George Lakoff nails it on the head

[Lorien]

As cognitive psychologist George Lakoff told me: “Democrats moving to the middle is a double disaster that alienates the party’s progressive base while simultaneously sending a message to swing voters that the other side is where the good ideas are.” It unconsciously locks in the notion that the other side’s positions are worth moving toward, while your side’s positions are the ones to move away from. Plus every time you move to the center, the right just moves further to the right.

From: http://www.ariannaonline.com/columns/column.php?id=748

[itzamirakul]

1. My feelings, exactly! n/t

[sam sarrha]

2. he is one of todays greatest minds... check out his other stuff

[ScrewyRabbit]

3. Metaphors We Live By

...was one of the most intellectually inspiring books I ever read.

[Lorien]

5. Does he have a website?

what all has he written?

[madfloridian]

6. Here is the Rockridge Institute website.

http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/

He has written several books. There is a lot about him at the NOW site at PBS.

His latest is "Don't Think of an Elephant".

[G_j]

4. think about it...... n/t

[mattclearing]

7. Insert "DLC is trojan horse Republican infiltrator" comment here.

It's almost too depressing for words.

[Lorien]

9. Odd that none have shown up so far

but then again, it's hard to argue with Lakoff's logic.

[welshTerrier2]

8. political spectrums: a place for ostriches to hide

much has been written about Democrats moving to the right ... presumably, this means that by adopting positions on issues that have been supported by moderate republicans, Democrats can make inroads into the republican base ...

but the model is too simplistic to be useful because it does not reflect the real thinking of many of those who vote republican ...

let's look specifically at three traditionally republican voting blocks ... anti-abortion fundies, strong pro-gun voters and those who favor massive buildups in America's military capacities ...

what positions can Democrats take that will steal single issue anti-abortion voters back? where is the move to the right that will make a difference in which party these voters support?

what positions can Democrats take to win back the gung (gun?) ho crowd? even with John Kerry running around shooting ducks, the republicans own the issue ...

what positions can Democrats take to outspend the republicans on defense and ignore the importance of diplomacy to the extent the republicans have done? our deficits are destroying the power and effectiveness of the U.S. government and its ability to do the best possible job for the American people ... calling for big star wars systems, massive mobilization or a draft or more warfare to "protect" the country is not a sane policy ...

for thirty years now, republicans have effectively built a coalition (i.e. demagogued) between the "fat cat" corporatists (the old republican party) and anti-abortionists, pro gun and pro military ... we often question why people in these last three groups vote republican against their own economic interests ... can't they see the class war waged by the "fat cats" is targeting them ... what ever happened to the importance of the "pocketbook" issues?

moving to the right will not address the interests of these voters ... the only hope for Democrats to reach these "nouveau" republicans is to make a more effective case for how the class war hurts them ... you don't do this by moving to the right ... it will accomplish nothing ... the path for Democrats is a pro worker agenda ... the path for Democrats is an agenda that returns wealth and financial security to average Americans who are being hurt by the pro-corporate policies of the republicans ...

if Democrats are afraid to acknowledge that the U.S. government has been bought and paid for and that our institutions are failing us, the Democratic Party will grow weaker and weaker ... we are in a class war but most "leading" Democrats have shown no leadership on the issue ... looking at the political spectrum for solutions to our current deficiencies is ostrich politics at its very worst ...

[Lorien]

10. Yes, pro-worker and pro-environment

(75% of Americans call themselves "environmentalists"). Over 60% of Americans favor a woman's right to choose, so we shouldn't budge there.Dems never did embrace the gun hugging, bedwetting, paranoid nutjobs in the NRA (we have, instead, supported "radical" notions like locks on guns that would prevent kids from killing themselves and others, as a friend's 5 year old son did years ago). To DLC dems, being pro-war means being "tough". Hell, "tough" to me would be calling a spade a spade; the invasion of Iraq was based on a pack of lies. Our soldiers are dying for oil and reconstruction profits, and our tax dollars are being spent only to line the pockets of profiteers in the military industrial complex. There's NOTHING "pro-military" about any of it! If dems want to look "tough". they'll point this out once in awhile instead of meekly "supporting the pResident" and the lie that is "supporting the troops" (by supporting the lie that sent them there to kill and die)!

Sadly, our Dem leadership is bought and paid for, just like the opposition (though maybe not to the same degree) which is probably one of the reasons that it's getting harder and harder to tell the two apart!

[Nordic]

11. I keep hearing about this guy. He sounds brilliant

We need to hire him.

He's got the kind of ideas we MUST have.

[auburngrad82]

12. Check out the "Frame the Debate" DU Group

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=252

There's a lot there about Lakoff and framing.

[Lorien]

13. Thanks auburngrad62!

I'll check it out. :hi: