summary: Some Aspects of a General Theory of Fearism Again, such a short introductory paper on a general theory of fearism is going to be sorely inadequate, raise more questions than answer, and pro-voke readers to step out of comfortable and habitual ways of thinking. All of this can be somewhat troubling, I understand. It stirs not only emotions, feelings, and 'strange' thoughts, it can cause de-stabilizing of our entire way of understanding the world and ourselves. What happens to us, and our sense of the world, when we come to it through the lens of fear. Subba (2014) sees this as essential as do I and many others. But only Subba and I have put forth the foundations for a philosophy and theory of fearism, to which Subba has done the most systematic work (not all of which I agree with). With this cautionary and apologetic in mind, let me proceed to pull some ideas from Subba's work and my own, again, with focus on the construc-tion of a theory of fearism (one which anyone can critique and improve with time): (a) a theory of fearism out to explain and convince us that the cycle of vio-lence, terrorism, and oppression-repression dynamics in all forms (isms) created by humans is understandable, and fundamentally underpinned by fear-based motivations (e.g., fear creates more fear until it becomes terror) (b) fear and its management underpins, to some degree, all other theories and philosophies of life and human behavior, including the very formation of learning and knowing (i.e., existentially, as a defense against our sensi-tive awareness of mortality and the potential of future pain and suffering) (c) any downplaying, omission, absolute dismissal or forgetting of this piv-otal role of fear and its management in humans, individually and collective-ly, is more or less based on fearism, which systemically does not want to be revealed as an ideology that is extremely destructive to human growth and flourishing (or "Life" itself)
and its management. See Wikipedia for an introduction to TMT @http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_management_theory
15
15
(d) a first working definition of fearism (as ideology) challenges everything we know or think we know about fear—we need to re-interpret fear and our relations to it via the theory of fearism itself (i.e., an entire re-education is required)—Fisher (2006) outlined the basic problematic we face, which serves as a good starting place for future theories of fearism: It has always struck me as more than a little odd that the word terrorism has received an incredible amount of scholarly attention... but fearism has been invisible.... The early definition of fearism incorporated the notion that fear ('fear') was oppressive and fearism was at the substantive core of all other oppressive 'isms' (e.g., classism, racism). But I had to still deal with the problem that so many authors believed "fear was natural" [Subba included] and "fear was our protection from danger" and therefore could not be incorpo rated into oppression theory easily, certainly not with an idea of fearism. I ar gued then, and still do, that using "fear" instead of "alarm response" or "stress response" was an inappropriate use of the term fear, especially as fear was being constructed [so systematically] as 'fear' in a postmodern world (in fearism).... [my critics] insisted that fear is what keeps us from running onto the streets in front of a bus. I insisted that intelligence does that. We are born not to be stupid, in terms of survival [defense] logic. Anyway, leave that unresolved for now. Fearism is complex beyond those arguments: Fearism is the systematic (often unconscious) production and perpetration of fear on others for the purpose of obtaining power for abusive control and manipulation of people, other species, and the environment.... Fearism [connected to the "politics of fear" and "culture of fear" concepts and phenomena] as a process and discourse hegemony, creates an experience of fear that is normalized and naturalized, whereby the term fear is skewed to mean whatever those in elite power positions, who control much of the originary fear production (and its "management"), want it to mean, and whatever they want to teach others it means. Fearism is dedicated to keeping the cultural matrix of 'fear' operative and relatively invisible, while preventing any systematic critique and exposure of the real dynamics of fear ('fear') and fearism. With fearism, you don't even feel or see the fear anymore—that is, if you don't look deep enough. You won't read that in your average textbook on fear management, or what the average therapist or psychiatrist might diagnose at the clinic, or priest at the pulpit. Simply and hypothetically, fearism, is attempting right now as you and I communicate, to erase (or skew, diss) any memory of this essay's contents, and mostly to erase (or skew, idss) the author's name who wrote it because a serious critique of our current knowledge about fear ('fear') and fearism itself is at the foreground of the communication here.... Likely, any educator who has taught anti-racism education or any anti-oppression topics will pick up on exactly what I am saying here. (pp. 51-52)23 (e) Fisher's theory of fearism (with a strong political and epistemological critique of the status quo) is not the only or best way to construct a theory of fearism--it ought to be constructed from multiple perspectives in order to get as wide and deep of a range of critical thinking involved, as nothing 23 Fisher, R. M. (2006). Invoking 'Fear' Studies. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 22(4), 39-71.
