For decades the linguist Gge Lakoff wrote about the importance of framing and frankly in one post you have encapsulated and made super clear how to do this practically. THANK YOU!
When I discuss a tax-supported social program with conservatives, they always follow up with "How are you going to pay for that?" My response is either "What makes you ask?", or "The same way we pay for the defense budget." Your thoughts?
Another home run for Reframing America. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
My only pro-empathy freedom suggestion is to consider using Dr. Lakoff's suggestions in Don't Think of an Elephant, and dial down the "war" language, which helps conservative culture war. In his third suggestion on page 158, Lakoff tells us that "Your job is to activate for politics the nurturant, progressive values already there (perhaps only passively) in whoever you're talking to."
Conservatives WANT culture war for "smaller government" because they don't govern with empathy. They always attack empathy and mutual responsibility. Progressives WANT culture diplomacy because we want "effective government" because we DO govern with empathy? Consequently, shouldn't we be talking about the ART OF POLITICAL DEBATE or the ART OF DIPLOMACY or the ART OF EFFECTIVE GOVERNANCE versus the art of war? (Yes. Commitment to empathy is a show of strength, i.e., as in protecting Ukrainian democracy with more arms and protecting Palestinian and Israeli civilians with a cease fire?)
Also, I love The Public Debate flow chart. However, wouldn't it be better to step away from conservative absolutist, take it or leave it frame, referenced in "set the terms" and use Dr. Lakoff's language "Whoever frames the debate, wins?" We want empathy at the center of constant public discourse to rewire Republican brains (yes, they do have a brain). Don't we want to nurture empathy in the GOP brains of our neighbors? If the GOP governed with empathy we could collaborate. Isn't that what we want? Collaboration around empathy and responsibility, which is at the heart of this amazing post?
Since governing conversations go on and on, don't we want to make empathy for and responsibility to humanity the center of public debate, which means "peace" not "war." The ART OF PEACE.
For decades the linguist Gge Lakoff wrote about the importance of framing and frankly in one post you have encapsulated and made super clear how to do this practically. THANK YOU!
I love this so much! Thanks for the tips.
When I discuss a tax-supported social program with conservatives, they always follow up with "How are you going to pay for that?" My response is either "What makes you ask?", or "The same way we pay for the defense budget." Your thoughts?
Another home run for Reframing America. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
My only pro-empathy freedom suggestion is to consider using Dr. Lakoff's suggestions in Don't Think of an Elephant, and dial down the "war" language, which helps conservative culture war. In his third suggestion on page 158, Lakoff tells us that "Your job is to activate for politics the nurturant, progressive values already there (perhaps only passively) in whoever you're talking to."
Conservatives WANT culture war for "smaller government" because they don't govern with empathy. They always attack empathy and mutual responsibility. Progressives WANT culture diplomacy because we want "effective government" because we DO govern with empathy? Consequently, shouldn't we be talking about the ART OF POLITICAL DEBATE or the ART OF DIPLOMACY or the ART OF EFFECTIVE GOVERNANCE versus the art of war? (Yes. Commitment to empathy is a show of strength, i.e., as in protecting Ukrainian democracy with more arms and protecting Palestinian and Israeli civilians with a cease fire?)
Also, I love The Public Debate flow chart. However, wouldn't it be better to step away from conservative absolutist, take it or leave it frame, referenced in "set the terms" and use Dr. Lakoff's language "Whoever frames the debate, wins?" We want empathy at the center of constant public discourse to rewire Republican brains (yes, they do have a brain). Don't we want to nurture empathy in the GOP brains of our neighbors? If the GOP governed with empathy we could collaborate. Isn't that what we want? Collaboration around empathy and responsibility, which is at the heart of this amazing post?
Since governing conversations go on and on, don't we want to make empathy for and responsibility to humanity the center of public debate, which means "peace" not "war." The ART OF PEACE.