Dissolve into Evergreens
|
||||
Then Came the Dark Ages (again) William Grieder ... Eschaton: Rick Santorum Quote: You say, well, it's... An Idiot's Guide to Parenting a Nuclear Armed Nati... Jobs, Jobs, Jobs Oh yeah, yesterday was Krugman D... Inhofe Watch! Yes, its time agains for Inhofe Wa... And if This Doesn't Tickle You Pinko....? Communi... Those Were the Best of Times, the Worst of Times ... Inhofe Watch "Our troops are better than anyone i... Archives: Story Smith said Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Ok... Ok, Now Tell Us Something We Don't Already Know ... Justin Oldham - Politics and Patriotism
Wilco The Flaming Lips The New Radicals John Mayer Zero 7 Dream Theater Radiohead Death Cab for Cutie The Notwist O.S.I. Ani Difranco The Shins Elliott Smith Badly Drawn Boy Chroma Key Coheed and Cambria The Streets Andrew Bird Sufjan Stevens Atom Site Feed |
4.29.2003
Metaphor, Morality, and Politics, Or, Why Conservatives Have Left Liberals In the Dust by George Lakoff In conservative thought, self-reliance (a goal defined by Moral Strength) is achieved through the disciplined and unimpeded pursuit of self-interest. In metaphorical terms, the complex of strength metaphors defines the moral goal and Moral Self-Interest defines the means for achieving that goal. In moderate conservatism, the reverse is true. There maximizing self-interest is the goal and conservative values (defined by the strength complex) is the means. Thus, the difference between strict and moderate conservatism is a matter of priorities. Strict conservatives are moralistic, giving highest priority to the conservative moral metaphors and seeing the pursuit of self-interest as the natural means for achieving conservative moral values. Moderate conservatives are more pragmatic and less moralistic, seeing conservative moral values as the natural means to achieve the pragmatic end of maximizing self-interest. Lakoff continues to amaze me with his clear and thoughtful analysis of metaphor as the driving force in our political inclinations. Do we support the politician that projects a Strict Father Model or one that embodies the Nurturant Parent? How does this explain the geographic distribution of support for these competing models? People in sparse contact, who enjoy their isolation from others place a high priority on their own self reliance, whereas people in large urban areas have learned to enjoy being in a constant state of community. When we speak of the bad character traits of the politicians we project our own moral metphor onto their behavior. When we expect people of different moral priorites to understand our criticisms we are being shortsighted. People in the "middle" do not abide by a strict model but may pick and choose between Strength and Nurturing. The question we have to address is not how can we change people's moral perspective (though that should be a long term goal) but rather, in the short term, divorce the conservative politicians from their base by attacking their connections to the moral metaphor. This is accomplished by pointing out the failings that they exhibit in their own actions when compared to the Moral Ideal. In addition we can re-style our positions to encompass some of their moral themes. Mary over at The Watch has more to say along these lines. Go read. | |
About Me
Any Box |
||
Dissolve into Evergreens
|