16
16
less is likely going to undermine fearism itself; theorists need to work to-gether and test theories in practices (f) Fisher has posited a "fearless standpoint theory," Subba a "fearless path" as ways beyond mere bravery and courage, in order to frame a ref-erence point where one can map and envision a critique of the status quo of an extreme fear age that we live in (g) a theory of fearism both posits and explains the handicap humanity has acquired in its relationship to fear, over many millenia, and it also posits a way of liberation from that handicap that is better than any other theory in understanding the nature and role of fear (h) a theory of fearism ought to look at all other theories (and philosophies) that have been constructed to explain human behavior, and show that they are attempts to better manage fear, but often do not accomplish that—such a re-interpretation of premodern, modern and postmodern thought by di-verse scholars comes from a "fearist perspective" (a la Subba)24 (i) a theory of fearism has to be more than a construction of another label of oppression (ism) that is thrown about as a demeaning label to build a case upon the other who is supposedly practicing and promoting fearism; such labeling in itself is not all that useful to emancipation in the long-term from the negative impact of systemic fear ('fear') (j) contemporary Cultural and Media Studies (i.e., Mass Communication) are essential to bring to our theorizing fearism because of the unique ways new technologies (e.g., Internet and social media) can so quickly spread an affective contagion politically, culturally, psychologically, if not spiritually in order to reproduce fearism (perhaps unwittingly) The list goes on and on... For a brief overview of how some scholars have been using fearism see Appendix 3. I look forward to future engagement and dialogues on these topics.
****
APPENDIX 1: FEARLESSNESS MOVEMENT on Wikipedia
Fearlessness Movement (also known as World's Fearlessness Movement, In Search of
24 Re: current philosophies, "Fear is the foundation of all: Michel Foucault's concept of power, Jacques Derrida's domination or suppression, Showalter's essential study, Gayatri Spivak's interpretation of subaltern, and Edward W. Said's interpretation of colonialism. On the whole, it is an attempt to relieve us from postmodern fear" (Subba, 2014, pp. 305-06).
17
17
Fearlessness Movement, Fearlessness (R)Evolution, Fearlessness Tradition) refers to a global, universal, usually loosely defined and organized category of activities signifying a his-torical thought or critical consciousness movement. Coined in 2003 [1] by self-proclaimed postmodern-integral fearologist [2] and educator, R. Michael Fisher [3], the Movement's priori-ty, within the context of nonviolence and liberation resistance movements, is dedicated specif-ically to unraveling the problems created by fear for Homo sapiens (and also other species). Individually and collectively, the Fearlessness Movement fundamentally serves to move us from fear to fearlessness, acting as a fear-vaccine and systematic counterresistance to the insidious 'Fear' Problem (also known as 'Fear' Project, 'Fear' Matrix, Fear/Anxiety Complex) [4], and its ideological underpinning in systemic fearism with its various symptoms such as terrorism and other diverse culture of fear phenomena [5].
Contents: 1. History 2. Philosophy, Theory, Practice 3. See Also 4. References
History
There is no known source or date when the Fearlessness Movement began though some manifestations throughout history have been tracked and labeled at times by scholars or pop-ulist leaders, for example: the Burma Fearlessness Movement [6] (a form of the gift of fear-lessness cultures [7] and their spiritual tradition in the far East, with roots in the worldviews of many Indigenous cultures [8]), The League for Fearlessness (early 20th century esoteric form, USA [9], A Course in Miracles (1960s-70s new age form, USA [10], Shambhala War-rior Training (late 20th century Buddhist form, USA) [11], In Search of Fearlessness Pro-ject (late 20th century emancipatory form, Canada) [12] and Fearlessness Revolution (early 21st century populist liberal form, USA) [13].
In distinction to the above in the context of a post-9/11 era and global economic crisis, are calls for a "culture of fearlessness" contra culture of fear (e.g., regarding innovation at Google, Inc.) [14], which tend to be less overtly political or traditional forms of the Fearlessness Movement. Many (not all) of the latter forms use "Fearless" to name their self-declared reform, movement, or revolution under the premise of a for-profit business venture [15]. Fear and fearless are now sexy marketing terms for just about everything, with little to no critical analy-sis of the terms fear, fearlessness or fearless themselves or establishing an obvious devel-oped relationship to the Fearlessness Movement traditions.
