By Rick Gordon
Cow Manure is Shit, or cow dung or even bull shit. You wanna buy some bullshit ? Many people know that's exactly what you're buying when you purchase manure and fertilizer, and many people know that's exactly what many politiciians are peddling - pure bullshit. When properly framed, as manure, it's a viable product.
Psychological research shows us just how powerful framing can be, and how consistently unaware we are of it being used against us.
Framing proves that people will have a much different reaction to an idea if it's given the correct 'spin'. Advertising professionals and propagandists have to possess a clear and concise knowledge and understanding of framing to successfully spin their dogma. The implications of framing is that our decisions and opinions are based more on our predetermined attitudes and biases rather than factual evidence.
The 2016 presidential election offerred a wealth of psychological data demonstrating how our reasoning and logic processing faculties can be subverted when information is properly framed.
Donald Trump was selected as the Republican nominee against all odds, the left wings socialists and progressives were chuckling to themselves believeing they had just been handed the presidency - they all knew and many utterred the famous last words "Donald Trump would never be President"
Cognitive scientist George Lakoff, a socialist and one time member of the progressive think tank,'Rockridge Institute' became alarmed as he watched Trumps rhetoric and followed his campaign. The Donald knew how to frame things and present his case, a tactic the left thought they had a monopoly on.
As a respected cognitive scientist Lakoff was well aware of the power of framing and how to execute it. The Trump phenomenon gave him goosebumps and simultaneous nausea. He penned an article “Understanding Trump” that detailed the methodology that Trump had stolen from the left, in which some say your 'brain is used against you'. Every member of the Clinton Team got a copy but paid it little heed, they thought their dirty tricks department would bag the white house for the Hildabeast.
Lakoffs expertise in how framing influences reasoning, or HOW the way we say something is often more important than WHAT we say. Democrats have used his research on ways to better frame their shifting agendas. His advice for Democrats is outlined in his book Don't Think of an Elephant! . The title conveys a primary concept of his thesis. By negating a frame, you strengthen that very same frame. Basically when you say “don’t think of an elephant,” an elephant is the first thing that comes to mind... you actually visualize it.
Lakoff also theorized that Trumps constantly repeating his pet names for opponents such as “Crooked Hillary” or 'Lying Ted' reinforced a particular frame, subconsciously causing the public to view her as "Crooked', never mind that the facts clearly demonstrate that 'crooked' is exactly what she is.
Lakoff urged the Democrats to follow a strict regimented strategy similar to Trump's. Continuosly and repetitively repeat your position both outright and with metaphors in order to reinforce them in the publics mind. And most certainly, at all costs avoid repeating Trump’s claims.
The Clintonians did not follow Lakoffs advise much at all in this campaign, and when they did it was poorly executed and could not match the growing Trump momentum.
The 2016 presidential election clearly demonstrated how framing plays a pivotal role in our cognitive reasoning. It is also the first time that a right wing candidate has successfully used it against the left. After 2016 'Framing' was no longer an exclusive left wing tool.
Another example of framing is in the LGBTQ realm and their infiltration of the classroom.
The 'tolerance and anti-bullying' crusades provided a trojan horse for gay activists to infiltate the education system, it was a path to classroom indoctrination. Kevin Jennings, a Gay Teacher and the Obama 'safe school czar' is credited with following statement ... 'If the radical right can succeed in portraying us as preying on children, we will lose. Their language .... is laced with subtle and not-so-subtle innuendo that we are after their kids' He then went on to propose a strategy of how they could get at our kids which included a campaign of framing the debate using tolerance and anti-bullying as a tool to get their foot in the door.
The strategy involves linking gays to universal values that all members of society share. Basically to latch onto tolerance, diversity, safety, and peaceful coexistence amongst children of many variations - which is a good thing. Anybody who objected to the LGBTQ planned indoctrination would be heretofore be labeled a heartless bully, a homophobic demon with a complete disregard for children and students.
'This framing short-circuited their arguments [heterosexuals] and left them back-pedaling from day one, .... No one could speak up against our frame and say, Why, yes, I do think students should kill themselves , This allowed us to set the terms for debate.' - Kevin Jennings
Research shows the Right and Left wingers tend to have a different set of values and moral foundations. Leftwingers, the rank and file anyway, tend to view themselves as enlightened torch bearers, illuminators of the future struggling against oppression and the oppression of others. They view those who oppose or disagree with them as ignorant throwbacks to a more primitive version of man, brutes and barbarians to be kept outside the gate. Lefties tend to have a more cynical worldview and are highly critical of all aspects of western society seeking constant change to satiate their never ending lust for fulfillment of their ego.
Rightwingers tend to view themselves in a more wholesome light, as members of a community / society / nation. This conservative view is looked down upon by the left as 'tribalism' which is one of many reasons why the border debate in the era of Trump has grown so momentus.
People of either side will tend to frame political arguments in terms of their own values, but when arguing with those from the other side, it is much more effective to frame your argument in terms of their values.
In the environmental realm, rightwingers view global warming as a charade executed against them by the left to suppress American and Western exceptionalism. The argument is not without merit. Left wingers however will emphasize whatever recent Al-Gore genre skewered 'research' is trending at the moment. Global warming, be it real or a hoax as many believe, is not served well by the steady trove of faux facts the left presents. This is one argument they have failed to properly frame.
Referenced
Metaphors We Think With: The Role of Metaphor in Reasoning
