the GOP understands (and manipulates) the national mythology

better than we do.

"George Bush, the rich, coke-snorting frat boy from Connecticut" would never have worked politically. Put the exact same specimen in Texas for a few years and associate him with oil, baseball and the death penalty? He's golden. The fact that he's purely a creature of the political machine is no matter. Ditto the drugs and the high-priced schooling. The money is now a positive. He owns a ranch.

When I was in school in Santa Fe, I was amazed for a while that the streets in the barrio were immaculate and well-paved while the ritzier addresses on the other side of town were located on, essentially, burro trails. Then someone pointed out to me that what folks were willing to pay for was the "feel" of "old Santa Fe". Rustica generica.

Never underestimate the power of image. In America, we're raised to believe that we're, deep down, cowboys. Ronald Reagan understood that better than anyone, and it was a lesson not lost on Bush the Younger, much as his father couldn't escape his essential "CIA wonk" being.

The nifty thing is that the west, in addition to being the cradle of this mythology, is also accessible to the left. There is a long, although now languishing, tradition of economic populism in flyover country (think Woody Guthrie, Jim Hightower) that the south doesn't have.

I think that economics wins over social wedge issues there if we make it so. I think the west is our future. We need to quit fighting the ghost of Nixon down here in the south and deliver a progressive message straight to the geographic middle of the country.

whatever it is!

they only rat on honest hard working people, like kerry....crooks like bush get/got a pass

.

:)<<<<<;)

His background as a crooked oil executive didn't win me over.

It works to legitimize him as something he actually isn't - a Texan.

And, much as we gripe about them, we revere Texans in America.

If I owned Hell and Texas I would live in Hell and rent Texas out

YOU "get" it.

There are too many "old school" democrats who, when we had majorities in the houses, set the agenda and the Republicans had to respond to US.

Now, I'm not talking about playing THEIR game and try to answer THEIR questions and deal with THEIR issues on THEIR terms.

We have to make them play by OUR rules, and your post is a great start!

:D Thanks.

Westering (in the West and in space) and rugged individualism are 2 main components of the American Myth. The cons have manipulated this myth very, very successfully. That's what the "value" thing is largely about.

Listen to Rush Limbaugh. Weaving the tale of the American Myth into lethal right-wing extremism is what his program is all about. This is why he can lie and lie and lie and his listeners "believe" he is telling the truth. Limbaugh wraps every lie in a big ribbon of Mythology.

This is why I think what George Lakoff is doing is so important.
http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/people/lakoff

Yes, indeed.

Lakoff rhymes with jackoff for a reason. This is a sideshow that diverts us from our real problem: lack of fairness in the media.

Essentially, Kerry tried to employ the power of storytelling in our last convention. It got us NOWHERE, and diverted potential converts from the bread and butter issues. If the political war is going to be played that way, the GOP win every time because of their ownership of the press. THEIR myth will be communicated and our story will be automatically distorted and mocked. How Kerry's honorable past was portrayed is case in point.

Avoid the style over substance critters at all cost. The secret to winning elections is KISS. Get a handful of solid progressive and populist issues, and keep hammering away at them. Rule 1: don't deviate from the message with fairytales.

Nor is it simply using the power of story telling. Nor has "framing the debate" as such, got anything to do with lack of fairness in the media. The lack of fairness is in part the result of Repubs deceptive framing. In that respect Lakoff is in fact right on target.

Since you think there's a reason why Lakoff rhymes with jackoff, you probably haven't listened to him much but if you would have, you would know this.

"Framing" is an inherent aspect of language. It can be used to deceive, it can also be used to tell the truth.

Our primary mission is to bring social justice to those who are unable to fend for themselves, or who have been treated unfairly. Instead, we have become Republican-lite, ministering to the comfortable.

I'm blue-collar, and I know blue collar through and through. Enough of our blue collar membership has abandoned us for BrandX. Ive heard the complaints and understand them. Its because they feel that our leadership has been co-opted by the same corporations and white collar constituencies that make up the Pugs. Look at who goes to our conventions: mostly upper middle class white collar union types, college educators, foundation heads, etc.

The hucksters in our party think that they can outtrick the Republicans by tricking those whom we need to get voting our way again. BS. The best way bring home the prodigals is to pay attention to their needs and TELL IT STRAIGHT. There's no bigger proponent of thinking outside the box than me, but Lakoff's ideas about aping GOP communication techniques are crap.