Although there are several mainstream scholarly works on the history of fear [16], there are no such works on the history of fearlessness. Therefore, the global Fearlessness Movement has no systematic documented history. The first attempt, a very brief introduction, was pub-lished by Fisher in 2007, in which the abstract says, "Although the In Search of Fearlessness Project (1989-) is coming on towards its 18th birthday, it has always been important to locate this Project as a New Social Movement [i.e., Fearlessness Movement], with an ancient-rooted past in a concrete history of liberation movements (E. and W.).... This paper provides an in-troduction to several exciting discoveries and initiatives that have led to clarifying both the importance of this historical ground/consciousness for the Fearlessness Movement (and ISOF Project) and clarifying the future possibilities for researching and writing a history of fearless-ness" [17].
Philosophy, Theory, Practice
The ancient roots of a perennial ethical philosophy (E. and W.) which posits that Love is greater than fear, and the path and virtue of fearlessness (e.g., The Bagavad Gita [18] is the way from fear to Love, violence to nonviolence) (i.e., ahimsa), is indicative of the Fearless-ness Movement's foundational philosophy, theory and practice of fearlessness, also defined as the basis of compassion [19]. In general, this philosophy of fearlessness is more accepted by Eastern religions and philosophies than Western, according to Fisher's unique research synthesis of the Fearlessness Movement, and its base in the World's Fearlessness Tradition and teachings (E. and W.) [20]. He posits premises of a critical and radical philosophy of non-violence and liberation and a theory of fearlessness and "paradigm of fearlessness" (as 'fear' vaccine [21]) of which are essential to better understand fear and fearlessness and their inti-mately interrelated roles and impacts. He also distinguishes the Fearlessness Movement or
18
18
"historical fearlessness" or "ethical fearlessness," with a developmental and ethical evolution-ary trajectory, from individual "behavioral fearlessness," the latter the more common but re-ductionistic understanding and use of the term fearlessness [22].
In 2000, Fisher published on the connection of nonviolence movements and "fearless move-ment" toward a "fearless society" he had conceived, one that was inspired by many leaders, of which Mahatma Gandhi and his Satyagraha independence movement was foremost in its clear conception of the pivotal role of fearlessness. Gandhi once said, "God is fearlessness" [23]. His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama once said to Westerners, "Don't fear fearlessness" [24]. Fisher wrote, "[A]s an educator, I am interested to challenge our ways of understanding and defining violence and the ways that we think are 'best' to deal with violence in all kinds of formal and informal learning sites. This publication is intended to briefly document a growing (populist and academic) movement that suggests that a non-violent society can only be founded on fearlessness--the ethical path of a fearless life--a way of 'Love.' The way to 'Love,' I argue (and this fearless movement suggests), is to better understand the nature and role of 'fear' and its impact on this planet." He suggests in his 2010 book that diverse, mostly inde-pendent sub-movements, more or less organized, express the spirit of the Fearlessness Movement, revolving around valued concepts like bravery, courage, without fear, freedom from fear, fear-less, no fear and fearless. In 1997, Fisher published on a growing "strong tradi-tion and several new 'movements' (both secular and religious) that are anti-fearlessness" [25].
How does one join and carry out the mission of the Fearlessness Movement? There is usual-ly no strict membership although some groups may have some criteria for such. If one de-cides to join the Movement that's all that is required, although various disciplined practices such a meditation, mindfulness, aesthetics, concentration, sensitivity, prayer, contemplation, fearanalysis [26], healing, martial arts, sacred warriorship, yoga, transformation etc. often contribute to a maturing mastery of fearlessness. The basic educational component is to learn/teach, with a critical lens, everything one can about fear ('fear') and fearlessness from diverse perspectives and synthesize these into one's own philosophy, theory and practices. It is essential, according to Fisher, that we promote a unifying of the Fearlessness Movement as a spirit to improve our current inadequate fear management/education curricula and peda-gogy, aiming towards a healthy and emancipatory fearuality [27].
References
1. He intimated such a "fearless movement" in a 2000 publication, preferring in later writing to use "fearlessness" instead. The movement concept with fearlessness existed from the incep-tion of his project and writing on fear and fearlessness begun in 1989 with the In Search of Fearlessness (ISOF) Project. The "fearlessness movement" (no caps) was first coined in 2003 @ http://www.feareducation.com/ and click on "Projects". See Fisher, R. M. (2000). The movement toward a fearless society: A powerful contradiction to violence. Technical Paper No. 10. Vancouver, BC: In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute. It is unclear when oth-ers started using the term but most uses seem to be after 2003. Fisher uses caps on the term a few years later.
