Following Matt's exposure of GOP cointelpro in West Seattle and at The Stranger, comes news of infiltration at unsound institution Foolproof Performing Arts. In a move meant to misdirect local Democrats, Foolproof will host George Lakoff for two nights in June. From their announcement:
Lakoff seeks to transform the political debate, revitalizing progressive discourse by reframing progressive policies in ways that speak to shared American values. Conservatives have already realized that individual issues need to be linked to an overall moral and ethical perspective. They have seen how issues fit together and they have created a language of conservatism that reflects their values. In the process, they have appropriated fundamental American virtues, such as freedom and compassion, and have given them conservative definitions. They have trained their advocates, policymakers, and media spokespersons in the use of this language to move public discourse in a conservative direction. They have successfully reframed issue after issue to make their language the everyday language of much of America. Lakoff’s American Voices appearance will be one step toward reframing the political debate, reclaiming progressive values, and exploring the shared values among very different progressive organizations.The argument is basically that conservatives' success is based on "reframing the political debate" rather than anything substantive. By encouraging progressives to waste time reframing their old ideas rather than generating new ones, Foolproof opens space for Republicans to make electoral gains.
A forum in May confirms this strategy. The title of Mainstream or Extreme: The Future of the Republican Party gives it away. A party which controls the presidency and both houses of Congress could only be considered mainstream. But by focusing progressives on how "extreme" the GOP is, Foolproof convinces them there is plenty of time for navel-gazing "reframing." A few more events like this, and Foolproof can keep Democrats distracted until the election.
Posted by Andy MacDonald at April 07, 2005 03:55 PM | Email ThisDarn. Missed the last harmonic convergence, too.
Don't change anything, just reframe it.
A lose-lose proposition except in Seattle.
Posted by: Norm on April 7, 2005 04:53 PMSeriously, in Washington, we have a long history of Populist Politics. We have a very strong Grange Movement, Initiative process, anti-big business (that sometimes become pro-union), and prefer a local government approach to things.
If you look at the members of the "Republican Party" who have done well in state-wide elections or federal elections (Rossi, Evans, Slade Gorton, Sam Reed, Rob MaKennea, Doc Hastings, Nethercut, etc.) they all either have Populist aspects to them or are liberals or RINO's.
As such the Republicans in this state might want to take a refresher course on reframing issues to a Populist perspective with emphasis on consevative values and approaches.
Not a bad idea
Posted by: Bob on April 7, 2005 05:41 PMLooks like we're going to be doing fine for quite awhile, nationally.
Posted by: Michele on April 7, 2005 05:59 PMThat is a good idea. Whichever party decides to represent the populist approach on issues such as illegal aliens, tax favors to big business, abusive public service unions (e.g. WEA), and incompetent government schools could own this state politically for years to come.
But you are suggesting a radically different approach than the Foolproof folks. This would be substantive change. Lakoff's flawed notion is that the problem is poor spin on the leftist message. Not a need for substantive change to the authoritarian/anti-democratic/anti-US platforms of the left. Even with the active support of the MSM, these platforms don't have general support. As a result, the lefty radicals find themselves becoming more marginalized every year.
When Foolproof, Lakoff and others figure this out, the pendulum will swing the other direction. Sometimes I wonder if the model for the new, new, left will be more like the writers at The Stranger; gutsy enough to publish Hitchens and Stefan, often opposed to the usual pork barrel & authoritarian politics, and overall less afraid of coopting ideas from ideological opponents.
Posted by: iconoclast on April 8, 2005 07:45 AMThese people believe their political opponents to be ignorant, stupid, sheep more interested in their personal comforts than any other thing, not even able to decide what is best for themselves. Amongst themselves, they freely admit these offensive opions.
But when a elitist politician spoke to an audience of like-minded people (say at Columbia U), saying lots of outrageous things, the MSM usually does not report it. Why? Is there no news value in outrageous statements made by politicians?
Well, these days, when such a thing happens, the news DOES get out and people do get to hear what these elitists truly believe about the rest of the human race.
Don't any progressives wonder why conservatives freely quote what progressives say, sometimes at great length?
Posted by: Bostonian on April 8, 2005 08:56 AMAnyway, what I am saying is that the cat is out of the bag now. It is no longer possible for progressives and Democrats to hide the elitists in their ranks.
It's an uphill battle trying to convince a guy to vote for you when you've already told him you think he's a moron.
Posted by: Bostonian on April 8, 2005 08:59 AMhttp://wsunews.wsu.edu/detail.asp?StoryID=5123
Posted by: Patrick E. Bell on April 9, 2005 04:12 PMIt's just like when a foreigner doesn't understand you, so you shout louder.
The voters don't agree with our views? They must not understand them. We need to explain it again, more slowly, with simpler words.
Posted by: Clint on April 11, 2005 09:04 AM