Abstract
Fear, as a primal emotion and social force, has profoundly shaped Australian society, influencing individual psyches, collective identities, and political landscapes. Since John Howard’s prime ministership (1996–2007), fear has been both a tool of governance and a reflection of societal anxieties, evolving in response to global and domestic shifts such as terrorism, immigration, economic uncertainty, climate change, and digital disruption. This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of how fear has transformed in Australia, with a particular focus on its psychological underpinnings. Drawing on psychological theories of fear, historical analysis, and sociological perspectives, it examines Howard’s strategic manipulation of fear, the post-Howard recalibration of national anxieties, and the emergence of new fears in the contemporary era. The paper argues that fear’s evolution reflects a complex interplay between individual psychology, collective trauma, and political agency, with lasting implications for Australia’s social cohesion and national identity.
Introduction
Fear is a fundamental human emotion, rooted in the amygdala’s fight-or-flight response, that shapes individual behaviour and collective action. Psychologically, fear arises from perceived threats, real or imagined, and can be amplified by uncertainty, social cues, and power dynamics. In Australia, a nation historically shaped by colonial anxieties, fear has long influenced societal dynamics, from fears of Indigenous resistance to invasions from Asia. The prime ministership of John Howard (1996–2007) marked a pivotal era in which fear was systematically harnessed to consolidate political power, redefine national identity, and navigate global upheavals like 9/11 and the Bali bombings. This paper explores the evolution of fear in Australian society since Howard’s tenure, with a deep focus on its psychological dimensions. It analyses how fear has been manipulated, internalised, and transformed, drawing on psychological frameworks such as terror management theory, social identity theory, and the psychology of moral panic. By examining fear’s role across political, cultural, and social domains, the paper illuminates its enduring impact on Australia’s collective psyche.
1. The Psychology of Fear: Theoretical Foundations
To understand fear’s role in Australian society, we must first explore its psychological mechanisms. Fear is an adaptive emotion, designed to protect individuals from harm, but it can be distorted by cognitive biases, social influences, and political manipulation. Several psychological theories provide insight into fear’s societal impact:
1.1 Terror Management Theory (TMT)
TMT posits that fear of mortality drives individuals to seek cultural worldviews that provide meaning and security. Threats to these worldviews – such as terrorism or cultural change – intensify fear, prompting defensive behaviours like in-group favouritism or out-group hostility. In Australia, TMT explains how external threats (e.g., terrorism) and internal challenges (e.g., multiculturalism) have fueled fear-driven nationalism.
1.2 Social Identity Theory (SIT)
SIT suggests that group membership shapes self-concept, with fear of out-groups reinforcing in-group cohesion. In Australia, fear of “others” (e.g., asylum seekers, Indigenous communities) has historically strengthened Anglo-Celtic identity, particularly under Howard’s leadership.
1.3 Moral Panic Theory
Moral panics occur when a perceived threat is exaggerated, often by media or political actors, to mobilise public fear. Howard’s era saw multiple moral panics, from asylum seekers to terrorism, amplifying societal anxiety and justifying control measures.
1.4 Uncertainty-Identity Theory
This theory argues that uncertainty drives individuals to seek group identities for stability. In times of economic or social upheaval, fear of uncertainty can fuel tribalism, as seen in Australia’s immigration debates.
These frameworks highlight how fear operates at both individual and collective levels, shaped by psychological needs for safety, belonging, and control. In Australia, these dynamics have been magnified by historical insecurities and political strategies, particularly during and after Howard’s tenure.
2. Fear as a Political and Psychological Tool Under John Howard (1996–2007)
John Howard’s 11-year tenure as Australia’s 25th prime minister was a masterclass in leveraging fear to shape public psychology and consolidate power. His government exploited psychological vulnerabilities – fear of mortality, cultural erosion, and economic instability – to foster a conservative national identity.
2.1 National Security and the “War on Terror”
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the Bali bombings of 2002 (killing 88 Australians) triggered profound existential fear, aligning with TMT’s premise that mortality salience intensifies cultural defensiveness. Howard’s government capitalised on this fear, aligning Australia with the U.S.-led “War on Terror” and committing troops to Afghanistan and Iraq. His rhetoric – “We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come” – evoked a sense of control amid chaos, appealing to the psychological need for security.
Psychologically, the government’s anti-terrorism laws, passed swiftly in 2002, amplified fear by institutionalising it. These laws, granting intelligence agencies powers like warrantless searches and detention without charge, were justified by a pervasive threat narrative. As then-Cabinet Minister Amanda Vanstone noted, “Australians were very, very apprehensive about terrorism.” This fear was not merely reactive but cultivated through media amplification and government messaging, creating a feedback loop of anxiety. The psychological impact was a heightened sense of vulnerability, with Australians internalising terrorism as an ever-present danger, despite the low statistical likelihood of attacks.
