Don't Think of an Elephant

In Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate - The Essential Guide for Progressives, cognitive scientist George Lakoff explains how conservative rhetoric has framed people’s perceptions, which has led to Republican electoral victories. He goes on to suggest ways in which Democrats can respond.

For example, Republicans coined the term “tax relief” to characterize the Bush tax cuts. The word “relief” frames taxes as an affliction and tax cuts as a mechanism of relieving the pain. That framing disregards the worthwhile accomplishments that arise from government spending of those tax dollars. And whenever anyone in either party repeats the phrase “tax relief”, they reinforce that framing.

Democrats could frame taxes as investments in the future, such as roads, education, health care, or reducing the national debt. Or, since people’s incomes depend on the government for security, justice, infrastructure, etc., liberals could treat taxes as an obligation and tax cuts as shirking responsibility. However, those formulations rarely arose during discussions of the Bush tax cut proposals.

Lakoff proposes two approaches to parenting as metaphors for liberal and conservative worldviews. Conservatives think in terms of a “strict father” model, in which children are born bad and must obey their father’s commands to learn the internal discipline they need in life. Liberals follow more of a “nurturant parent” perspective. As a non-parent, those metaphors didn’t quite resonate with me. However, a small shift – conservatives focusing “right vs. wrong” while liberals focus on empathy – does make a lot of sense.

His suggested responses were less compelling, in part because liberals have such an uphill battle. Republicans have been reframing the debate for decades, funding think-tanks, using carefully chosen terms in their speeches, and influencing the media. Being aware of the issue and avoiding terms like “tax relief” is a good start.

Democrats must find and express counterparts to the Republican maxims of “strong defense”, “lower taxes”, “smaller government”, and “family values”. Lakoff proposes stuff like “broad prosperity” and “mutual responsibility” which isn’t at all persuasive. Themes involving empathy and caring for the average American sound more promising, as Bill Clinton proved in the electoral victories.

The book is a short easy-to-read collection of essays, which include some repetition. He applies his ideas to various contexts, such as 9/11, the California recall, and gay marriage. Though I disagree with some of the details, his big picture of how the Republicans have framed the public discourse is on target and important for progressive to comprehend. I plan to read Lakoff’s larger work Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think for a more detailed analysis.