I had a brainstorm on the way home today concerning taking back our language versus framing. It's about the word I used as the title of this entry. It's a scary word to progressives; it brings to mind fire-and-brimstone religious views and reactionary politics.

I want this word back. This is exactly the word that I need to summarize what I mean by Get Back to Basics. When talking about religion, fundamentalists are disrespectfully known as "Bible thumpers" because they wish to revert to their original source - a book. Well, I'm a Constitution thumper. That means that when talking about politics, I am a fundamentalist because I wish to revert to my original source - a document.

I think this nation has gone so far to the right that those who are actually in the political center are considered radical. I believe the political center of this nation is most accurately defined by the Constitution. I propose that the left be left (!) to the radicals. I also maintain that a "progressive" is a person who believes in progress, and therefore the term "progressive" does not denote a position on the political spectrum at all, even though the connotation in the current political climate is that a progressive is a leftist.

I propose that we restore dignity to the political center by developing our list of values from those expressed in the Constitution (as amended). This approach is used in Article I (Findings) in the DoP Bill. In doing so, we will become fundamentalists in the true sense of the word. So far, I am a Constitutional Fundamentalist. However, after careful reading, we may find that we hold values not listed in the Constitution. That's okay; we can add them to the list and mature into Progressive Fundamentalists.

I want my language back. I want my country back. I believe most people today don't even know that their rights are being violated because they are ignorant of the rights GUARANTEED to them by the Constitution - the document that, as amended over the years, expresses the true mandate of our government. I know I could use some review of just what that mandate is and what rights are guaranteed to us.

The connection between rights and values should be clear. I'm not sure I completely understand Lakoff's distinction between concepts/ideas and values, but from what I do understand, it is clear to me that the values must be primary since votes are cast with respect to values. I'm not entirely convinced that Lakoff's distinction is necessary to the development of progressive rhetoric. Let our positively-framed progressive rhetoric spring up like a brainstorm and spread like wildfire. (My apologies to Southern California for the imagery.) "If you build it, they will come."

In other words, it doesn't take a deep understanding of Lakoff's esoteric theory - interesting as it is to those of us who understand it - to define a list of values and find ways to express them that resonate with our core. For example, I'm still using "...address the propeace agenda." I don't know how the framing of that phrase would stand up to Lakoff's analysis, but I do know that people pay attention! The only value expressed there is the basic one for our campaign - peace - and that is a calm value. It is the strong, active verb (address) and the powerful noun (agenda) that draw attention to the benign value word that's hidden in the adjective.

I'll close with another simple, well-known, traditional rhetorical ploy (new euphemism for propaganda) with very little theoretical baggage: repetition. That's what I mean by "take back our language" - one word at a time if necessary. That's what I mean by Get Back to Basics. That's what I mean by Progressive Fundamentalism.

"Blue in a Red State"

Here are some notes about the information from Jason’s blog entry on the workshop with Lakoff concerning framing.

Definitions:

Framing - using short phrases to evoke ideas and connect to values. (I would add that the vocabulary should be simple without sacrificing depth. This is difficult, but remember that we only rank 49th in the world in literacy.)

Core Values - empathy, responsibility, strength, protection, fairness, fulfillment, freedom, opportunity, prosperity, community, service, cooperation, trust, honesty, and open communication. (Given the examples below, this list is not exhaustive – but it’s a start!)

Examples:

How do we use framing to counter the far right’s rhetoric on “tax relief?” Concept: tax base. Value: prosperity. Frame: “prosperous tax base.” Critique: The Concept is long-standing and clearly understood. The Value is well documented.

Concept: terrorism. Values: compassion, community. Frame: “Don’t forsake compassion and community in developing a balanced response to acts of desperation.” Critique: On the positive side, I was glad to see the word “compassion” used instead of “empathy” since the latter has paranormal connotations. However, it is too long, and it starts with a negative while we are trying to evolve from anti- to pro-. “Balanced response” is too abstract; it smacks of intellectualism as much as the phrase “organizing principle” that appears in the DoP bill itself. Positive Progressive Propaganda: “Foster compassion and build community to defeat terrorism.” The ideas can be rearranged: “To defeat terrorism, foster compassion and build community.” This can be shortened further into a bumper sticker: “Defeat terrorism: Foster compassion, build community.”

Concept: privacy. Value: dignity (not on the Core list above). Frame: “Privacy is essential for preserving human dignity.” Critique: I would give this one second prize in spite of the weak verb. “To preserve” is such a fine strong verb; use it as such. The word “human” is extraneous and the statement violates the brevity principle with its awkward construction. Things start to get fuzzy here, too. Is privacy a Concept or a Value? Positive Progressive Propaganda: “Privacy preserves dignity,” or “Dignity requires privacy.”

Concept: environment. Value: safety (not on the Core list above; maybe we can subsume this one under "protection"). I’d like to add “children” to the list of Core Values, but only if we also add “elders” and “parents” and …. What I’m really saying is what I’ve said before: We must take back our language! We are talking about “family” here, but somehow we’ve conceded the term “family values” to the far right. Frame: “We are in a unique position as humans to provide a safe and clean future for our children.” Critique: This one gets the booby prize! “Unique” is a sorely tired and often inappropriately used word – like here, for example. What is unique about our position as humans is that we are the only species that can consciously and swiftly manipulate environments, and therefore change entire ecosystems. That whole phrase addresses neither the Concept nor the Value(s) and is responsible for the gross violation of the brevity principle. Furthermore, the juxtaposition of “future” and “children” is semantically empty. Would we provide a future for our ancestors? I realize that politicians have found much kudos in kissing babies, so it’s probably a good idea to keep the word “children.” But why not use the word “environment” instead of “future?” That names the Concept clearly, while “a safe and clean future” could mean an expensive modern house with a good alarm system. I would add clarity as a criterion for successful framing. Positive Progressive Propaganda: “Our children deserve a safe and clean environment.”

