The ALL NEW Don't Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate

Good analysis of what the Democratic Party keeps getting wrong.

Professor George Lakoff is the democrat's equivalent of the GOP's Frank Luntz. We may have won the election with Biden and the two Georgia senators giving us the edge, but the decades long investment the Republicans have put in to their messaging style (framing the issues)( and word choices runs circles around the Democrats' attention to this.The first twenty pages are worth it. Reaally. Lakoff retired a few years ago from Cal Berkeley, ,and does not seem current on his FB page, but you can get an idea of his theories on his FB page or other postings.This is a revision of the 2004 book. I read it then and felt I needed to really get this concept.I only wish Lakoff were posting, what with the uprising of QAnon and other conspiracy movements. I have a hunch right now (early Feb 2021), that these whack jobs have bushwacked even the savvy Republicans and all their careful coordinated messaging and propaganda. What would Lakoff have to say NOW!?

My friend Cliff Pearson said this was the most important book on American politics I could possibly read. I am grateful to him for introducing it to me but my praise thereof is not unqualified.Author George Lakoff is convinced that people's attitudes on political or social issues are fixed long before they can participate in politics by their perception of what works in their families of origin. Conservatives see the world through a "strict father" mentality; liberals see it through a "nurturant parent" mentality.I have two objections (related to each other) to this frame. I think it works for social conservatism but not necessarily for economic conservatism. (Lakoff's separate observation that the different types/emphases of conservatism re-enforce each other is of course entirely correct but that is not what I am trying to say.) Everyone knows that the period 1933-1968 was much more socially conservative than contemporary America, but it was also more economically LIBERAL. People could not vote four times for Franklin Roosevelt while believing in the super-rich as the rightful "fathers" of the American economy (unless they voted for Roosevelt because he WAS super-rich). Libertarianism is a form of anti-authoritarianism (or at the very least CAN be blended with it) and is doing better today when fathers are less strict.My second objection to the "strict father" as the essence of conservative thought is that most fathers try to be BOTH strict and nurturing. Lakoff partially anticipated this complaint by observing that many people are what he calls "biconceptual." If biconceptualism had the sort of political impact he thinks it does, however, there should be many more swing voters. Of course, it does neatly explain how many people voted for Obama twice and then Trump.This is probably because both Obama and Trump were better FRAMERS of the issues they wanted to talk about than Hillary Clinton was. (Of course, we shouldn't rule out sexism as a factor in both of her Presidential defeats, which ALSO doesn't mean she was the BEST candidate both times.) The essence of Lakoff's argument is that the liberal or conservative way of talking about an issue looks like common sense, or doesn't, based on how many IDEAS each side is able to get into more people's heads. This is what Lakoff means by "frames."Lakoff might not be right about everything, but still, every progressive should read this book. The best chapters are 9-11, the last of which goes beyond poetry to become a classic. Chapter 14 could easily be re-worked and made into the 2020 Democratic platform, especially if Elizabeth Warren is the nominee (she is the only person still in politics whom Lakoff mentions by name and I assume he is a major force in her campaign). Even some biconceptual people could be made into committed progressives if they read the book. Four stars.

Having read the 2004 edition of this book, this is a significant improvement. Given the progress that radical conservatism has made over the past 10 years, perhaps Dr. Lakoff needs a third edition to address where we are today (in 2024) and give progressives even more of a roadmap to push back. Progressives have lost even more ground since 2014, mostly because of the strict father frame that authoritarian thinking is built around.

I hope the right people read this book and take its lessons to heart. Lakoff's work on framing is an extremely important explanation for why progressives have been losing out to conservatives, even while progressives share the opinions and desires of the majority of Americans. As frustrating as that has been, Lakoff has explained it in scientific terms. Enlightening. If you are a progressive; if politics are of interest to you, even as nothing more than conversation at the dinner table; if societal issues interest you, especially if you are frustrated with the way this country selects its political leaders and by the direction Congress is taking this country, you must read this book. It is a quick read, so there is no excuse not to.

The Delivery was excellent, the company that shipped me the book was very fast and awesome.The Book itself: Quite intriguing on how the book itself "frames" it's own beliefs. The book takes conservative believes way out of context. Mis-applies James Dobson positions and creates it's own system out of a misunderstood position. But, again, the book is practicing what it preaches. The author is using his own framework to create a position that he believes is legitimate. So, well done there. I find it interesting how he calls the conservative beliefs strict and those strict self reliant beliefs lead to success, when most conservatives believe that immoral people are those who are with the most money at this point in history. Also, the author speaks of the liberal position as "progressive;" framing the idea that the liberal position is progressing in a positive light, when in reality, it's not.