Book Review

Don’t Think of an Elephant:  Know Your Values and Frame the Debate

by

George Lakoff

          In 119 small pages George Lakoff provides thinkers a guide for understanding how the framing of values influences political action, especially voting.  Lakoff helps readers see why having reason and facts on our side is not enough to persuade people who hold deeply entrenched notions about issues like taxes, choice for women, and same-sex marriage.

          Central to the process of framing issues is a grasp of how conservatives and progressives differ in their views about concepts such as “family,” “marriage,” and “taxes.”  By manipulating minds, clever conservatives like right-wing pollster/consultant, Frank Luntz; Master Manipulator, Karl Rove; and hundreds of others in positions of influence, have managed to influence many voters to support conservative, ideological positions.

          Frames are not just words carefully chosen to obtain a particular reaction.  Frames are structures in the brain.  They exist because of conditioning – reinforcement over time through experience or “brainwashing” by those who influence our physical and cognitive development.  Through language we access frames.  Frames lead us to consider purchasing one product instead of another.  Frames affect our decisions about what is ethical or moral.  Frames determine how voters choose candidates to support and vote for in elections.  Frames are powerful constructs that determine how we think and feel.

          Conservatives recently have determined via surveys that the phrase “personal accounts” is more acceptable to U. S. voters than the phrase “private accounts” or “privatization of Social Security.”  That is why recently all Republican spokespersons on television and in newspaper and magazine accounts have spoken in favor of “personal accounts.”  Although Alan Greenspan consistently used the term, “private accounts” during a recent hearing on Capitol Hill, the Republican legislators who were questioning him responded repeatedly with “personal accounts.”  Many even used that phrase several times in one sentence.  By frequent repetition of their agreed-upon term, Republicans are framing their campaign to replace the U. S. Social Security Insurance System with investment accounts.  They are united in this propagandistic strategy.  Sen. Grassley accidentally let slip the “private accounts” phrase while being interviewed on “Washington Journal” (on C-Span) in early March.  Before the words had left his mouth, he quickly corrected himself with “uhh.. ‘personal accounts’.”  It’s impressive to see how absolutely “on script” the Republicans are when speaking about Social Security.  How and why this happens is described clearly throughout Lakoff’s book.

          Lakoff spends a considerable amount of print explicating the deep-seated frames that divide U. S. voters.  Among the most important to comprehend is the view of the nation as a family.  Conservatives tend to need and want a very strict father as leader.  This derives in part from Puritanism and the Judaeo-Christian tradition of the father’s role as master of the family.  He protects, defends, and punishes his wife and children as he deems best.  His word must not be questioned.  He has ultimate power over those in his household and, if he has status in the community, then his power extends even beyond his own family.

          Progressives, on the other hand, view the family as a unit in which both parents are nurturing, attempting to lead their children to become responsible, caring persons.  These two different essential frames regarding how families are structured and how they best operate influence many aspects of political and social activity. 

          Regarding “choice” for women about decisions affecting their own bodies, right-wing conservatives generally believe that if a young woman becomes pregnant outside of marriage, she should not abort but should have the child as a punishment for her sin or mistake.  If an older woman determines that she is not able financially or mentally to cope with more children but becomes pregnant, then she should bear the child regardless.  In that way she cannot put her career or her own personal sanity ahead of the life of a fetus.  She must remain subservient to the man who rules the home or to a male-dominated society.  Right-wing conservatives tend to follow the “strict father” principle in social and political decision-making.

          Progressives, however, place a much greater emphasis on how a baby is treated throughout the entire process of its development.  First of all, prevention of unwanted pregnancies is important so that all babies will be wanted by their parents.  Then throughout pregnancy mothers should be provided with excellent pre-natal care so that their newborns will enter the world in good health.  As the infant develops, its parents will need help with parenting.  Programs to provide coaching for new parents and ongoing help to reduce child abuse and domestic violence have been drastically reduced under the Republican-controlled Congress.  After school programs that were previously funded by the

U. S. Government have been cut – probably so that “faith-based” organizations will pick up the slack.  Those religious groups (which also tend to follow the strict father doctrine) will then lean toward the conservatives in power, thus adding even more strength and power to the far-right power base.

          So how can framing help to change this state of affairs?  Lakoff proposes that we learn ways to communicate with those who hold in their brains both views of the world, both the strict father and the nurturing parent.  Most people are capable of perceiving both models; they just tend to practice one more than the other and actually vary their behaviors according to situations.  (As a teacher, one may be strict when interacting with students, but may be quite nurturing at home with her children; or the opposite may occur.)  Four essential guidelines are these:  1) Show respect, 2) Respond by re-framing, 3) Think and talk at the level of values, and 4) Say what you believe.

          At the Rockridge Institute in Berkeley , California , Lakoff and his associates work with groups and individuals who are seeking more effective tools for achieving Progressive political and social goals.  In previous books (Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think, 1996, U. of Chicago Press; Metaphors We Live By, 2003, U. of Chicago Press; and several other academic studies of language), Lakoff provided in-depth analyses of linguistic phenomena.  In Don’t Think of An Elephant, Lakoff presents a comprehensive, yet concise and compelling tool for using frames that will help us re-connect with the scores of people who want ultimately the same things that Progressives want:  honesty in government, safety and security, protection of privacy rights, protection of civil liberties, and healthy lives with the families that we cherish.   

Review by Rebecca Wolfe

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information please review Title 17, Sec. 107 of the U.S. Code. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

privacy policy

© 2002- 2008  OLDAmericanCentury.org and OLDAmericanCentury.com