Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate--The Essential Guide for Progressives (Paperback)

by George Lakoff (Author), Howard Dean (Foreword), Don Hazen (Introduction)
Key Phrases: strict father values, nurturant morality, strict father morality, United States, Iraq War, State of the Union (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review
In the first of his three debates with George W. Bush, 2004 presidential candidate John Kerry argued against the war in Iraq not by directly condemning it but by citing the various ways in which airport and commercial shipping security had been jeopardized due to the war's sizable price tag. In so doing, he re-framed the war issue to his advantage while avoiding discussing it in the global terrorism terms favored by President Bush. One possible reason for this tactic could have been that Kerry familiarized himself with the influential linguist George Lakoff, who argues in Don't Think of an Elephant that much of the success the Republican Party can be attributed to a persistent ability to control the language of key issues and thus position themselves in favorable terms to voters. While Democrats may have valid arguments, Lakoff points out they are destined to lose when they and the news media accept such nomenclature as "pro-life," "tax relief," and "family values," since to argue against such inherently positive terminology necessarily casts the arguer in a negative light. Lakoff offers recommendations for how the progressive movement can regain semantic equity by repositioning their arguments, such as countering the conservative call for "Strong Defense" with a call for "A Stronger America" (curiously, one of the key slogans of the Kerry camp). Since the book was published during the height of the presidential campaign, Lakoff was unable to provide an analytical perspective on that race. He does, however, apply the notion of rhetorical framing devices to the 2003 California recall election in an insightful analysis of the Schwarzenegger victory. Don't Think of an Elephant is a bit rambling, overexplaining some concepts while leaving others underexplored, but it provides a compelling linguistic analysis of political campaigning. --John Moe

From Publishers Weekly
Lakoff, a cognitive scientist and linguist at Berkeley, believes he knows why conservatives have been so successful in recent years and how progressives like himself can beat them at their own game. This slim book presents a simple, accessible overview of his theory of "moral politics" and a call to action for Democrats mourning November’s election results. Lakoff’s persuasive argument focuses on two ideas: what he calls "framing," and the opposition of liberals’ and conservatives’ concepts of the family. Conservatives, he says, have easily framed tax cuts as "tax relief" because of widespread, preexisting views of taxes as burdensome, and liberals have had little success conveying the idea that taxes are a social responsibility. In Lakoff’s view, conservatives adhere to a "strict father" model of family, in contrast to liberals’ "nurturant parent" view, and he sees this difference as the key to understanding most of the two sides’ clashes. His writing is clear and succinct, and he illuminates his theories through easy-to-follow examples from current politics. Although the book has been updated since the election, many of its sections were originally written long beforehand, so some comments are outdated (at one point Lakoff wonders, for example, whether George Bush’s support of the gay marriage amendment will help him keep the White House). However, the process of regaining power may be a long one for Democrats, and Lakoff’s insights into how to deal with conservatives and appeal to the general public are bound to light a fire under many progressives.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 144 pages
• Publisher: Chelsea Green; Number Line 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 edition (September 15, 2004)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1931498717
• ISBN-13: 978-1931498715
• Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.4 x 0.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 6.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars See all reviews (201 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #8,302 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #1 in	Books > Nonfiction > Politics > Reference
  #6 in	Books > Nonfiction > Government > Elections
  #6 in	Books > Nonfiction > Social Sciences > Political Science > Government

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

263 of 300 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The most important political book on the market today, September 29, 2004

By	Progressive Patriot - See all my reviews

In Thomas Frank's bestselling "What's the Matter with Kansas?" the author asks why so many Americans vote against their own economic interests. Well, George Lakoff of the Rockridge Institute, a prominent progressive think tank, provides the answers. According to Lakoff, most Americans vote their identity and values not their economic self interest.

Conservatives, despite being a minority, are dominating because they understand this. They are winning by putting their values front and center, by controlling the national dialogue by "framing" issues (i.e. calling the estate tax "the death tax,"), through institution building, and by developing overarching strategic initiatives rather than advocating single issues and isolated programs.

Lakoff provides the groundwork for progressives to begin to counter conservatives. Conservatives call for "strong defense," progressives call for a "stronger America;" conservatives say "free market," progressives say "broad prosperity;" conservatives argue for "smaller government," progressives want "effective government;" etc. The book provides the tools for progressives to move the debate -- by addressing people's core American values -- from the divisive arguing that reinforces conservatives' positions to a civil discourse that reinforces progressives' positions.

A must read!

59 of 64 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Essential for Progressive Patriots, May 12, 2005

By	Lee Armstrong (Winterville, NC United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 100 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

As part of the Democratic Action Network here in North Carolina, this book was recommended to us. Obviously, with John Edwards on the national ticket and not carrying the state, we are trying to focus on how to make change. Progressives understand how Republican tax cuts favor the rich and pull the rug out from under working people, but in the face of "tax relief" speech find ourselves desperately needing a new language to describe "efficient government" that maximizes our "tax investment."

Progressives are continually startled when people do not vote for what is clearly in their own self-interest. Lakoff addresses these issues in a focused and understandable manner. Clearly, people who drive around with "W" on their gunracks have a perspective to which progressives must learn to speak. Last week in western North Carolina, a preacher threw out 9 members of the congregation because they had the audacity to vote for John Kerry. One Democratic congressional candidate was asked how she could be a Christian and a Democrat. Clearly, we are involved in an ideological war, the dimensions of which progressives have greatly underestimated.

I am particularly struck by Lakoff's view about how these two groups view God. From his perspective, conservatives view a God who is wrathful and requires punishment, a very "old testament" view. Progressive Christians view a beneficent God who loves His children. But while conservative Christians are well organized, progressive Christians are only loosely aligned. Much work needs to be done because people will vote against their own self-interest if they believe it to be God's will. The Republican rich have manipulated these issues, ignoring that Jesus' gospel is that we should take care of the sick.

Lakoff's argument on idea framing is helpful, but is new thinking for progressives used to thinking issue by issue. I know I am going to need more than just this little book to really get the hang of this, but it is an interesting starting point. For those of us puzzled by the direction of our country, befuddled by public unconcern of blatant lies and misrepresentations by the president with the war in Iraq, we need to reshape our thinking. We need to redefine a "Clean Water Act" that encourages pollution as a "Dirty Rivers Act" or find conceptual ways to battle these ideas before Republicans succeed in polluting the planet. Lakoff's book is a key to this; and is therefore essential reading for progressive patriots.

56 of 61 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Strict Father Vs. Nurturing Parents...Powerful Metaphors, September 26, 2004

By	Ed Uyeshima (San Francisco, CA USA) - See all my reviews (TOP 100 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

I sure wish I had the foresight to take George Lakoff's class when I was going to Berkeley, but at least I can revel in this illuminating book about the influence exerted by metaphors that resonate with the American public. A professor of linguistics, Lakoff is a senior fellow of the Rockridge Institute, the renowned liberal think tank that concentrates in part on helping Democratic candidates and politicians with re-framing political metaphors. He certainly has the credentials to produce this treatise on the power of words and the resulting images that stay within the mind regardless of what other objective information may be conveyed that run counter to these images. The discussion seems so basic, but Lakoff's treatment is fascinating.

In this penetrating book, he focuses on the impermeable connection people make between family and nation and how images are divided along party lines. Republicans follow the strict father model, which assumes that the world is a dangerous place and always will continue to be because there is evil out there in the world. The world is also difficult because it is competitive. There will always be winners and losers. There is an absolute right and an absolute wrong. What is needed in this kind of world is a strong, strict father who can protect the family in a dangerous world, no matter the cost.

Democrats, on the other hand, see both parents are equally responsible for raising the children. The assumption is that children are born good and can be made better. The world can be made a better place, and our job is to work on that. The parents' job is to nurture their children and to raise their children to be nurturers of others. According to Lakoff, empathy and responsibility are paramount in political liberalism. From this opposing logic, one can, for example, understand the power of Governor Schwarzenegger's "girly men" comment, which one moment was considered appallingly sexist and subsequently turned into a rallying cry at the Republican National Convention. Lakoff is especially articulate in showing how the Republicans have leveraged the fear of homeland terrorism to reinforce the strict father model and used it as a groundswell to gain support among the undecideds.

This is an essential guide for not only progressives but also any American who wants to segregate facts from messages and so-called values from actual programs. More importantly, this book explains why people vote their values and identities, often against their best interests. My only fear is that the book has come out a bit late to make a genuine impact on the November election. This is the perfect complement to John Sperling's "The Great Divide: Retro Vs. Metro America", which explores the same partisan dilemma but in terms of marketing principles, the Republicans' superiority in unifying the retro states and the Democrats' failure to do the same with the metro states. I recommend reading both to get the full picture of how the Democratic strategy has not historically embraced the strategies proposed by Lakoff and Sperling and what needs to be done to reconstitute an effective two-party system. Highly recommended.