Neo-Conservative: Say What?

By Parker Blackman, AlterNet. Posted March 15, 2005.

Over the past few months a great deal of time has been spent thinking about, analyzing and discussing the election and why we lost and they won. Two of the dominant themes of these discussions have been values and framing. As we know, Karl Rove and the Republicans succeeded in framing their candidate as a strong, unwavering leader in uncertain times, while framing Kerry as a flip flopper without a moral compass, willing to do or say anything to get elected.

As we move forward, everyone is asking essentially the same two questions: what do we as Democrats stand for? And how do we talk about it in simple, compelling, value-laden terms? There has already been some great writing and thinking done on this issue, and for good reason. To come from a position of strength we must present a positive alternative that lets Americans who didn't vote Democrat see that they are more like us than they thought they were.

The other piece of the puzzle, and the focus of this paper, is the question of how we frame the Republican leadership. We can't afford to wait. The Republican leadership has been moving swiftly to frame and act on a sweeping, radical agenda that, in the next four years, could demonstrably change the course of history in our country and we cannot allow that to happen. One of the most important roles we as communicators can play is to provide a general, thematic framework to describe the Republican agenda that everyone on the progressive side of the fight – no matter what their specific issue may be – can embrace, repeat and drive home. So here are a couple of ideas for a broad framework describing the Republican agenda, as well as a specific recommendation about what to call our opposition.

Reckless, Irresponsible, Extreme, Radical

We all know that the current leaders of the Republican party – be it President Bush, Tom Delay, or Bill Frist – represents the extreme-right wing of their party. But most of America doesn't see them that way because nobody has successfully framed them as such. So let's start calling them what they are – irresponsible, reckless, extreme, and radical. These are four adjectives that I think most accurately describe their agenda. More important still, these adjectives imply un-American values and speak to a flaw in their collective character.

This group of leaders is endangering the safety of our country, our children's future, our health, and other things we hold close to our hearts. Most Americans are moderate in their views; extremism on either side of the political spectrum makes them uncomfortable. Reckless behavior makes them very uncomfortable. Americans would rather that their leaders be conservative in the true sense of the word. The majority of Americans don't want Social Security dismantled. They don't want us to fight an endless war in Iraq with more of their sons and daughters maimed or killed. They don't want their air polluted and their water poisoned, and they don't want their public school system destroyed.

Most Americans think of themselves as living responsible lives, looking out for their children's future, and making good choices that will provide stability in their careers. Many of us give back to society whether it's at church, at school, or through volunteering and charity work. If we frame the Republican leadership as extreme and reckless, we are painting a picture that runs contrary to how people behave in their own lives, and what they expect from their leaders.

Again, this frame can be applied to any issue – health care, Iraq, Social Security, oil drilling in the Arctic – thereby allowing all progressive interest groups to repeat a singular theme as it applies to their particular issue.

An important reason this frame works is that, in the aftermath of an election, people who voted for George W. Bush don't want to be told that they voted for the wrong guy. But, if you can create space in some voters' minds that the Bush administration's current agenda isn't the one they signed up for, or that they are not getting the leadership they voted for, you give those voters space to rationalize moving away from Bush and the Republican leadership.

Parker Blackman is deputy general manager and managing director of Fenton Communications' West Coast office. This article originally appeared on the Fenton web site.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »