"Why should the American people trust somebody who does not have clear values?"

[ClassWarrior]

"The very idea that there is a 'center' marginalizes progressives, and sees them as extremists, when they simply share fundamental American values. The term 'center' suggests there is a 'mainstream' where most people are and that there is a single set of views held by that mainstream. That is false.

"The fallacy matters in terms of Democratic electoral strategy. The Democratic base consists of people who are mostly or totally progressive, just as the Republican base consists of people who are mostly or totally conservative. How does the Democratic Party as a whole, and how do Democratic candidates in particular, speak to those who are biconceptual?

"I am a cognitive scientist and believe that people's brains play a significant role in elections. From the perspective of brain science, the answer is a no-brainer. (Sorry, I couldn't resist!) You speak to biconceptuals the same way you speak to your base: you discuss progressive values, and if you are talking to folks with both progressive and conservative values, you mainly talk about the issues where they share progressive values. What that does is evoke and strengthen the progressive values already there in the minds of biconceptuals...

"The losing strategy is to move to the right, to assume with Republicans that American values are mainly conservative and that the Democratic party has to move away from its base and adopt conservative values. When you do that, you help activate conservative values in people's brains (thus helping the other side), you offend your base (thus hurting yourself), and you give the impression that you are expressing no consistent set of values, which is true! Why should the American people trust somebody who does not have clear values, and who may be trying to deceive them about the values he and his party's base hold?..."

Read more at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/no-center-no-centrists_b_60419.html

NGU.

[ProSense]

1. Here's the link, article is from August 2007

No Center, No Centrists

<...>

Barack Obama has it right: Get rid of the very idea of the right and the left and the center. American ideas are fundamentally progressive ideas -- the ideas this country was founded on and that carry forth that spirit. Progressives care about people and the earth, and act with responsibility and strength on that care.

The progressive view of government is simple. Progressive government has two aspects: protection and empowerment. Protection is far more than the military, police, and fire departments. It includes consumer protection, worker protection, environmental protection, public health, food and drug safety; social security, and other safety nets. It also includes protection from the government itself, and hence a balance of powers, openness, fundamental rights, and so on.

Empowerment include roads and bridges; public education; government-developed communications like the internet and satellite communications systems; the banking system; the SEC and institutions that make a stock market possible, and the court system, mostly about contracts and corporate law. Progressive government makes business possible. No one makes any money in this country without the progressive empowerment by government. A progressive foreign policy is not based solely, or even mainly, on the state -- about the "national interest" defined as our military strength and GDP. Progressive foreign policy focuses on individual people's interests as well as national interests: on poverty, disease, refugees, education, women's and children's issues, public health, and so on.

These are simply American values. The progressive movement is a patriotic American movement. People who call themselves "centrists" share progressive views on important issue areas, but have conservative views on other major issue areas. The areas vary from person to person. There is no single moral perspective, no single set of agreed upon issues.

<...>

[ClassWarrior]

3. Yup, Candidate Obama had it right.

Thanks for the good link. Fixed in the OP.

NGU.

[truedelphi]

20. Where did that guy go? I clearly remember him.

I guess the only people that are allowed to run for office must have an evil twin - the "good" twin runs for office and acts all progressive-like. The good twin understands everything - that banks need to be regulated, that they have the ability to end a war upon a nation where no one did anything to us...

They understand the Public Option and they tout Universal Single Payer Health Care.

And then they are elected to office and put the same crowd of A__W__es into position. Including one Henry Kissinger, as an "adviser."

Where did candidate Obama go? What did President Obama do to him?

[ClassWarrior]

24. No kidding.

NGU.

[Go2Peace]

34. I am extremely familiar with George Lakoff's works and you are misrepresenting

Yes, he is saying to de-polarize, but you MUST replace the "frame" with new frames. That is the part that Obama and much of the Democratic leadership does not get.

[dipsydoodle]

2. The same justification

could be used by the rest of the world with reference to the USA.

[Tarheel_Dem]

4. Where's the evidence for this?.....

"The Democratic base consists of people who are mostly or totally progressive," :shrug:

According to this article, only 20% of the electorate claims to be liberal

"Conservatives love to use liberals as the boogeyman of big government, but the liberal vote has always been a dicey matter. According to most polls, about 20% of voters is a liberal, substantially less than the about 40% who identify themselves as conservative. Thus the battle for independents often determines elections, especially national ones.

Liberals are also notoriously diverse in ideology and are often seen as ineffective in governing — even by friends and allies. As H.L. Mencken noted last century: “The Liberals have many tails, and chase them all.”

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/03/news/la-pn-obama-liberals-gallup-poll-20110803

[ClassWarrior]

5. Professor Lakoff is talking about the base, not general voters.

Not to mention the fact that the word "liberal" has a bad rep in the general public. While the majority of American citizens hold mostly progressive values, few "identify themselves" as liberals (which is what the poll in the article shows).

NGU.

