We started a conversation in comments below about whether some of your language is too abstract to reach the general public, and about whether using words like "government" lights up a frame, a neural network, where Republicans have repeated messages for decades that bias people toward distrust.
I agree with the causes and effects you have written in this piece, and the need to effectively make an argument. But I think we're getting away from George Lakoff's lessons of using our own words and metaphors and repeating them to create a frame. Republican messaging strategist Frank Luntz, often cited by Lakoff, substitutes words and frames them while speaking simply and repeating the same language everywhere. We could make arguments about government but use words like "our citizenry," "our fair town," "this innovative state." Avoid using the term, "government." I.e., "our progressive county needs more building inspectors get projects done, and this will create jobs and save us money.
Let's take a look at a broader problem. Some government agencies have ossified. I heard from a former firefighter that the U.S. Forestry service had 40K wildfire fighters quit in one year because they weren't assigned the proper pay grades and would go unpaid for many months. Was this because of GOP interference? I don't know. But Democrats lose working class voters, like those firefighters, if they don't call it out and fix it. Politicians of both parties have let this happen and have been bought by large donors. Unable to deliver, Democrats lost their credibility.
More people are recognizing the corruption, cruelty, lawlessness and incompetence of the Trump regime as their actions impact us personally. This is bringing people out in numbers and is becoming a movement. We will soon see strikes and boycotts at massive scale. The community feeling this generates may help people come together and right-size government functions. Some, like air traffic control must be national. For others, that may not be the case.
Some government agencies and business monopolies have gotten too large and hurt our economy. As the regime succeeds in cutting federal agencies or making them underperform, we may need to reconnect as communities and provide for each other more locally or in state compacts. This will require sacrifice and compromise to solve big problems like homelessness and underfunded education.
It looked like media was dying, but here we are, informing each other on SubStack. A city or an alliance of counties could form their own health insurance company and own it collectively, working with providers for low administrative costs and doctor-driven authorizations. People of similar values will buy in, but it's hard to impose one region's values on another region. Washington State reaffirmed its climate laws despite initiatives brought by Republicans. We're also raising new taxes to fund public education. That won't work in other regions.
The bottom line is that although there's danger, there's also opportunity for reform and innovation in this time of great upheaval. Our messaging can drive hope as well as fear.
Abandoning critical terms is what I call the "message death spiral." The word "government" isn't going to go away just because we don't use it. We just forfeit 100% of the control over what it means to the opposition. That is, in fact, what has already happened. It’s like saying, "We have allowed conservatives to win unchallenged for fifty years, let's continue that strategy."
I agree with you Antonia, but as long as we let Elon Musk be "the president" I feel that we are swimming against the current. Let's concentrate on kicking out Musk first. It's obvious that Musk controls the purse
We have to do both. This strategy is about reaching people who are not paying attention, but have the vague idea that what Musk is doing is "okay" because the federal government needs "shaking up." This helps us get rid of Musk by turning public opinion against him, by removing that justification for his actions.
I would also recommend to people getting involved with your county party and pushing them to implement these ideas. I know it's annoying to consider that you have to become more involved with an organization that you are uphappy with, but these organizations aren't going to change on their own. My husband is a party official in our county and I run a local Dem club. At the county party level, it is still a lot of old guard that kind of resent who they consider the "Johnny-Come-Latelys" (people who got involved with the party after 2016). It's frustrating, but it's not going to change until the people that want to party to change are more numerous than the people who talk about the way we used to do things. And, as frustrating as it is, that requires people getting more involved with the party machinery, not less.
I like your general idea but would like to see less abstraction and more concrete examples. Also, what do we do about the effect of Republicans' years of creating negative associations to the frame raised by the word, "government"?
It’s very, very good. I’ll study it. We still need metaphors for government and a way of setting our frame for it as a process with participants expressed in plain talk similar in style to Mark Twain. I am busy also — helping manage the incoming wave of volunteers at a local Indivisible chapter.
I wish I could put out a companion newsletter to every newsletter containing all concrete examples, but I just don't have the capacity! As it is, it takes a week+ just to write each newsletter. I would love it if people would take a crack at it and share in the comments!
I know Ruy and greatly admire his work, but a lot of people who do opinion research see public opinion as something we have to accept and work within, as opposed to something we play an active role in forming.
For forty years we have believed we have no agency, that reality just "is what it is" while Republicans are loading all their resources and energies into the mission of reality construction.
When Republicans mocked us as being the "reality-based community," we took that as an admission that they were liars. Really it was an accurate statement about our ignorance about the fact that how people perceive the world has little to do with direct experience and everything to do with explanatory narratives which can be directed. Our refusal to understand this is how we got into this mess.