I disagree, and the entire electoral history of Kansas proves you wrong. Go check out Thomas Frank's "What's the Matter With Kansas." Because of the way framing works, and has been successfully utilized by the GOP, it is impossible to just, "Tell it straight" and come out ahead in electoral politics.

Yeah, its not all framing - its got to do with localisms, the so-called Liberal Media, and a host of other things, but one thing is clear: In American Politics the truth does not set you free, its sends you home to play golf for the rest of the year.

The evil bastard has us tied up in knots. His infection is spreading. Rather than being innovative, people here want to be copycats.


Will somebody remind that I'm at DU and not in Freekdom?

Be snide about it all you want, but show me one case where a progressive politician in the last 15 years "told it straight" (let's not even get into the implications of what that might actually mean) and won an election.

Everything is contextualized and framed. It's not about telling lies or falsehoods, its about better communication by politicians and hacks to the very people they are trying to represent.

It's not "copy Rove," its take what Rove does right and do something righteous with it.

I smell DLC.

You are so far off it's laughable.

Why not actually respond instead of resorting to the ad hominem attacks (and yes, I consider being called a DLC member an attack).

Reread my post - I specifically critique the electoral strategy of the last 15 years (the reign of Shrum and From) - i"m saying we need to ditch the DLC and their milquetoast candidates with bad messaging.

I agree Democrats need to stick to our principles but we also need to learn how to frame the debate on our terms. It's a big part of politics and it's a weakness of the democratic party. If it's the one thing the GOP understands it's marketing to the American public.

i could repeat what i said before about Lakoff not promoting outtricking repubs. but i won't repeat it since it seems to be falling on deaf ears.

Fighting the cattle baron (Republican) for the poor little farmer (Democrat).

Unfortunately, the GOP echo chamber has convinced the populace that the cattle baron is the Liberal Elite who is attacking the poor little everyman farmer that is trying to stand for "American Values" while "defending the institutions that made this country great," to quote The PigMan.

Clinton came from a poor background and became president. Rethugs like to think that myth belongs to them!

of the American pantheon, yes. :D

.

selling upward mobility? And I know it's not real upward mobility; it's a pack of lies, but people want to believe it. If you convince them their problems are the boogeyman's fault, then they'll vote with every time, as long as you've got the boogeyman on the run.

time to buy tickets because the odds are better when th epot gets bigger!

The have stolen the flag, our history, our religion, and now they even want Christmas for God's sake!

most people think moses looked like charlton heston and "injuns" scalped white folk for fun.

the populism of which is spoken here was a reaction to the rise of corporate or concentrated power, either with the late 18th and early 19th century hudson river valley small scale farmer reaction to the patroon system of large scale land owners or the mid-west and southern farmers in response to the rail road trusts.

how is the current situation akin to those and what lessons can be learned from them?

we have to convince people the concentrated corporate power is more TO THEM, and impacts their lives more than:

1) two men getting married
2) some woman deciding to have an abortion
3) losing an assault weapon
4) the ten commandments plastered outside some public building

our side needs to shift the debate away from god, gays, and guns with its populist message.

but I think a bigger issue is RW radio. Did you see the article on how interior California counties are voting Repub? One reason is that they all commute long distances and listen to RW radio. :argh:

aren't they mostly reinforcing the god, guns and gays mantra? isn't their message ultimately this: someone is to blame for you miserable existence and it's "them." i don't know if i'm articulating this well, but it seems to me the power of the rw message is that it shifts the focus from self to some "other." the other changes from liberals, to gays, to terrorists, to democrats, to "baby-killers," and the like, but someone else, or some other agenda is always to blame. so when people like rush and o'reilly get caught red-handed, they don't have to be personally responsible (that's for those "others"), it's just that the hordes of others are out to get them. even bush voters will admit he lied about the threat iraq posed, but that's ok...he must have jad a good reason for starting the war, and since we're already in it... :eyes: i think it's a waste of time of try to reason with most of the hard-core willfully ignorant.
i say write these folks off in terms of getting elected. the great non-voting majority is a better bet from less brainwashed recruits.

I ain't no rocket scientist, but I gave up on populism when I saw how many people believe Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson and George Bush (to name a few). Populism is exactly what these snake-oil salesmen are peddling.

Where folks seem to get lost is that in America, as Uly pointed out, the focus has been on using aspects of the mythology of the Protestant Work Ethic to link moral behavior as the requisite for worldly gain.

