Don’t think of an elephant

-1- How to take back public discourse

Since we start reading the work of George Lakkof, we notice his political views. He is obviously a Democrat who recognizes that the Right has some good tactics that helped them to win the presidency in 2004 with their nominee George W. Bush. These tactics I am referring to can be easily referred to as Framing. The following lines summarize in 14 points the keys of framing in order to successfully take back public discourse according to Lakkof:

1.    Recognize what others have done right and where you are failing.
Regarding this point the Democratic author gives us a very good example, mentioning how that Republican George Bush, in 2004, effectively used framing by creating a new concept such as “tax relief.” This term was flowing from the White House to all the media, and from the media to the voters.

2.    Don’t think of an elephant.

This means that by negating the frame presented by the other party you are just giving it strength. The example given is pretty graphic - Richard Nixon during the Watergate scandal. When he denied being a “crook,” everyone thought of him as a “crook” because he was using the frame given by others.

3.    Frame the truth from your perspective.

The conservative perspective of George W. Bush viewed taxes as some type of affliction that needed to be removed. The way he framed his truth made voters see him as a hero that was about to bring them relief.

4.    Speak from your moral perspective at all times.

This can be related to the reinforcement theory contained in the study The People’s Choice by Lazarsfeld, Berelson and Gaudet. The aim is not the partisans of the contrary side, but to reinforce your moral perspective among your people. Here lies the importance of family values since Americans conceive their Nation as a family.

5.    Understand from where the other parties are coming.

In this case Lakkof tries to understand the reason why Republicans think what they think, to predict what they will say according to their psychology. The illustrative example of the conception of the State as a strict father (Republican) and Nurturant parent family (progressive). To explain this he refers to a conservative Christian writer James Dobson, who thinks that there is an absolute right and an absolute wrong; children are born bad, therefore they just want to do what pleases them, thus they have to be made good and moral. Dobson relates morality with prosperity. He links his ideas to Adam Smith and his view of capitalism, pointing that by pursuing your own profit you are already helping everyone. In consequence, those who do good to others are not maximizing the potential of that society because they get in the way of those that seek their own profit. Thus doing good to others is not moral; which means that social programs are not moral. It is very interesting how the morality and obedience, reflected on prosperity have to be rewarded with a tax cut for example.

6.    Think strategically across issue areas.

It is about a hidden plan that is focused on a specific area but deliberately produces effects in many other areas, such as tax cuts that may seem straightforward, but as a result there is not money for social programs.

7.    Think of the consequences of proposals.

8.    Remember that voters vote according to their identity and values. Voters relate the Nation as their family, so despite the fact that many other issues are important, standing to defend the family values and framing the truth from that perspective will always get the attention of the voters.

9.    Unite and cooperate. , such as socioeconomic progressives, Identity politics progressives, etc. The important thing is to recognize that they all are part of something general a higher category and how irrational it is to go against their own interests, as conservatives did in 2000, when the 99% voted their conservative values. 

10. Play Offense, not defense. , such as socioeconomic progressives, Identity politics progressives, etc. The important thing is to recognize that they all are part of something general a higher category and how irrational it is to go against their own interests, as conservatives did in 2000, when the 99% voted their conservative values. 

11. Activate your model in swing voters.