The “children overboard” affair during the 2001 election campaign exemplifies how Howard exploited moral panic to manipulate public psychology. False claims that asylum seekers threw their children overboard were framed as evidence of moral deviance, triggering disgust and fear of cultural contamination. Psychologically, this tapped into SIT, reinforcing an “us vs. them” dichotomy between “civilised” Australians and “barbaric” outsiders. The incident, later debunked, secured Howard’s re-election, illustrating how fear can override rationality when amplified by trusted authorities.
2.2 Immigration and Border Protection
Howard’s immigration policies, particularly the Tampa crisis (2001) and the Pacific Solution, were rooted in psychological fears of cultural erosion and loss of sovereignty. The Tampa affair, where a Norwegian ship carrying Afghan refugees was denied entry, crystallised fears of uncontrolled borders. Howard’s declaration that “this country’s borders are sacrosanct” resonated with SIT, positioning Anglo-Australian identity as under threat from “illegal” migrants. The Pacific Solution, involving offshore detention, was a psychological as well as political act, externalising fear by physically removing the “threat.”
These policies tapped into Australia’s historical “invasion anxiety,” a collective fear of Asian immigration dating back to the White Australia policy. The rise of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party in 1997, with its anti-Asian and anti-multicultural rhetoric, amplified this fear, creating a fertile ground for Howard’s policies. Psychologically, Hanson’s rhetoric and Howard’s actions triggered moral panic, with asylum seekers dehumanised as “queue jumpers” or “potential terrorists.” This dehumanisation reduced empathy, a key psychological barrier to fear-driven hostility, enabling harsh policies like indefinite detention.
Paradoxically, Howard oversaw a doubling of permanent migration by 2007, particularly in skilled and temporary visa categories. This duality – stoking fear of “uncontrolled” immigration while expanding economic migration – reflects a sophisticated manipulation of fear. By focusing public anxiety on asylum seekers, Howard diverted attention from broader migration trends, maintaining economic growth while appeasing cultural fears.
2.3 Indigenous Issues and Cultural Conservatism
Howard’s approach to Indigenous affairs reveals how fear of moral accountability shaped policy and public psychology. His refusal to apologise for the Stolen Generations, despite the 1997 “Bringing Them Home” Report, was driven by fear of legal liability and white guilt. Psychologically, this aligns with TMT: acknowledging historical wrongs threatens the cultural worldview of Australia as a “fair” nation, prompting defensive denial. Howard’s 1999 “Motion of Reconciliation,” expressing “regret” without “sorry,” was a psychological compromise, assuaging guilt without confronting fear.
The 2007 Northern Territory Intervention, which suspended the Racial Discrimination Act to impose controls on Indigenous communities, was framed as a response to child abuse but tapped into deeper fears of Indigenous dysfunction. Psychologically, this reinforced stereotypes, reducing complex social issues to a simplistic “threat” narrative. The intervention’s militaristic approach – deploying troops and seizing land – evoked a colonial fear of Indigenous resistance, perpetuating a cycle of mistrust.
Howard’s broader cultural conservatism, including his opposition to a republic (1999 referendum) and his 2004 amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman, appealed to fears of rapid social change. Psychologically, these policies catered to uncertainty-identity theory, offering traditional values as a bulwark against globalisation and progressive reform. By emphasising Anglo-Celtic heritage, Howard fostered a sense of in-group cohesion, alleviating fears of cultural fragmentation.
2.4 Economic and Social Reforms
Economic reforms like the Goods and Services Tax (GST, 2000) and WorkChoices (2006) leveraged fear of economic instability to gain public acquiescence. The GST, despite Howard’s earlier pledge against it, was framed as essential to avoid economic decline, tapping into fears of global competition. WorkChoices, which deregulated labor markets, was sold as a safeguard against job losses but instead fostered fear of job insecurity, contributing to Howard’s 2007 defeat. Psychologically, these reforms exploited uncertainty, with fear of economic failure overriding concerns about social equity.
3. Post-Howard Recalibration: The Psychology of Hope and Resurgent Fear (2007–2013)
Kevin Rudd’s 2007 election victory marked a psychological shift from fear to hope, as his campaign promised to heal Howard’s divisive legacy. Rudd’s early actions – signing the Kyoto Protocol, apologising to the Stolen Generations, and convening the 2020 Summit – addressed psychological needs for moral restoration and collective optimism. The apology, in particular, was a psychological milestone, reducing white guilt and fostering reconciliation, though it did not fully resolve Indigenous fears of ongoing marginalisation.
