Word Wars: "The private depends on the public"

[Cosmic Kitten]

An eye opening interview with George Lakoff
underscores WHY Progressives and Populists are losing.

It is necessary to ground a nurturing politics for the common good
and core values in language and a moral foundation that appeals -
rhetorically and emotionally - to the better selves of voters.

The tendency of Democrats to use "facts" and "reason" is not
effective to create the frames and guide the narrative to Victory.

What progressives call "rational arguments" are not normal modes of real reason. What counts as a "rational argument" is not the same for progressives and conservatives. And even the meaning of concepts and words may be different. Cognitive linguists have learned a lot about how all this works, but few progressives have studied cognitive linguistics. For a thorough review of such differences, take a look at my book Whose Freedom?, which shows how reasoning about freedom can take two utterly different forms for progressives and conservatives.

Will Democrats continue to allow right-wingers
to dominate the conversation on Freedom?
Democrats should "own" by right, if for no other reason
than that right-wingers are AUTHORITARIAN.
It's time to recapture the narrative of Freedom...

Democracy is a governing system in which citizens care about their fellow citizens and work through their government to provide public resources for all. In short, in a democracy, the private depends on the public. Businesses depend on public resources: roads, bridges, the interstate highway system, sewers, a water supply, airports and air traffic control, the Federal Reserve, a patent office, public education for your employees, public health, the electric grid, the satellite communications, the internet, and more. Individuals depend on public resources like clean air, clean water, safe food and products, public safety, access to education and health care, housing, employment - as well as everything listed above. Without such public resources, you are not free.

Do you think that Elizabeth Warren does a good job of conveying that, in your words, "the private depends on the public"?

She does it better than anyone else in public life. She sees the truth and has the courage and articulateness to say it out loud and effectively.

Read the whole article at Truth-out
http://truth-out.org/progressivepicks/item/27576-george-lakoff-progressives-cannot-succeed-without-expressing-respect-values

[yallerdawg]

1. We have to change the frame of the conversation.

In personal interactions, as over the Thanksgiving table with conservative relatives or in your social or business life with colleagues and coworkers, the first thing to realize is that, for the most part, conservatives believe deeply that they are morally right, that they and other conservatives are operating from the right moral principles. They don’t believe that they are immoral, and they don't believe that right and wrong don't matter. As moral beings, they want to be treated with respect. And in personal relationships, respect is appropriate.

I know deeply religious conservatives who are morally opposed to abortion and birth control, opposed to any restrictions on public and private expressions of Christian faith, and opposed to taxation and regulation which supports any of these anti-Christian views. But, they are Democrats! The frame they see it in is the message of Christ, and the Republican Party consistently delivers anti-Christian values - hate, intolerance, war, disdain and contempt for the poor, obvious racism, economic inequality.

As Liberals and Democrats, we have allowed the right wing to label us as baby killers, godless atheists, communists who want to take their hard earned money and give it away to the undeserving. The argument has ended right there. The lines are drawn.

But we can change the frame.

[Cosmic Kitten]

2. Good points

But there are obvious contradictions that
open the door to changing the frame and narrative.
Christians need to take back their own rightful place.
Democrats can't help the church, but the church can help Democracy.

[yallerdawg]

4. The Republican Party thrives on cognitive dissonance.

Why can't the Democratic Party?

For example, we tell the values corporations they do not have to have health insurance which includes abortion or birth control coverage. Then, we do everything in our power to make sure there is affordable coverage available.

Since Roe v. Wade (1973), the Republicans have pledged to end abortion. That is a long time to fail in delivering a promise - but a lot of elections! Do they really want to end this divisive, manipulative issue? And religious conservatives keep voting for the party that doesn't deliver.

We lose elections we should win because we concede our identification to the Republicans. We need to change the perception which in effect is reality.

[Cosmic Kitten]

5. We fail if We deceive, they don't suffer their conscience

We need to change the perception which in effect is reality.

Yes, that's why the messaging must include values.
"a nurturing politics for the common good "
"the private depends on the public"
"Democracy is freedom"

[yallerdawg]

7. We play the same game.

Aren't we the party of environmental protection opposed to greenhouse gases and supporting alternative energies?

Didn't President Obama today declare we are now the largest oil producer in the world? That Keystone XL Canadian oil is irrelevant, just a drip in the market?

Cognitive dissonance.

[CrispyQ]

3. I love Lakoff. His book, "Moral Politics" was very good.

Makes you wonder why the dems won't hire him & take his advice. Maybe because you can only spout liberal values for so long, without really supporting them.

[Cosmic Kitten]

6. Democrats need to wake up to these Word Wars.

We keep losing elections and the voting base is apathetic and disenfranchised.
How we frame issues and talk about the problems can turn it around.

...you can only spout liberal values for so long, without really supporting them

Hasn't stopped MANY career "democratic" politicians!

[sabrina 1]

8. I agree with you. The Right Wing Noise Machine managed to change the language

Their words were stupid, childish, but they were repeated over and over again until people were so familiar with them, they didn't THINK about what they really meant.

But first you have to know what will resonate with people. THEN you can condense it into a catchy phrase and/or word.

No one has done the work on this.

Eg, the Right coined phrases like Welfare Queens eg, which instantly conjured up images of lazy, no good, healthy people who simply won't 'pull themselves up by their bootstraps'.

But the Left has done nothing half as effective regarding Wall St, who are the REAL 'Welfare Queens', feeding at the public trough for Trillions, AFTER they have failed.

OWS has done a lot to introduce short phrases and words aimed at Wall St that is now commonly used.

But maybe it would be smart to pick an issue, Wall St Money eg, its influence on our Government, and find ways to condense the info so that people 'get it'.

[Cosmic Kitten]

9. Don't misunderestimate the right-wing speechifiers ;~/

but first you have to know what will resonate with people. THEN you can condense it into a catchy phrase and/or word.

No one has done the work on this.

The "work" has been done... many years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays
http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html
http://www.whale.to/b/bernays.pdf

To make something "resonate" it needs to touch the
individuals "value system"...
Once the values are identified ideas can be "framed"
to create an overarching "narrative" that describes
a POV to which people can subscribe.

The "Left's" ineffectiveness has much to do with the
difference between intellect and emotion.
As you point out "they didn't THINK about what they really meant"!
TaDa! People respond emotively to media and propaganda,
NOT intellectually... which is why facts and reason fall on deaf ears.

The success of OWS IS in fact due to "resonating" with
people in an EMOTIVE manner.
It is easy to look at banksters and then one's own bank account
and say HEY! Wait a minute!!! I'm getting ripped the eff off!!1!!1!

Whatever "issue" Populists choose to work with it needs to
resonate with the MAJORITY of Americans, across political lines,
and clearly define "Us and Them"...
Public vs private?
Public vs corporate?
1% vs 99%?

Picking a partisan issue or looking at the trees
rather than the forest is not a winning formula.
Populism is a Public concern.