Concept: cause and effect? Values: knowledge (not on the Core list above), open communication. Frame: “My knowledge is a direct result of the freedom of expression of others.” Critique: Is knowledge a Concept or a Value? Despite the fuzziness and the weak verb, this frame gets first prize. The beauty of this piece of rhetoric is the way it illustrates another value that’s missing from the Core list above: reciprocity. I love the way it starts and ends with opposite pronouns. Positive Progressive Propaganda: “My knowledge comes from the freedom of expression of others,” or if we sacrifice that wonderful pronoun placement for a stronger verb, “The freedom of expression of others feeds my knowledge.”

Concept: information. Values: strength, open communication. Frame: “Strength through an informed public.” Critique: The Concept is not clearly tied to the Value, possibly because this is the only frame that is not a complete sentence. Perhaps in this example brevity is taken too far. I’m not sure what to think about the relationship between open communication, a Core Value, and an informed public. The former looks like freedom to me, and the latter more like authoritarianism. Or, I might be misunderstanding completely. Maybe the Concept is supposed to be “the public” and “information” is being used as a synonym for “knowledge” and this has nothing to do with open communication after all. It’s not a bad bumper sticker, though. Positive Progressive Propaganda: “An informed public strengthens our nation.”

Suggestions from my own experience and training:

Use as many strong transitive verbs in the active voice as possible. The first can be accomplished most easily by avoiding forms of the verb “to be” as a main verb. The best legitimate use of this verb is for purposes of definition, like an equal sign. Obviously, its occasional use as an auxiliary is necessary. To accomplish effective use of the active voice, we must unlearn the lessons we were taught in grade school about avoiding all but the third person. This restriction is only appropriate in writing scholarly essays or for scientific journals and is anathema to effective speaking. Please go back to the examples of Positive Progressive Propaganda and notice the strong verbs.

Don’t be shy about using words with negative connotations if they have been frequently used recently, like “terrorism.” There is a phenomenon called “semantic satiation” that causes “acts of desperation” to sound even scarier! To fully understand this phenomenon in its extreme form, take a clearly concrete noun like “butter” and say it about 40 times in a row. By the time you finish, the word will have no meaning.

I "get it," but I'm not sure this model is of much use to the politician in a debate setting because it is too complex. I still think we'd be better served by a simple collection of catchy phrases, buzz words, and irrefutable positions so that it would be easier for our candidates to "think on their feet" instead of having to rely entirely on speech writers, cue cards, etc. There is value in spontaneity.

I'm also unclear exactly what is meant by a Core Value. My confusion stems from the things I think of as Values that actually came up in the examples but were absent from the list. Another confusing thing is that it was often difficult to determine what was a Value and what was a Concept. My favorite examples here are knowledge and community.

I have already added simplicity and clarity to Lakoff's requirements for brevity, evocativity, and connection. One further consideration is rhythm, and that has a lot to do with avoiding complex syntax. Grammatical complexity causes cracking, warping, distorting, or even shattering of the frame, an uncomfortable tongue-tied feeling for the speaker, an impression of intellectual snobbishness on the part of the audience, and difficulty following a sentence from its beginning to its end resulting in an experience of frustration and lack of comprehension by the audience. Rhythm, on the other hand, introduces symmetry and style while facilitating delivery by the speaker and comprehension by the audience. Perhaps it would be a good idea for our candidates to study with rap artists. (My tongue is only halfway into my cheek with that suggestion!)

Disclaimer: I have not yet read Lakoff’s book, although I did read an interview with him about it. I did not attend the workshop, either.

(But I "get it.")

After reading the 1870 proclamation in full, I didn't find that any of the summaries or excerpts quite captured the substance without sacrificing the flavor of her words. Here is my version, including updated punctuation:

"…Say firmly: ‘We will not have great questions answered by irrelevant agencies; our husbands will not come to us reeking with carnage for caresses and applause. Our sons shall not be taken from us to unlearn all that we have been able to teach them of charity, mercy, and patience….’ From … a devastated Earth a voice goes up…. It says: ‘Disarm! Disarm! The sword of murder is not the balance of justice.’ Blood does not wipe out dishonor, nor violence indicate possession…. Let women … bewail and commemorate the dead [and] take counsel with each other as to the means whereby the great human family can live in peace…. In the name of womanhood and humanity, I earnestly ask … that a general congress … may be appointed … to promote the alliance of the different nationalities, the amicable settlement of international questions, [and] the great and general interests of peace."

Far be it from me to suggest a problem without proposing a solution. I think I've come up with a Pledge that everyone can live with. It goes beyond the FLAG and the REPUBLIC (which word I've replaced with "nation," since I'm not sure I understand the connotations of the R word) to include the rights and responsibilities of citizens. Even though it's a bit longer than the current version, I think that breaking it into three sentences makes it simpler to understand and learn - even for children and immigrants. The beauty of the wording of that third sentence is that it even promises that US citizens living or working elsewhere will abide by the laws of their host countries while at the same time giving a head-nod to states' rights. What do you think?

"I pledge allegiance to the United States of America. I pledge respect for the ceremonies that honor this nation’s flag. I pledge to uphold and protect its Constitution and Amendments, including the Bill of Rights, and any other Laws that pertain to the place I call home."

How's this for a patriotic song? The tune should be obvious.

Purple America

Purple America, land that I love -
Stand beside her, and guide her
Through the night with a light from above.
From the mountains to the prairies
To the oceans white with foam
Purple America, my home sweet home.
Purple America, my home sweet home.

"Blue in a Red State"