Where I see libs getting into trouble is refusing to acknowledge the validity of opinions they disagree with. I think our vibe is too often "we're obvi right and so let's figure out better ways to school the ignorant bigots and dupes who vote against their interests" and this is fairly transparent to a lot of people and generates alienation and resentment.
Yes, it's really frustrating that so many people think of public opinion as something static, as opposed to something that we can influence and change.
I remember reading the passage and being confused about the “reality-based community” comment. I felt it was an odd way to say that public opinion is something that can be shaped or even changed with organization and the lack of an effective coordinated response. I ran into this around 2005 or so in a conversation with a consultant that worked at the DPG HQ in Atlanta who is basically a numbers man. I asked him about George Lakoff, “I don’t like him.” He also said, I’m paraphrasing, that we were in a cultural war, and “We can’t win.” He also said something about how the majority of public opinion may be unfavorable now and sometimes we have to wait till there’s a shift before we react. I didn’t know enough at the time and wound up just letting the comments float in the air. I know now that avoiding the cultural war and not getting proactive about public opinion will lead to disaster as minds get hardwired!
I was cursed to become a speed reader in the 1960's and I read a lot, its a joy for me. Antonia has become a favorite of mine. Her use of language is masterly.
Right on target, another bullseye! While we're at it, can we please stop calling the Musk/Trump shit show a "shock and awe" campaign? Anyone who is shocked or awe struck must have been asleep for the last eight years. What we're seeing is the same old Trump cycle of brag, blame, and cut. How about we call it the "Musk/Trump Crime Wave"?
This is so spot on and exactly what an effective opposition would do. Why is it so hard for the Democrats to do this right now? It has been used against them often enough— think back to Newt Gingrich in the mid90s.
Antonia,
We started a conversation in comments below about whether some of your language is too abstract to reach the general public, and about whether using words like "government" lights up a frame, a neural network, where Republicans have repeated messages for decades that bias people toward distrust.
I agree with the causes and effects you have written in this piece, and the need to effectively make an argument. But I think we're getting away from George Lakoff's lessons of using our own words and metaphors and repeating them to create a frame. Republican messaging strategist Frank Luntz, often cited by Lakoff, substitutes words and frames them while speaking simply and repeating the same language everywhere. We could make arguments about government but use words like "our citizenry," "our fair town," "this innovative state." Avoid using the term, "government." I.e., "our progressive county needs more building inspectors get projects done, and this will create jobs and save us money.
Let's take a look at a broader problem. Some government agencies have ossified. I heard from a former firefighter that the U.S. Forestry service had 40K wildfire fighters quit in one year because they weren't assigned the proper pay grades and would go unpaid for many months. Was this because of GOP interference? I don't know. But Democrats lose working class voters, like those firefighters, if they don't call it out and fix it. Politicians of both parties have let this happen and have been bought by large donors. Unable to deliver, Democrats lost their credibility.
More people are recognizing the corruption, cruelty, lawlessness and incompetence of the Trump regime as their actions impact us personally. This is bringing people out in numbers and is becoming a movement. We will soon see strikes and boycotts at massive scale. The community feeling this generates may help people come together and right-size government functions. Some, like air traffic control must be national. For others, that may not be the case.
Some government agencies and business monopolies have gotten too large and hurt our economy. As the regime succeeds in cutting federal agencies or making them underperform, we may need to reconnect as communities and provide for each other more locally or in state compacts. This will require sacrifice and compromise to solve big problems like homelessness and underfunded education.
It looked like media was dying, but here we are, informing each other on SubStack. A city or an alliance of counties could form their own health insurance company and own it collectively, working with providers for low administrative costs and doctor-driven authorizations. People of similar values will buy in, but it's hard to impose one region's values on another region. Washington State reaffirmed its climate laws despite initiatives brought by Republicans. We're also raising new taxes to fund public education. That won't work in other regions.
The bottom line is that although there's danger, there's also opportunity for reform and innovation in this time of great upheaval. Our messaging can drive hope as well as fear.
Abandoning critical terms is what I call the "message death spiral." The word "government" isn't going to go away just because we don't use it. We just forfeit 100% of the control over what it means to the opposition. That is, in fact, what has already happened. It’s like saying, "We have allowed conservatives to win unchallenged for fifty years, let's continue that strategy."
Excellent point, and you’re the expert at this. Is there any merit on also establishing our terms?
We should absolutely establish our own terms. Government, freedom, and values are three of them!
What we should avoid is the need to keep coming up with new terms that require explaining.