However, the global financial crisis (2008–2009) reignited economic fear, undermining Rudd’s hopeful narrative. His stimulus packages mitigated collapse but fueled fears of national debt, a psychological trigger for uncertainty-averse voters. Concurrently, asylum seeker arrivals revived border protection fears, with the Coalition accusing Labor of weakness. This resurgence of fear, amplified by media, illustrates moral panic theory: a small number of boat arrivals was framed as a national crisis, rekindling Howard-era anxieties.
Julia Gillard’s tenure (2010–2013) introduced new psychological dynamics. Her carbon tax (2012), aimed at addressing climate change, triggered fears of economic hardship, with opponents framing it as a “great big tax on everything.” Psychologically, this tapped into loss aversion, where fear of immediate costs outweighed long-term environmental benefits. As Australia’s first female prime minister, Gillard also faced misogynistic attacks, reflecting fears of shifting gender norms. These attacks, amplified by media and political opponents, created a moral panic around female leadership, exacerbating societal polarisation.
4. The Return of Fear-Based Politics (2013–2022)
The Coalition’s return under Tony Abbott (2013–2015), Malcolm Turnbull (2015–2018), and Scott Morrison (2018–2022) saw fear re-emerge as a political and psychological tool, adapting to new threats and societal shifts.
4.1 Abbott and Security Fears
Abbott’s “Stop the Boats” policy and response to the 2014 Lindt Café siege capitalised on fear of terrorism and border insecurity. Psychologically, his rhetoric – “Team Australia” – invoked SIT, rallying in-group unity against perceived out-group threats (asylum seekers, Muslim extremists). The Lindt siege, though a lone-wolf attack, was framed as a broader terrorist threat, amplifying public fear and justifying expanded surveillance laws. This aligns with TMT: fear of mortality drove support for authoritarian measures, even at the cost of civil liberties.
4.2 Turnbull and Economic Anxiety
Malcolm Turnbull sought to shift focus from security to economic opportunity, but his tenure was undermined by fears of economic stagnation and housing unaffordability. Psychologically, housing crises triggered existential fears among younger Australians, who faced declining prospects of homeownership – a cornerstone of the Australian dream. Turnbull’s inability to address these fears, compounded by internal party conflicts, reflects the psychological challenge of managing uncertainty in a polarised society.
4.3 Morrison and Crisis-Driven Fear
Scott Morrison’s leadership was defined by cascading crises – bushfires (2019–2020), COVID-19, and climate change debates – each amplifying distinct psychological fears. The bushfires evoked existential dread, with images of burning landscapes triggering TMT-driven fears of environmental collapse. Morrison’s perceived inaction fueled public anger, as fear of climate catastrophe clashed with economic fears in coal-dependent regions.
The COVID-19 pandemic introduced acute health and economic fears, with Morrison’s border closures and lockdowns reflecting a fortress mentality. Psychologically, these measures alleviated fear by restoring control but also fostered social isolation and mistrust, particularly among marginalised groups. The pandemic’s “othering” of unvaccinated individuals or ethnic communities (e.g., early blame on Chinese Australians) echoed Howard’s scapegoating tactics, reinforcing SIT-driven divisions.
Morrison’s handling of cultural issues, like the 2017 same-sex marriage plebiscite, tapped into fears of social change. The plebiscite, though resulting in legalisation, inflamed divisions, with conservative fears of “traditional family” erosion pitted against progressive fears of entrenched discrimination. This polarisation reflects the psychological tension between stability and progress in a rapidly changing society.
5. Contemporary Fears in Australian Society (2022–2025)
Since Anthony Albanese’s 2022 election, Australian society has grappled with a complex interplay of traditional and emerging fears, shaped by environmental, technological, and social transformations.
5.1 Climate Change and Existential Dread
Climate change has become a dominant source of fear, with severe weather events – floods, bushfires, droughts – triggering existential dread. Psychologically, this aligns with TMT: environmental collapse threatens human survival, challenging cultural worldviews of progress and control. The 2023 rejection of the Indigenous Voice to Parliament referendum, despite its environmental justice implications, reflects lingering fears of Indigenous empowerment, rooted in Howard-era anxieties about accountability. Public demand for climate action is tempered by economic fears, particularly in fossil fuel regions, illustrating the psychological conflict between immediate security and long-term survival.
