NOT a purple Dean Nation
Two of Aziz's posts this week generated a bit of a dust-up in the comments (Divider not a uniter, and Defuse the demonization cycle). It seems to me that this shows a bit of a "red-blue split" here in Dean Nation, and one that can be explained by by George Lakoff's concept of framing. Further, this might help us all understand the red-blue split in the country a bit better.
The dust-up stemmed from Dean's use of the name "Slobodan Milosovic" in connection with his description of techniques which Bush used in winning the election. For some people, "Slobodan Milosovic" evokes a strong, dominating frame of a demon, Bush is obviously not a demon, so the facts of what the rest of what Dean said did not fit that frame. For others, the frame was not evoked, and we just saw a very loose analogy between types of techniques used. (Actually, Dean inadvertantly created a NEW frame, and if repeated and repeated then the words "Slobodan Milosovic" would not invoke a demon frame but a "sleazy Republican tactics" frame... this is not to say it is a GOOD frame, it probably isn't.)
I'm currently reading Lakoff's book. It is quite interesting and explains why (1) elections are decided by voters who vote their identity (not necessarily their interests), (2) how "truth will NOT set you free" (explaining what blue/red staters see as "the facts" will not convince red/blue staters of anything, because facts are useless without frames to stick to), and (3) how DLC-like "moving to the right" is absolute suicide for Democrats. Among a lot of other things.
Maybe I'll post more here as I read the book. But I encourage others to get it. Also, much of it is excerpted on the Rockridge Institute site, which is definitely worth a browse. Your first impression might be that it sounds a little new-agey (e.g. strict father v.s. nurturing parent worldviews), but there is a lot of substance there.
UPDATE (Aziz): Moved the bulk of the post to the Extended Entry. Preserve front-page real-estate!
The dust-up stemmed from Dean's use of the name "Slobodan Milosovic" in connection with his description of techniques which Bush used in winning the election. For some people, "Slobodan Milosovic" evokes a strong, dominating frame of a demon, Bush is obviously not a demon, so the facts of what the rest of what Dean said did not fit that frame. For others, the frame was not evoked, and we just saw a very loose analogy between types of techniques used. (Actually, Dean inadvertantly created a NEW frame, and if repeated and repeated then the words "Slobodan Milosovic" would not invoke a demon frame but a "sleazy Republican tactics" frame... this is not to say it is a GOOD frame, it probably isn't.)
I'm currently reading Lakoff's book. It is quite interesting and explains why (1) elections are decided by voters who vote their identity (not necessarily their interests), (2) how "truth will NOT set you free" (explaining what blue/red staters see as "the facts" will not convince red/blue staters of anything, because facts are useless without frames to stick to), and (3) how DLC-like "moving to the right" is absolute suicide for Democrats. Among a lot of other things.
Maybe I'll post more here as I read the book. But I encourage others to get it. Also, much of it is excerpted on the Rockridge Institute site, which is definitely worth a browse. Your first impression might be that it sounds a little new-agey (e.g. strict father v.s. nurturing parent worldviews), but there is a lot of substance there.
UPDATE (Aziz): Moved the bulk of the post to the Extended Entry. Preserve front-page real-estate!
Comments