2. For a brief description of the nascent profession of fearology and role of a fearologist see http://www.wildculture.com/article/disappear-fear-quick-fix-fear-pill-and-its-discontents/1276
3. For scholarly summary of his work go to http://csiie.org/mod/page/view.php?id=3 and biog-raphy summary/cv go to:http://csiie.org/mod/page/view.php?id=10
4. Fear with (') marks refers to not merely biophysiological and psychological fear but a soci-ocultural and political construction of 'fear' that is much more complex, invisible and insidious. See discussion of the problems of defining fear (and 'fear'), for e.g., in Fisher, R. M. (1995/12). An introduction to defining 'fear': A spectrum approach. Technical Paper No. 1. Calgary, AB: In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute. Available @ http://csiie.org/mod/page/view.php?id=3
5. For a quick good synopsis of the "human fear-problem" see Overstreet, B. W. (1951/71). Understanding fear in ourselves and others. New York: Harper & Row, 11-22; for a brief intro-
19
19
duction to the culture of fear dynamics in contemporary society and Fisher's view as well, see http://www.ucobserver.org/features/2013/01/scared_senseless/
6. The Burmese Fearlessness movement, based on the populist uprising in support of the Burmese opposition politician and political prisoner Aung San Suu Kyi between 1989-10, and a later inspired movement with somewhat parallel aims regarding a political prisoner in Thai-land led to the Thailand Fearlessness movement. See Fry, G. W., Nieminen, G. S., and Smith, H. E. (2003). Historical dictionary of Thailand. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 34.
7. Religious scholar Maria Hibbets (now Heim) has documented a religious, spiritual and ethi-cal perennial philosophy at the core of Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism in the far East, of which the ideal is to not think or act from fear and thus bring not fear (and its associated vio-lence) to others (including other species) or oneself in all arenas of life. It is widely known in south Asian cultures as abhaya-dana or "gift of fearlessness." See Hibbets, M. (1999). Saving them from yourself: An inquiry into the south Asian gift of fearlessness. Journal of Religious Ethics, 27(3), 437-62. See also Heim, M. (2004). Theories of the gift in south Asia: Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain reflections on Dana. New York: Routledge.
8. A leader of this current thinking is the Indigenous educator, Four Arrows (also Don Trent Jacobs), who has written of the close parallel of fearlessness in the worldview of Gandhi and American Indian thinking. See Four Arrows (2006). Epilogue. In Four Arrows (Ed.), Unlearning the language of conquest: Scholars expose anti-Indianism (pp. 273-80). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 279. See also Four Arrows (with Ed McGaa or Eagle Man and R. Michael Fisher), chpt. 13 "From Fear to Fearlessness (Religion/Psychology and Spirituality)" in Four Arrows (2013). Teaching truly: A curriculum to Indigenize mainstream education. New York: Peter Lang.
9. The League for Fearlessness: An International Movement to Free the World from Fear was organized by 50 people, inaugurated Oct. 17, 1931, led by an esoteric spiritual group in New York City, associated with the theosophist Alice Bailey and directly facilitated by her husband Foster Bailey (a 33rd degree Freemason). It seems to have either gone underground under a different name or else folded rather soon after its inception(?). See reprint of this brochure in-full, and its counter aims to the dominating climate of fear during the Depression, in Appendix 2 in Fisher, R. M. (2007). History of the Fearlessness Movement: An Introduction. Technical Paper No. 22. Vancouver, BC: In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute. Available @ http://csiie.org/mod/page/view.php?id=3
10. The Course as it is known in popular circles (for short) is a channeled book of spiritual teachings that began in the mid-60s, based on a unique blend of Eastern (e.g., Advaita) and Western (Christian mysticism, and new age esotericism) thought and practices. The teachings came with the intent of moving human motivation from fear to Love. Marianne Williamson is one of the most popular teachers of this book and movement today.See discussion in Har-man, W., and Rheingold (1984). Higher creativity: Liberating the unconscious for break-through thoughts. Los Angeles, CA: Jeremy P. Tarcher, 115-18. Also see the book: Founda-tion for Inner Peace (1975). A Course in Miracles. Tiburon, CA: Foundation for Inner Peace.
