Grace GuzmanBakerWorld History Pre-APJanuary 23,2018Option #1Politics in its simplest form is merely the game of influence against others in order to gain power over others; whether for personal gain or the welfare of the community. Prior to attaining any desired goal, an orthodox politician would create the most efficient stratagem to get the blessings of any keys to power who would be an obstacle otherwise. Although this procedure is commonplace, many politicians find their plans beginning a a moot debate then ending as a stalemate. To avoid the typical parliamentary muddle that many in government face, political thinkers found solace in a new tactic: one that utilizes fear and intimidation to grant them the their desired results; they would rather be feared by their nation than loved by their constituents. Although this is unorthodox, if the solution is best for the nation then it is morally justifiable. Fear can be used in order to force the desired action against an opponent. The despot Kim Jong Un rules his nation with both a loving hand and an iron fist via hypnotizing a nation to view their leader as a demigod then by eliminating any decent that he sees in his nation, respectively. The despot knows that a hypnotizing love from his nation would not last, therefore he must rely on a system of fear to keep anyone who questions his power. Fear was further used by President Trump to intimidate Kim from launching missiles near the US territory of Guam by maintaining a hefty amount of troops near the dictators border and a verbal assaults on twitter. This method has left kim with a cear cause and effect reality: if he launches on the US he can expect a soon expect a swift defeat. By using fear as a gambit on a political chessboard fear can replace war and revolution. Many critics would argue that one would be morally wrong for instilling fear into their constituents, claiming that using fear would make one as bad as their opponent however when fear is used correctly this tactic can be the best for all parties. Cold War era tension found both the Soviet Bloc and NATO allies attempting to subordinate the other through a series of proxy wars and a race to arms. Both sides have attempted to use fear against the other through testing their military might with the aid of nuclear tests, dropping weapons of destruction for both the world and their enemies to see. This series of potential destruction has led to both agreeing to not eliminate one another via several treaties. Without the fear of global destruction during the Cold War, the 1950’s would’ve seen the end of the world. Furthermore within the United States fear had to be spread about Communism in order to prevent an insurgency within our own nation. Politicians like Nixon and McCarthy hunted down communist sympathizers while propaganda was spread through the nation that told citizens to favor freedom and individuality and fear the stark realities that may come with communism. By telling the American people to fear another nation, ideology, and thinkers, the American government was able to avoid internal strife within its borders. Fear is not always negative, if it can promote peace as seen in the Cold War then it is justified. Even at the most basic form of politics, everyday life and interactions between people, we can see fear being used to force a desired reaction. Parents and teachers who are at the heads of their respective households and classrooms must keep order in their domain. Parents use the threats of disciple and monetary retaliation to get what they want from their children; they could easily spank their child or threaten to not pay their tuition. With these two tactics at hand a child would be wise to not cross their parents in any way or they will face the wrath of their guardians. Likewise within a classroom a teacher can issue write ups, change grades, or call the parents of disruptive children; again leading to the wrath of their parents. With the fear of the teacher in the class, students will be subordinate to their instructor and open to learn the materials they would have struggled to comprehend without order in the classroom. The basic politics of an elder to a junior in daily life also champions the usage of fear an an effective tool of politics.Love and affection can be useful to temporarily change the capricious minds of neophytes, however if one covets a more permanent reign in politics then they should utilize a system built around the fear of consequence. Lives, money, time, all were saved through the proper usage of intimidation. If the means are benevolent, then the method of fear is simply the scenic route of a pathway to political power.