[Tarheel_Dem]

6. Where's Professor Lakoff's proof that most or all of the Democratic base is "progressive"?

I didn't ask about "holding mostly progressive values". I'll wait. :shrug:

[ClassWarrior]

7. He's a distinguished professor of cognitive sciences. I'm sure it's well documented.

Shout back when you find out. I'll wait.

NGU.

[Tarheel_Dem]

8. You introduced the topic, and since you obviously agree, I think it incumbent upon you,

as the o.p. to address where the good Professor's numbers come from. Distinguished or not, doesn't give one license to pull shit out of one's ass. ;)

[ClassWarrior]

9. Why? What do you think? That most or all of the Democratic base is conservative?

:crazy:

NGU.

[Tarheel_Dem]

10. Doesn't matter "what I think". Nor you for that matter. I asked for numbers to back up

the good Professor's assertion. I understand if you can't provide proof, and I highly doubt the Professor can either, but can't you just admit that he may have indulged in a bit of gratuitous hyperbole and move on? :shrug:

[ClassWarrior]

12. Wow, classic. That calls for a visit from the Chairman.

NGU.

[Tarheel_Dem]

13. Cute. But, still no numbers? Ya know, proof?

:rofl:

[ClassWarrior]

14. ...

NGU.

[Tarheel_Dem]

15. You're posting cute pics now. I guess you're out of ammunition? "Proof"?

:rofl:



Say Hi to the Professor, and whatever orifice he pulled this hyperbolic load from. :hi:



:rofl:

[ClassWarrior]

21. I bet your buddies in the freshman class debate club just giggle like little girls at that...

...oh-so-tricky debate tactic!

You got me!

:eyes:

NGU.

[Tarheel_Dem]

29. One thing's certain. We would've laughed you off the stage. Why debate material...

you haven't vetted? That's essential to real "debate". It helps to know the argument you're making, or refuting, don't ya think? ;)

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tarheel_Dem]

40. Bingo. Thank You Professor!

:rofl:

[Go2Peace]

35. You fell for the linguistic trap! Read George Lakoffs work. The term "liberal" has been hijacked

and people no longer understand what it stands for.

The public has a lot of "liberal" beliefs, but language has been purposely short circuited. This results in the inability of people to express those beliefs well. Really, read George's books. They do a good job of discussing this.

The Republicans understand linguistics much better than the Democrats. One of the few science's they respect.

[Tarheel_Dem]

38. Not really all that concerned with the Professor's "linguistics". I asked a

very specific question of the o.p., and all I got in return was cute pics. I think that says everything I need to know about this article and it's author. :hi:

[ClassWarrior]

39. You're so unconcerned that you didn't even bother to read the article.

:rofl:

At the top of the article, Professor Lakoff explains the scientific concept of "biconceptualism," and the statement, "The Democratic base consists of people who are mostly or totally progressive," refers to that concept.

Which you'd understand if you had read the article. Classic.

:hi:

NGU.

[Carolina]

11. K&R!

[center rising]

16. Thaty's right George, don't blame the man, blame the ideology.

fucking idiot. Gotta blame those centrists for all the woes in the country. I would laugh at it if it weren't such an idiotic statement.

[ClassWarrior]

22. His premise is that "centrists" don't exist. So how can he be "blaming" them??

:crazy:

NGU.

[jefferson_dem]

17. Thanks for reminding me...

That Lakoff is a linguist and not a political scientist.

[ClassWarrior]

23. Thanks for reminding me...

...that labels are more important to you than ideas (and well-researched ones at that).

NGU.

[theaocp]

18. I'd like to try just admitting that conservative "values"

have no value in our society. Let them take it up at the ballot box. The opposite just ain't working. K.I.S.S.

[bvar22]

19. If there WAS a "Far Left" counter balance in the US, I WOULD be a "Centrist"

since I AM an FDR/LBJ Pro-LABOR Democrat.

There is NO VOICE for for Pure Communism in the US to counterbalance the Far Right Screams for Fascism,
so "The Center" in the US is a NOT a valid representation,
and "Centrists" are already half way to the Extreme RIGHT from the start.

You know the field is badly tilted when Mainstream Center FDR/LBJ Democrats
are labeled the "Fringe Left" by their OWN Political Party.

That is my problem with Centrists.
They agree with Conservatives too often.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone

photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed

You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

Solidarity!



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[truedelphi]

30. Very well said, bvar22.

And not only have they marginalized the opinions of the average American, they have underscored that point by outright killing those individuals who would have made great leaders. So it is not our opinions that are marginalized, but also our options.

Starting wth Nov 22 1963, and then Martin, then Robert F Kennedy, and going on with the take-out of John Kennedy Jr, and then Wellstone.

(I didn't really believe they took out John until I found out that the Coast Guard refused to search for his downed plane. It took Ted Kennedy calling the Bill Clinton WH to get the Coast Guard up in the air looking for the signals from the transmitter that relayed the position the plane was in when it went down. (This was a delay of over nine hours, a very unusual delay.)