5.2 Digital and Information Fears
The rise of social media and disinformation has introduced new psychological fears about truth, privacy, and social cohesion. Platforms like X amplify fear through rapid dissemination of misinformation, creating moral panics around issues like vaccines or immigration. Psychologically, this reflects uncertainty-identity theory: in an information-saturated world, fear of “fake news” drives individuals to seek tribal affiliations, deepening polarisation. Fears of foreign interference, particularly from China, have also intensified, shifting from Howard’s terrorism focus to cyber and geopolitical threats. This fear of invisible enemies mirrors the psychological paranoia of Cold War-era McCarthyism.
5.3 Social and Cultural Anxieties
Debates over gender, race, and identity have become psychological flashpoints, with progressive reforms – like trans rights or Indigenous recognition – triggering fears of cultural erosion among conservatives. The “culture wars,” a term popularised under Howard, have intensified, with fear of “wokeness” clashing with fears of resurgent bigotry. Psychologically, this reflects SIT: competing group identities (progressive vs. conservative, urban vs. rural) fuel mutual fear, undermining social cohesion.
Economic inequality, particularly housing unaffordability, has amplified existential fears among younger Australians. Psychologically, this triggers a sense of betrayal, as the “Australian dream” of homeownership becomes unattainable. This fear of exclusion fosters resentment toward elites, echoing the class-based fears that fueled Hanson’s rise in the 1990s.
6. Analysis: The Psychological Evolution of Fear
The evolution of fear in Australian society since Howard’s prime ministership reflects a dynamic interplay between psychological mechanisms, political strategies, and societal change. Key trends include:
6.1 From Singular to Multifaceted Fears
Howard’s era was defined by singular, high-profile fears (terrorism, asylum seekers), which aligned with moral panic theory. Today, Australians face a diffuse array of fears – climate, economic, cultural, technological – reflecting the complexity of modern threats. Psychologically, this multiplicity overwhelms cognitive coping mechanisms, fostering chronic anxiety.
6.2 From External to Internal Threats
Howard’s focus on external threats (terrorism, immigration) leveraged TMT-driven fears of mortality and cultural erosion. Contemporary fears, like climate change or inequality, are internalised, reflecting a shift toward existential and systemic anxieties. This internalisation complicates political responses, as internal threats are harder to externalise or scapegoat.
6.3 From State-Driven to Societal Fears
Howard’s government actively shaped fear through top-down narratives, exploiting psychological vulnerabilities. Today, fear is decentralised, amplified by social media and grassroots movements. This democratisation aligns with uncertainty-identity theory, as individuals seek group identities to navigate a chaotic information landscape.
6.4 Amplification Through Technology
The digital era has transformed fear’s psychological impact. Social media’s algorithmic amplification of outrage and misinformation heightens fear’s intensity, creating feedback loops of anxiety. This contrasts with Howard’s reliance on traditional media, which allowed greater narrative control.
Psychologically, fear’s persistence reflects its evolutionary role as a survival mechanism, but its manipulation has societal costs. Chronic fear erodes trust, fosters division, and undermines resilience, as seen in Australia’s polarised debates over climate, immigration, and identity. However, fear can also galvanise action, as evidenced by growing climate activism and demands for social justice.
7. Conclusion
Fear has been a defining force in Australian society since John Howard’s prime ministership, evolving from a politically orchestrated tool to a multifaceted societal phenomenon. Howard’s strategic use of fear – leveraging terrorism, immigration, and cultural change – exploited psychological vulnerabilities, fostering a conservative, insular national identity. While subsequent governments have sought to shift from fear to hope, new anxieties – climate change, digital disruption, social polarisation – have emerged, reflecting the psychological complexity of a globalised, uncertain world.
Psychologically, fear’s evolution reveals the interplay of terror management, social identity, and moral panic, with political actors and media amplifying these dynamics for control. Understanding this interplay is crucial for addressing Australia’s challenges, as fear can both paralyse and motivate. Future leaders must navigate fear’s psychological roots, fostering resilience and collective purpose to counter its divisive effects. By acknowledging fear’s role in shaping Australia’s psyche, society can move toward a more inclusive, hopeful future, balancing vigilance with compassion.
References
• Becker, E. (1973). The Denial of Death. Free Press.
• Flanagan, R. (2007). A decade of John Howard has left a country of timidity, fear and shame. The Guardian.
• Howard, J. (1997). Transcript of the Prime Minister’s Opening Address to the Australian Reconciliation Convention. PM Transcripts.
• National Museum of Australia. (n.d.). John Howard.
• Pietsch, J., & Aarons, H. (2012). Australia: Identity, Fear and Governance in the 21st Century. ANU Press.
• Sydney Morning Herald. (2017). Australia still plagued by destructive policies of John Howard.
• Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations.
• Wikipedia. (2023). John Howard.
• Wikipedia. (2004). Howard Government.
