Schechner claims that Make believe is when you know what you perform does not exist in reality and Make belief means making people believe, making a certain reality by, i.e., a religious activity. In real life, Politicians use the fluidity between these two methods to form people’s prejudice against something. In my opinion, the biggest difference between the two is whether the audience participates in the performance, that is, whether they are specactors: i.e. in political spectacles, if the voter is convinced by the authorities make belief, they vote for the politicians, Machiavelli is the first one who make the process of Make belief clear in the political field: in his opinion, education in those past centuries has only given citizens idleness and weakness, which makes them lack of decency, And they don’t have the love of freedom as they were republicans, so the politicians are allowed not to be good ( in the Christianity sense) anymore.
Kolbert explains the citizens’unreasonable response to political fiction from the perspective of cognitive behavior studies. She thinks Sociality is the key to the question because human beings rely on cooperation and highly depend on others’ expertise. As a result, there is no sharp boundaries between one person’s idea and knowledge and those of other members of the group. Once formed, a certain impression is remarkably perseverant, even when their beliefs has been refuted, people fail to make an appropriate revision in those beliefs. Because people have “confirmation bias” in collaborative works in cognitive mode and Myside bias in personal cognitions. In Kolbert’s words: the Environment changed too quickly for the natural selection to catch up so it is easier for people in the society to be trapped in fake news and crazy politician fandoms.
The other article explains why the specactors are still actively involved while it is obviously fraudulent. For supporters, what they never condone in their personal lives, they relish in the folk hero. For political figures like Trump, sexism、 lying、 corruption only adds to his legend. Blow’s article starts with a case study about fandom and tells us the real reason behind these paradoxes: He cited the example of Monkey King who is a hero but also a misbehaving child who only needs a firm hand and a sense of purpose to come good, and tries to explain the supporters intention behind their ridiculous behaviors.
Machiavelli, The Prince
Richard Schechner, “Make Believe and Make
Belief” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YG6fMnH17GU)
Elizabeth Kolbert, “Why Facts Don’t Change Our
Minds” (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds)
Charles Blow, “Trumpism Extols it’s Folk Hero,”
NYT, 4/8/19, (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/07/opinion/donald-trump-trumpism.html)