And even so, the Coast Guard still pretended they had a vast ocean to search, rather than going immediately to the area where the plane had crashed, an area indicated by not only his flight plan, but by his location when he had last made contact with others.)

[Phx_Dem]

25. The only people who marginalize progressives is progressives.

They are every bit extreme in their views as Tea Partiers in that they insist their opinions are the only correct ones and they absolutely abhor any type of compromise. Sounds familiar?

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[yurbud]

27. I don't abhor compromise so long as it comes after an actual fight for something worthwhile

the hallmark of the Democrats in Congress and now Obama for the last decade or so has been STARTING with what would have been an acceptable final result, and then letting the GOP water it down until it is indistinguishable from a Heritage Foundation talking point. And when the GOP refuses to play, the ''centrist'' Dems do the watering down themselves.

[ClassWarrior]

28. Bingo. Witness the "Single Payer is off the table" phenomenon.

NGU.

[JoePhilly]

32. Its funny listening to a guy from the left espouse "superior values"

That's a right wing tactic. That's why we endlessly hear about "Family values" candidates.

The goal of doing this is to send the message, "I am a better person than X, because I have the correct values."

I too am a Psychologist. And the appeal to "values" used in this article, is an attempt to manipulate, and little else. When one says a person "has no values", what they are also saying is that that individual is a bad person. Good people have the "correct" values, and bad people, have the wrong values, or perhaps worse, they have "no values".

What this author misses is that the folks on the farther right and the farther left seem to only hear what they DON'T want to hear when Obama speaks.

And so, during a speech, when Obama says we need to extend unemployment, the right wing gets angry, and says he's a socialist this is code for "redistribute the wealth". And then in the same speech, when Obama says we also need to find waste and cut that from the budget, the far left screams that this is code for "slash Social Security".

In the right wing and left wing blogosphere, both groups now begin a series of threads in which Obama gets blasted for being a "socialist" or for "hippy punching", respectively.

And again, the reason this happens is that these groups aren't listening for the message they want to hear, they are listening for the message they DON'T want to hear. Even if to find it, they need to "decipher the code words".

And they do this, because the both want purity. And when they see any deviation from that, they scream.

[ClassWarrior]

33. So do you believe that right wing values are superior?

The whole premise of the article is that there are only two types of values: progressive and conservative. And that, for a candidate or a leader, taking a strong position on either one is superior to exhibiting vague, unclear values.

Is that what you think is superior? Vague, unclear values?

:shrug:

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

36. Well?...

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

37. ?

[JoePhilly]

43. Sorry for not making you the center of my life ...

My wife just returned from a week plus emergency business trip, and I decided to make her a nice meal, given she's been on multiple planes and eating take out for the last 7 days.

But as you will see, now that we, and our kids have finished dinner, and I've just about finished clean up. I've responded down below.

I must also suggest that if you are sitting eagerly for responses on DU, you might want to add another on-line hobby.

[JoePhilly]

41. My point is that the entire "values" premise is BS.

Step back from whatever ideology you hold.

Now consider what a "value" is.

It is an ABSTRACT concept. And because it is abstract, it is also not "concrete".

So for example ... the GOP screams about defending "family values". And then we learn that the defenders of these "family values" cheat on their wives. They pray to God, they claim to have transgressed, they swear to do better ... blah blah blah.

Now, we democrats, progressives, liberals ... we have "values" too. We love the planet and concerned about global climate change. And so we never buy SUVs. When we buy a home, you can walk or bike to work. oppps, no.

The values are abstract, and the things we all do are concrete. And we, as individuals act in a concrete way that is counter from a "value" we can always rationalize it.

Having said this, the right wing, generally ties values to religion to give their values extra moral weight, and the left does not.

You, and the article, claim that there are only 2 types of values. I call BS.

Let's test this value ... "The US government should not have a deficit".

I do not see that as conservative or liberal. And to show that ... take out the word "not".

A deficit is not conservative or liberal.

Here is another ... "The US government should have a strong defense".

I don't see the value as stated as liberal or conservative ... but in application, it can be.

And that is my larger point.

You can use the "abstract" values frame to praise or complain about anything ... because very few actual actions fit perfectly into all of the abstract values that we throw around.

[ClassWarrior]

42. Funny you bring that up. The author of the articles maintains, in fact, that it's NOT abstract.

That our brains are actually physically wired that way. Who am I (or you) to argue with a distinguished professor of cognitive sciences?

:shrug:

NGU.

[JoePhilly]

44. My PhD is in Expermental Psychology ...

My BS was General Psych.

My MA was ... get this ... Attitude Development.

And so, my Psych degrees are in how people think, how they learn, how they solve problems, and how they form, maintain, and change, attitudes.

So yea ... I feel VERY comfortable in this "argument".

[blkmusclmachine]

45. .

:shrug: