I came across this very interesting interview with linguist George Lakoff. He’s got some intriguing ideas about how progressives should frame their debates against conservatives. I found this bit pretty interesting:
Why do conservatives like to use the phrase “liberal elite” as an epithet?
Conservatives have branded liberals, and the liberals let them get away with it: the “liberal elite,” the “latte liberals,” the “limousine liberals.” The funny thing is that conservatives are the elite. The whole idea of conservative doctrine is that some people are better than others, that some people deserve more. To conservatives, if you’re poor it’s because you deserve it, you’re not disciplined enough to get ahead. Conservative doctrine requires that there be an elite: the people who thrive in the free market have more money, and they should. Progressives say, “No, that’s not fair. Maybe some should have more money, but no one should live in poverty. Everybody who works deserves to have a reasonable standard of living for their work.” These are ideas that are progressive or liberal ideas, and progressives aren’t getting them out there enough.
What progressives are promoting is not elite at all. Progressives ought to be talking about the conservative elite. They shouldn’t be complaining about “tax cuts for the rich,” they should be complaining about “tax cuts for the conservative elite,” because that’s who’s getting them.
I think he dodging the issue a bit. Honestly, there’s an elite on both sides of the aisle. To say that George Soros isn’t among the elite is just out false. He may be a philanthropist, and he may care about poor people, but he’s still stinkin’ rich, and he cannot, absolutely cannot, relate to a poor person. And unless we’re going to ditch the free market completely for communism, there will be some sort of class system. Now, a free market isn’t necessarily incompatible with a living wage, or ending poverty, but there will always be elites of any flavor. The real question is, are progressive elites willing to be taxed at a higher rate to support the fight against poverty. And his final sentence is just a flat out lie — every rich person in the United States benefits from the tax cuts — not just conservatives….
Progessives like to talk about the “widening gulf” between the rich and poor. But this will always exist in a free market economy — it’s built into the rules. The gulf could be narrowed, but it will never, every disappear. So progressives need to ask themselves what they might be willing sacrifice to bring this about. Will they pay more taxes? Will they pay more for goods and services? Simply saying that conservative elites are getting more money off the backs of the poor doesn’t reframe (his terminology) the debate at all, because it doesn’t offer any solutions.
Posted on 26 August 2004