11. This is based on the ancient sacred warriorship tradition in Tibet, carried forth into North America and has spread across the world in the last few decades, based on the teaching primarily of the late Rinpoche Choygam Trungpa (Naropa Institute, Boulder CO). Trungpa's classic book, with important writing on fear and fearlessness inspires many, including Fisher's In Search of Fearlessness Project. See Trungpa, C. (1984/07). Shambhala: The sacred path of the warrior. Boston, MA: Shambhala. See also http://www.shambhala.org/shambhala-training.php.
12. In Search of Fearelssness Project (ISOF) was co-founded by Robert M. Fisher (now R. Michael Fisher) and his intimate partner Catherine V. Sannuto in the fall of 1989 in Calgary, AB, Canada. ISOF Project was a counter to what Fisher then called the historical global 'Fear' Project. Inspired by a transpersonal love and study of sacred warriorship traditions (See Also), the organization (incorporated as a non-profit in 1995, closed down in 1999) had its identity and liberation mission from the start envisioned as "a therapeutic community dedicated to
20
20
'freedom from all forms of violence, oppression and hurting'." Fisher began the In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute in 1991 as the research, publishing and educational wing of the ISOF movement. That same year Barbara Bickel, his next intimate partner, co-founded the In Search of Fearlessness Center (Calgary), which operated as a small not-for-profit busi-ness until 1999. Info. on ISOF taken from The Glenbow Museum public archives (Calgary, AB) http://ww2.glenbow.org/search/archivesMainResults.aspx?XC=/search/archivesMainResults.aspx&TN=MAINCAT&AC=QBE_QUERY&RF=WebResults&DL= 0&RL=0&NP=255&%0AMF=WPEng Msg.ini&MR=5&QB0=AND&QF0=Main%20entry+|+Title&QI0=Centre+Gallery+fonds. See also more history @ http://www.feareducation.com and click on "Projects."
13. Arianna Huffington, populist liberal author of On Becoming Fearless and founder of Huff-ington Post, has politically challenged (especially) Republican party politics in the USA during the George Bush Jr. presidential campaign (2004-08) because of fear-mongering tactics to win votes. Bloggers (for e.g., http://www.punditmom.com/2006/10/on-becoming-fearless-part-2) have argued she is leading the "groundwork for a fearlessness revolution" and helping (especially women) start (in Huffington's words) an "epidemic of fearlessness," which Huffing-ton calls "counteroffensive," in order to resist abuses of fear in politics (and everywhere). See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/why-we-need-an-epidemic-o_b_28561.html. Huffington in a CNN.com (Sept. 26, 2006) interview with Miles O'Brien says she started a "Becoming Fearless" section in the Huffington Post to encourage women to tell their stories about fear and overcoming it and "to start a kind of fearlessness movement, if you will." Avail-able @ http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0609/15/ltm.04.html
14. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/20/AR2006102001461.html
15. For an example of a more social entrepreneurial campaign of this form by an influential leader Alex Bogusky, see "FearLess Revolution" http://fearlessrevolution.com/alex-bogusky/. For an example of a less political and more business (coaching) psychological form see http://yasminekhater.com/fearlessrevolution/. For examples of Christian-based ventures (and/or groups) using "Fearless Revolution" see http://erickajackson.com/ and http://thefearlessrevolution.com/. For a critique of exemplars of these "Fearless" forms see Fisher (2010), 22-25.
16. For example, Bourke, J. (2005). Fear: A cultural history. UK: Virago Press; Robin, C. (2004). Fear: The history of a political idea. New York: Oxford University Press; Stearns, P. N. (2006). American fear: The causes and consequences of high anxiety. New York: Routledge.
17. Fisher, R. M. (2007). History of the Fearlessness Movement: An introduction. Technical Paper No. 22. Vancouver, BC: In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute. Available @ http://csiie.org/mod/page/view.php?id=3
18. Mahatma Gandi wrote, "Fearlessness is the first requisite of spirituality. Cowards can never be moral! Every reader of the Gita is aware that fearlessness heads the list of the Di-vine attributes enumerated in the 16th Chapter.... Fearlessness is a sin qua non for the growth of the other noble qualities [virtues]. How can one seek truth or cherish Love without fearlessness?" Available @ http://www.mkgandhi.org/momgandhi/chap12.htm
19. According to integral philosopher and Zen Buddhist, Ken Wilber, the teachings of Buddhist education, in the words of Jeremy Hayward, involve: "Recognizing the fear as well as the fearlessness in others, helping others to recognize the fear and to discover fearlessness, this is compassion." Hayward cited in Wilber, K. (1993).Grace and grit: Spirituality and healing in the life and death of Treya Killam Wilber. Boston, MA: Shambhala, 382.