Excellent thank you. Will use
LOVE this reframing!
I agree with you Antonia, but as long as we let Elon Musk be "the president" I feel that we are swimming against the current. Let's concentrate on kicking out Musk first. It's obvious that Musk controls the purse
We have to do both. This strategy is about reaching people who are not paying attention, but have the vague idea that what Musk is doing is "okay" because the federal government needs "shaking up." This helps us get rid of Musk by turning public opinion against him, by removing that justification for his actions.
I would also recommend to people getting involved with your county party and pushing them to implement these ideas. I know it's annoying to consider that you have to become more involved with an organization that you are uphappy with, but these organizations aren't going to change on their own. My husband is a party official in our county and I run a local Dem club. At the county party level, it is still a lot of old guard that kind of resent who they consider the "Johnny-Come-Latelys" (people who got involved with the party after 2016). It's frustrating, but it's not going to change until the people that want to party to change are more numerous than the people who talk about the way we used to do things. And, as frustrating as it is, that requires people getting more involved with the party machinery, not less.
Absolutely. The "Party" is whoever shows up.
I like your general idea but would like to see less abstraction and more concrete examples. Also, what do we do about the effect of Republicans' years of creating negative associations to the frame raised by the word, "government"?
I don't know if you saw this companion piece?https://reframingamerica.substack.com/p/repost-the-art-of-war
It’s very, very good. I’ll study it. We still need metaphors for government and a way of setting our frame for it as a process with participants expressed in plain talk similar in style to Mark Twain. I am busy also — helping manage the incoming wave of volunteers at a local Indivisible chapter.
I wish I could put out a companion newsletter to every newsletter containing all concrete examples, but I just don't have the capacity! As it is, it takes a week+ just to write each newsletter. I would love it if people would take a crack at it and share in the comments!
Thank you, Antonia. I will do so when I have a chance.
I think Teixieira makes some important points here that impact our strategy and comms. https://www.liberalpatriot.com/p/government-bureaucracies-are-not?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=239058&post_id=157045063&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=3xtfn&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
I know Ruy and greatly admire his work, but a lot of people who do opinion research see public opinion as something we have to accept and work within, as opposed to something we play an active role in forming.
For forty years we have believed we have no agency, that reality just "is what it is" while Republicans are loading all their resources and energies into the mission of reality construction.
When Republicans mocked us as being the "reality-based community," we took that as an admission that they were liars. Really it was an accurate statement about our ignorance about the fact that how people perceive the world has little to do with direct experience and everything to do with explanatory narratives which can be directed. Our refusal to understand this is how we got into this mess.
Where I see libs getting into trouble is refusing to acknowledge the validity of opinions they disagree with. I think our vibe is too often "we're obvi right and so let's figure out better ways to school the ignorant bigots and dupes who vote against their interests" and this is fairly transparent to a lot of people and generates alienation and resentment.
Yes, it's really frustrating that so many people think of public opinion as something static, as opposed to something that we can influence and change.
I remember reading the passage and being confused about the “reality-based community” comment. I felt it was an odd way to say that public opinion is something that can be shaped or even changed with organization and the lack of an effective coordinated response. I ran into this around 2005 or so in a conversation with a consultant that worked at the DPG HQ in Atlanta who is basically a numbers man. I asked him about George Lakoff, “I don’t like him.” He also said, I’m paraphrasing, that we were in a cultural war, and “We can’t win.” He also said something about how the majority of public opinion may be unfavorable now and sometimes we have to wait till there’s a shift before we react. I didn’t know enough at the time and wound up just letting the comments float in the air. I know now that avoiding the cultural war and not getting proactive about public opinion will lead to disaster as minds get hardwired!
Hi Brian! "Wait until there's a shift?" Ugh. We need to have a collective conversation about the concept of "leadership!"
I was cursed to become a speed reader in the 1960's and I read a lot, its a joy for me. Antonia has become a favorite of mine. Her use of language is masterly.
Right on target, another bullseye! While we're at it, can we please stop calling the Musk/Trump shit show a "shock and awe" campaign? Anyone who is shocked or awe struck must have been asleep for the last eight years. What we're seeing is the same old Trump cycle of brag, blame, and cut. How about we call it the "Musk/Trump Crime Wave"?
This is so spot on and exactly what an effective opposition would do. Why is it so hard for the Democrats to do this right now? It has been used against them often enough— think back to Newt Gingrich in the mid90s.
Gingrich was a master at communication. Smart AF, he could see around corners. Why are the evil ones always so good at it?
I will share this,but without the picture of Stallone who is apparently one of Trumps blessed.
I changed the photo!
Thank you!