"In order to rally people, governments need enemies... if they do not have a real enemy, they will invent one in order to mobilize us"

Throughout history, the rallying power of an enemy—real or imagined—has been a staple in the toolkit of governments seeking unity or compliance from their citizens. The words of Nhat Hanh reveal a sobering truth about political mobilization: collective action often arises not from shared ideals or compassion but rather from a perceived threat. When a society faces an adversary, however defined, it becomes easier to align public will, to direct resources, and to justify actions that might otherwise provoke dissent. The forging or exaggeration of enemies, therefore, becomes an expedient means to foster social cohesion and to distract from internal issues.

The creation of an enemy serves not only as a psychological anchor for collective identity but also as a mechanism for power consolidation. By defining themselves in opposition to another group or nation, people form bonds that rely on exclusion and sometimes even hatred. Governments may manipulate these divisions, amplifying fear or hostility to strengthen their own legitimacy or to maintain control over a population. The language of emergency and existential danger becomes a rationale for curtailing freedoms, increasing surveillance, or even going to war.

Such tactics are not limited to overtly authoritarian regimes; democracies, too, can fall prey to the temptation of manufacturing threats for political gain. The depiction of outsiders, minorities, or ideological opponents as existential menaces can be a powerful tool in electoral politics or national narratives. This fosters a climate where suspicion reigns, dialogue erodes, and violence becomes justified under the illusion of self-defense.

Nhat Hanh’s insight highlights the importance of vigilance and skepticism in public life. Recognizing when enmity is constructed rather than discovered is essential for resisting manipulation and for building a society grounded in understanding rather than division. Only by questioning the narratives that are presented—and seeking commonality rather than conflict—can people hope to transcend cycles of fear and control.