20. Fisher, R. M. (2010). The world's fearlessness teachings: A critical integral approach to fear management/education for the 21st century. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
21. Fisher, R. M. (2006). An integral fearlessness paradigm. Technical Paper No. 9. Vancou-
21
21
ver, BC: In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute. Available @ http://csiie.org/mod/page/view.php?id=3
22. Fisher (2010), xv, 65-66.
23. Cited in Rao, K. L. Seshagri (1978). Mahatma Gandhi and comparative religion. India: Motilal Banarsidass, 69.
24. Cited in Ferguson, M. (2005). Aquarius now: Radical common sense and reclaiming our personal sovereignty. Boston, MA: Weiser Books, 154.
25. Fisher, R. M. (1997). Defining the 'enemy' of fearlessness. Technical Paper No. 6. Calga-ry, AB: In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute. Available @ http://csiie.org/mod/page/view.php?id=3
26. See Fisher, R. M. (2012). Fearnalaysis: A first guide book. Carbondale, IL: In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute. Available @ http://csiie.org/mod/page/view.php?id=3
27. See Fisher (2010) for background theory and the analogy of fearuality (his own term) with sexuality.
*****
APPENDIX 2: FEARISM on Wikipedia
Fearism (�����) is new philosophy of literature, which defines fear as integral part of our life and how it co-exists together from birth to death. It should not be treated as enemy but as friend that alert us for possible accidents or wrongdoings and should be taken positively. Desh Subba introduced it for the first time in Nepal as Bhayabad(�����).[1][2][3]
Subba (2014), proclaimed by some as "founder of fearism," has published a book outlining and arguing the case for a new perspective to look at the world, he wrote (p. 11): "The fearist perspective is a new dimension to look at life and the world. The question strikes the mind: How does the fearist perspective look at life and the world? The purpose behind fearism is to conduct continuous research, investiga-tion, and invention in order to make life more comfortable. [p. 12] This theory is applicable to both distinct and general philosophical purposes. In fact, fear is not any external factor, but power exists within itself. If it is utilised properly, it is benefi-cial to man. Otherwise, it can be harmful. Therefore, its usage depends on us. This is what the theory tells us. We are users, victims, and consumers of it.... This is the theory that has just begun its investigation and research."
In a similar but distinct form than Subba's, fearism is a radical cross-/inter-/trans-disciplinary conceptualization, coined in the first years of the turn of the 21st centu-ry, after 9/11 (Fisher, 2001), by Canadian fearologist and educational philosopher R. Michael Fisher. His definitions and meanings vary slightly over the years, but basically point out that fearism is a pathological ideological form of oppression (like sexism, racism, classism) that has not been labeled prior. It is the underbelly of all terrrorism and 'ism' oppressions, perpetuating a subtle cultural matrix of excessive, toxic, and destructive fear-based patterning. It is a new hyper-real 'fear' that is largely itself without a feeling. Fearism is so pervasive, like the 'air we breath' in this day and age, and ends up being normalized, because of its accumulation and stra-tegic (mis)use as political power to maintain regimes of domination (Fisher, 2006,
22
22
2010). In the spirit of nonviolence (e.g., Mahatma Gandhi), he proposes that a Fearlessness Movement [Appendix 2] is the ultimate solution to exposing and un-dermining fearism [4].
Fearism in Fisher's framework, theory and philosophy has been utilized in small part by peace and reconciliation educator, e.g., Zembylas (2010) in Greek-Cyprus ethnic conflicts and, anthropologist Kalir (2014) in discussing the State of Israel's oppressive policies re: African asylum seekers. In a more marxian perspective, sociocultural, and politico-geographic analysis by scholars (Shirlow and Pain, 2003), fearism has been coined similar to but independently from Fisher's frame-work. As well the political scholar White (1997) coined the term "low-grade fearism" as the ongoing more subtle destructive side of overt acts of terrorism (p. 74). REFERENCES 1. http://fearism5.blogspot.com.au/2008/06/life-consciousness-knowledge-fear_05.html 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqca-K78sLk 3. http://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Fearism-Conducted-Directed-Controlled/dp/1499004699 4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fear_educator/sandbox Fisher, R. M. (2001). 'Fear' Studies: A Conceptual Proposal. Technical Paper No. 11. Van couver, BC: In Search of Fearlessness Research Institute. Fisher, R. M. (2006). Invoking 'Fear' Studies. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 22(4), 39-71. Fisher, R. M. (2010). The World's Fearlessness Teachings: A Critical Integral Approach to Fear Management/Education for the 21st Century. Lanham, MD: University Press of America. Kalir, B. (2014). The Jewish State of Anxiety: Between Moral Obligation and Fearism in the Treatment of African Asylum Seekers in Israel. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2014.960819. Shirlow, P., and Pain, R. (2003). The Geographies and Politics of Fear. Capital and Class, 80, 15-26. Subba, B. (2014). Philosophy of Fearism: Life is Conducted, Directed and Controlled by the Fear. Xlibris. White, J. K. (1997). Still Seeing Red: How the Cold War Shapes the New American Politics. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Zembylas, M. (2010). Agamben's Theory of Biopower and Immigrants/Refugees/Asylum- seekers: Discourses of Citizenship and the Implications for Curriculum Theorizing. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 26(2), 31-45.