In a classical sense, Weber linked capitalism in Europe to Calvinistic predetermination and the Protestant Work Ethic, careful not to waste money, save it, invest it, and that economic prosperity reassured people that God favored them. Therefore, to Weber, capitalism grew (?) out of this Christian philosophic base and this religious superstructure determined the infrastructure, the economics of capitalism.

However the right articulates such a framework it still does not pass muster as a consistent rationale for modern society.

In dealing with the right, even the most articulate, and reading their most articulate essays, I am constantly impressed with their lack of substance. They seem to be without principles, calling what guides them a philosophy would seem to be giving them far more distinction than they deserve. Rather their thought seems to be nothing more than crumbs and shards raked together from various sources-- Hobbes, Locke, Smith (invisible hand leading towards utopia), Marx (economic determinism), Freud (where they get their constant urge to play on middle class fear) and numerous others -- and shaped together into a formless mass which they mold to the desired situation. There is no philosophical system on the right, rather only cynical opportunism mascara ding as coherent thought, a fig leaf of virtue to hide their whoring ways.

Where they are quite vulnerable is that their own postulates on capitalism can be turned about and used to attack them.

To take just one (excellent) example, "-- and shaped together into a formless mass which they mold to the desired situation. There is no philosophical system on the right, rather only cynical opportunism mascara ding as coherent thought.."

For me, this is pretty much the definition of fascism. Anything to attain and retain power. Eh?

And what's this about Moses not looking like Charlton Heston? Heretic!

:hi:

actually what matters is not that they are or are not the same but how an examination of the past can be utilized to affect the future.

what is akin to those earlier times such that a systematic pattern can be revealed and manipulated like archemides with his fulcrum and lever to get us where we want to go?

we have massive concentration of wealth and social power locked up and manipulating the organs of government and business. thrown into this is an increased level of social sophistication that far surpasses earlier times and a government that has a far different and higher place of power in society than it had before.

i have to laugh sometimes at liberals. the most important thing liberalism ever did in the history of america has been the implimentation of the social programs of the new deal to help people produced an increased concentration of power on the hands of the government.

its success is killing liberalism now.

That the right benifits from their mistakes while the left suffers from their successes. For instance Bush ignores al Queda, 9/11 happens, he is somehow a hero. They underfund and trash education then say the system is broken and we have to privatize it. While we clean up the rivers and air, and they say we have the cleanest waterways in the world why do we need such a stringent clean water act. We make great strides in poverty with the Great Society programs and they say we are making minorities dependent as if it were slavery. I dont have the answer to that one

This is what Lakoff is talking about - they are successfully reframing the way that issues are percieved.

We've got to come up with compelling story-lines that reframe our successes in a way that paints us positively, and the GOP negatively.

we have massive concentration of wealth and social power locked up and manipulating the organs of government and business. thrown into this is an increased level of social sophistication that far surpasses earlier times and a government that has a far different and higher place of power in society than it had before.

I'm not sure just how much more sophisticated things are. Yes, the government plays a bigger role because it's a bigger government, but it's still largely in the service of oligarchs.

i have to laugh sometimes at liberals. the most important thing liberalism ever did in the history of america has been the implimentation of the social programs of the new deal to help people produced an increased concentration of power on the hands of the government.

That's just the tool, though, and as Ani says, every tool is a weapon if you hold it right. The irony I see is that the rw has taken control of this big federal government by campaigning against the idea of big government - playing the "rugged individualism" tune (the idea that welfare equals slavery is just a variation on this).

its success is killing liberalism now.

It's being used to kill a lot more than liberalism.

:)

Bush the lost soul who found religion, purged his demons and is now the devoted family man.

Coming from the business world these people know their marketing cold. They know what appeals to people and how to sell them on a candidate. This is one of the main reasons why we keep losing because we've lost touch with the myths of America that resonate deeply with the people.

This message would work best in the best area for the Dems to pick up support, the Southwest. Though we suffered a setback.

As usual spot on Uly

GWB didn't exist before he served honorably in the National Guard, and then ceased again to exist for a while before he hit Texas. :D

:hi: Zack!

because too much focus on the negative would be bait for us, but the rest fits.

If it's as simple as image, should we cultivate a style that runs on a parallel track to the cowboy image.

Is is as simple as wearing newsboy caps and adopting the image of the coalminer or the rail tramp?

http://www.hartfordyork.com/newsboy-caps-fw.asp?&source=overturenewsboys&OVRAW=newsboy%20cap&OVKEY=newsboy%20cap&OVMTC=standard

Sometimes goofy ideas turn out to be brilliant.