*******
APPENDIX 3: Some Explicit Uses of Fearism by Scholars
In Appendix 2, are all the known scholars (at this point of Dec. 25, 2014) that have used "fearism" explicitly in their work. Kalir (2014) is the only author-scholar (other than Fisher, or Subba) to have put "fearism" in the title of their works, using it as a major construct to cri-tique. Kalir brandishes the critique, like one would the conception of rac-ism, as a label to both condemn and help explain the actions of the Zionist-Israeli "hegemonic ideology of 'fearism'" (p. 1). Kalir writes, "While the fo-cus in studying modern regimes of deportation is often set on the fear they
23
23
generate in an already vulnerable and marginalised population.... my goal here is to analyze how the production of fear in the first place permeates and legitimises the construction of asylum seekers as deportable abject Others by the receiving nation and state [e.g. Israel]" (p. 3). Without care-fully defining or conceptualizing "fearism," Kalir uses it in his analysis of the "ideology of Othering" (p. 5) and "anxiey that the abject Other generates" in some regimes/cultures/societies, yet, he does say where he got the notion of "fearism" indirectly as a secondary reference, he wrote: "The production of anxiety towards non-national Others is therefore a crucial ingredient in the modern sense-making of national belonging. As Zembylas (2010, 32) contends, there is 'a new kind of global imaginary [that] is being shaped by the fear of the Other or what Fisher (2006) has termed fearism, that is, 'a process and discourse hegemony [which] creates an experience of fear that is normalized... keeping the cultural matrix of "fear" operative and rela-tively invisible.' While fearism mostly feeds on powerful global processes—the retraction of the caring state under neoliberal ideologies... and the widely experienced ontological insecurity that typifies a growing inability among many ordinary citizens to understand and plan their lives in a 'liquid modern age' [of "liquid fear"] (Bauman 2006)" (p. 6). Kalir suggests the no-tion of fearism is a way of explaining Zionism and its outcomes, in that "we should empirically study the manner in which it [fearism] ties in with the particular histories and national narratives of each state" (p. 6).... I argue, that the cultural matrix of fear [via fearism] that is at the core of the Zion-ism-cum-security mind-set" with grounding in the Holocaust and "notion of victimhood" within politicians and NGO's for peace in Israel (p. 6). "The pervasive Israeli fearism is rooted in a Zionist narrative" (p. 15). Zembylas (2010), cited by Kalir (2014) secondarily, whom cites my articula-tion of fearism in Fisher (2006), also emphasizes the systemic cultural his-torical politics of fear of Othering and the conflict (and potential violence) it creates, important as it is, it is only one small part of a theory of fearism, as far as I am concerned. These authors use "fearism" but do not develop it with any nuance or systematic thought or theory of fearism as the basis of all other 'isms.' This is like using "racism," as a quick box, or any other 'ism' to label a phenomenon or group, etc. that is participating in oppression-repression dynamics. That said, it is good that they are focusing on the affective register and meta-motivational basis of all oppression-repression dynamics, even if they only tangentially make this evident in these pub-lished works. Zembylas, an educator in conflict sites, earlier (Zembylas, 2009) referred to my work (i.e., Fisher, 2006) without picking up on "fearism" (but brief mention25) but rather used "culture of fear" and "hege-
25 Zembylas (2009) wrote, "... these public pedagogies of fear create experiences of fear that are normalized, while preventing any critical analysis of the implications of fearism, as Fisher (2006) labels the systematic production and perpetuation of fear for political and
24
24
monic discourses of fear" (i.e., fearism) in order to construct the problemat-ics in education today: "fear, in its unavoidable invasion to the pedagogic field, educates students to create particular affective relations to one's self and to others" (p. 188)—the good news of this implied reference to fearism in education, is that Zembylas gets beyond reducing fear and its power to only a feeling or emotion, but rather an affective politics that is operative in and beyond the classrooms, and that it is always fear participating in a dis-course, and usually a hegemonic one. Unfortunately, he also remains in this earlier work to conceptualize fear within the "emotional capital of fear" (p. 193) and thus keeps fear as an emotion (which is a troubling conception on many levels, itself representing in my view just another psycho-hegemonic discourse on fear). Zembylas, M. (2009). Global economic of fear: Affect, politics and pedagogical im-plications. Critical Studies in Education, 50(2), 187-99. In Sadozai and Ali (2015), they refer to one woman: "She explained how cultural differences were used to contribute to what we refer to as dis-courses of fearism" (p. 120) due to being taken as an offense by one cul-ture or individual; specifically the authors argue "that the Afghan identity in Pakistan is constructed through the Pakistani State discourse(s) of fearism, international development agencies and the larger geo-political context" (p. 111); in like argumentation to Kalir (2014), the authors assert: "Categories such as 'migrant,' 'asylum seeker' and 'refugee' exist and are explained within a global context. A new kind of global imaginary is being shaped by the fear of the Other, or what is termed fearism" (p. 110) (they then cite Zembylas, 2010, and acknowledge Fisher, 200626 for "fearism" conception) and note "The media are often the conduit for the hegemonic discourse of fearism" (p. 111); but there is no further detailed elaboration of what this means, other than the concept is used in a cultural framing where there is "othering" involved and fear is invoked systematically in the other (e.g., "refugee") due to their different, controversial, or strange customs when in the gaze of a dominant (or other) cultural perspective which is more or less paranoic (e.g., embedded in a culture of fear or 'Fear' Matrix). Sadozai, S. G., and Ali, H. A. (2015). Can the Afghan diaspora speak?: Diasporic identity in the shadow of human rights. In S. Croisy (ed.), Globalization and 'minori-ty' cultures: The role of 'minor' cultural groups in shaping our global future (pp. 109-121). Martinus Nijhoff.
economic purposes" (p. 191). Again, here we see Zembylas ignoring the epistemological dimension of my concept of fearism. 26 But they do not actually give the full Fisher (2006) citation in the references, only Zembylas (2010).
25
25
This sparse use is similar with one mention of the term "fearism" in White's book where he notes the devastating effects/affects of "low-grade fearism" underneath the more overt terrorism we see in the world. Among the political (and feminist) geographers, studying the fear of crime phenomenon, Shirlow & Pain (2003) conclude that fear is no longer so simply definable within individuals as only a psychological state, but it is best located in places of fear along with the construction of a politics of fear: "Thus fear is not reducible to generalisations, but needs to be viewed as situated, complex, and often multiply caused" (p. 24)--but that is not the most radical re-configuration of fear, they actually use 'fear' (with inverted commas, as I do in my work) in the paper at one point referring to "'Fear' has been constructed in particular ways around certain groups, and widely used to serve certain political interests" (p.17). They then link this construc-tion to geographies "patterns of fear" (p. 24) and "hegemonic discourses" (p. 15) and "fearist discourses" (p. 20)--and end up positing "fearism" as the umbrella concept defining it as "the manufactured and contested na-ture and use of fear of crime" (but also fear, in general) (p. 15). Again, like other authors cited above (other than Subba), these scholars do not further elaborate the term fearism. Subba (2014) has by far developed "fearism" in his own unique way, more from a Far Eastern perspective (Nepali), with its own style. His central framing is philosophical, with strong psychological aspects and some spir-itual aspects. He has less depth of analysis in sociopolitical, cultural as-pects that I would prefer added to his conception. Again, a philosophy of fearism is what it is, and can be a basis for a theory (or more specific theo-ries) of fearism. Unfortunately, Subba seems not to have read, or at least he does not cite the essential literature on fearism, from my perspective, leaving his work less rigorous in scholarship than is ideal. That said, he and his followers in Nepal (at least) are very enthusiastic with this new phi-losophy of fearism and have even started programs of study on it at the Fearism Study Academy in Dharan, Nepal (although, I have not found the website for this because it is perhaps too soon for a website to be built).