...sometimes they're just goofy.

It's image and ideology, one package, easily sloganized. A lot easier to do when the media's helping you.

The Clintonian rags-to-riches story is a workable myth for us, I think (as long as it is actually hitched to some real economic populism--don't abandon the folks back home!). And I think John Edwards really tried to use his background, and it just wasn't allowed to take hold.

that using myth is a crock. He had an all American story, but people didnt respond to it. What they wanted to hear was an ideologically consistent message on a few issues that were key & understandable to them (thats what motivates most voters).

Kerry's war valor and Edward's blue collar rise were good as introductory tools in a primary, BUT NOT AS GENERAL ELECTION POINTS OF EMPHASIS. If we fall into that trap, we're good as done for the next 20 years.

Everyone knew the Son of a mill worker speech and it was a huge part of his appeal. Just because he didn't win doesn't mean it didn't resonate

If that message was working, we would have won a Southern swing state or two. There were Democrats (and some fairly liberal ones) in the South elected state-wide by sticking to bread&butter issues, but Edwards wasnt one of them. Maybe the DNC should take notice about what voters respond to.

and because they completely gave up on the south. If they had done some targeted campaigning in Virginia, Arkansas, Missouri, West Virginia, Kentucky and the Carolinas we might have picked up a couple, but we abandoned all of them to fight on our swing states and not theirs, which was a dumb move.

I was carrying over a little anger from a post higher up on the thread that argued that we have to use Rove-like techniques.

If you analyze the recent elections, the problem is twofold. Long term, we have lost blue collar votes by losing focus on their needs. This last election, we lost enough women due to their uneasiness about world violence against Americans.

In both cases, they were lost, not because our hearts werent in the right place, but because our message was muddled and unfocused. We spent too much of the general election season reacting to smears or telling voters about K/E's biography. That's not what blue collar voters want. They are simple (in the best meaning) people who respond to two or three issues. Instead, weve been complex, or, like this year, scattered. Just one example: what WAS our position about the war?

This wont be fixed by being clever, but by being honest, simple, repetitive, and not distracted. If so, the message will get through the dishonesty of the media whores, regardless of how hard they hammer our candidate. Average people like simplicity and determination. Lets give it to them for a change, not some Roveian, Strangelovian copy.

these two are not mutually exclusive. We need simplicty, we need to regain the trust of the common people, we need to refocus and find the messages that resonate with people. But there is a large segment of voters for whom the issues don't matter and the appearance does, and even for many of those for whom the issues DO matter they assume * thinks like they do because of the All-American image that has been built around him. They trust him because his carefully crafted image and message makes people think he is one of them.

We spent the early time talking about Kerry's biography because we had to let the people get to know him/trust him on an issue that requires a lot of trust (national security). And they did. Until he addressed that though he couldn't tallk about the other things because they wouldn't have mattered He came out of the convention with higher Commander-in-chief numbers than Bush! But all of that was destroyed by the swifties (and the failure to respond to that for a whole month was Kerry's first and probably biggest mistake).

I'll agree the message was muddled and unfocused, and that fed right into the tale the Bushies were spinning about flip-flops and weakness. But the problem is, the Republicans are unified completely on most issues. Whereas you find pro-life, pro-gun, pro-DP, anti-war, etc dems. It's hard for us to field a unified message when we are a broad-tent party.

Was actually resonating with the public then the Swifties attacked and Kerry did nothing to counter it. Edwards was beating that son of mill worker angle to death and then he pretty much disappeared out of the mainstream for most of the election. But his populist views would have taken root if he was more in more visible during the campaign.

"rich, coke-snorting, frat boy" image being made golden with oil and cowboy hats but there is one more thing...the Republicans made it an absolute NO-NO to mention ANYTHING about Bush's life before he was 40.
Funny how our "leaders" didn't pick up on that same idea.

everything from trends to perceptions to myths...

Down here in the south. Hasn't been a lynching in 30 years, blacks can vote and eat in the same restaurants with whites...

Don't expect too much too soon.

Woody Guthrie's populism is sorely needed here. He could disarm his critics with wit and he fully admitted he did not belong to any organized political party...he was a democrat.

who we could also use. :)

Geez, what an idiot I are.

:)

...the "small town boy who hit the big-time" type imagery.

...we need a modern day Will Rogers-or at least a few Dems who can go on TV and speak some plain truth...

God! God! God!