BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS
From: Stringsinger
Date: 22 Oct 11 - 02:34 PM

Can't get the blue clicky to work.


A Framing Memo for Occupy Wall Street

By George Lakoff

I was asked weeks ago by some in the Occupy Wall Street movement to make suggestions for how to frame the movement. I have hesitated so far, because I think the movement should be framing itself. It's a general principle: Unless you frame yourself, others will frame you — the media, your enemies, your competitors, your well-meaning friends. I have so far hesitated to offer suggestions. But the movement appears to maturing and entering a critical time when small framing errors could have large negative consequences. So I thought it might be helpful to accept the invitation and start a discussion of how the movement might think about framing itself.

About framing: It's normal. Everybody engages in it all the time. Frames are just structures of thought that we use every day. All words in all languages are defined in terms of frame-circuits in the brain. But, ultimately, framing is about ideas, about how we see the world, which determines how we act.

In politics, frames are part of competing moral systems that are used in political discourse and in charting political action. In short, framing is a moral enterprise: it says what the character of a movement is. All politics is moral. Political figures and movements always make policy recommendations claiming they are the right things to do. No political figure ever says, do what I say because it's wrong! Or because it doesn't matter! Some moral principles or other lie behind every political policy agenda.

Two Moral Framing Systems in Politics

Conservatives have figured out their moral basis and you see it on Wall Street: It includes: The primacy of self-interest. Individual responsibility, but not social responsibility. Hierarchical authority based on wealth or other forms of power. A moral hierarchy of who is "deserving," defined by success. And the highest principle is the primacy of this moral system itself, which goes beyond Wall Street and the economy to other arenas: family life, social life, religion, foreign policy, and especially government. Conservative "democracy" is seen as a system of governance and elections that fits this model.

Though OWS concerns go well beyond financial issues, your target is right: the application of these principles in Wall Street is central, since that is where the money comes from for elections, for media, and for right-wing policy-making institutions of all sorts on all issues.

The alternative view of democracy is progressive: Democracy starts with citizens caring about one another and acting responsibly on that sense of care, taking responsibility both for oneself and for one's family, community, country, people in general, and the planet. The role of government is to protect and empower all citizens equally via The Public: public infrastructure, laws and enforcement, health, education, scientific research, protection, public lands, transportation, resources, art and culture, trade policies, safety nets, and on and on. Nobody makes it one their own. If you got wealthy, you depended on The Public, and you have a responsibility to contribute significantly to The Public so that others can benefit in the future. Moreover, the wealthy depend on those who work, and who deserve a fair return for their contribution to our national life. Corporations exist to make life better for most people. Their reason for existing is as public as it is private.

A disproportionate distribution of wealth robs most citizens of access to the resources controlled by the wealthy. Immense wealth is a thief. It takes resources from the rest of the population — the best places to live, the best food, the best educations, the best health facilities, access to the best in nature and culture, the best professionals, and on and on. Resources are limited, and great wealth greatly limits access to resources for most people.

It appears to me that OWS has a progressive moral vision and view of democracy, and that what it is protesting is the disastrous effects that have come from operating with a conservative moral, economic, and political worldview. I see OWS as primarily a moral movement, seeking economic and political changes to carry out that moral movement — whatever those particular changes might be.

A Moral Focus for Occupy Wall Street

I think it is a good thing that the occupation movement is not making specific policy demands. If it did, the movement would become about those demands. If the demands were not met, the movement would be seen as having failed.

It seems to me that the OWS movement is moral in nature, that occupiers want the country to change its moral focus. It is easy to find useful policies; hundreds have been suggested. It is harder to find a moral focus and stick to it. If the movement is to frame itself, it should be on the basis of its moral focus, not a particular agenda or list of policy demands. If the moral focus of America changes, new people will be elected and the policies will follow. Without a change of moral focus, the conservative worldview that has brought us to the present disastrous and dangerous moment will continue to prevail.

We Love America. We're Here to Fix It

I see OWS as a patriotic movement, based on a deep and abiding love of country — a patriotism that it is not just about the self-interests of individuals, but about what the country is and is to be. Do Americans care about other citizens, or mainly just about themselves? That's what love of America is about. I therefore think it is important to be positive, to be clear about loving America, seeing it in need of fixing, and not just being willing to fix it, but being willing to take to the streets to fix it. A populist movement starts with the people seeing that they are all in the same boat and being ready to come together to fix the leaks.

Publicize the Public

Tell the truth about The Public, that nobody makes it purely on their own without The Public, that is, without public infrastructure, the justice system, health, education, scientific research, protections of all sorts, public lands, transportation, resources, art and culture, trade policies, safety nets, … That is a truth to be told day after day. It is an idea that must take hold in public discourse. It must go beyond what I and others have written about it and beyond what Elizabeth Warren has said in her famous video. The Public is not opposed to The Private. The Public is what makes The Private possible. And it is what makes freedom possible. Wall Street exists only through public support. It has a moral obligation to direct itself to public needs.

All OWS approaches to policy follow from such a moral focus. Here are a handful examples.

Democracy should be about the 99%

Money directs our politics. In a democracy, that must end. We need publicly supported elections, however that is to be arranged.

Strong Wages Make a Strong America

Middle-class wages have not gone up significantly in 30 years, and there is conservative pressure to lower them. But when most people get more money, they spend it and spur the economy, making the economy and the country stronger, as well as making their individual lives better. This truth needs to be central to public economic discourse.

Global Citizenship

America has been a moral beacon to the world. It can function as such only if it sets an example of what a nation should be.

Do we have to spend more on the military that all other nations combined? Do we really need hundreds of military bases abroad?

Nature

We are part of nature. Nature makes us, and all that we love, possible. Yet we are destroying Nature through global warming and other forms of ecological destruction, like fracking and deep-water drilling.

At a global scale, nature is systemic: its effects are neither local nor linear. Global warming is causing the ferocity of the monster storms, tornados, floods, blizzards, heat waves, and fires that have devastated huge areas of our country. The hotter the atmosphere, the more evaporated water and the more energy going into storms, tornados, and blizzards. Global warming cannot be shown to cause any particular storm, but when a storm system forms, global warming will ramp up the power of the storm and the amount of water it carries. In winter, evaporated water from the overly heated Pacific will go into the atmosphere, blow northeast over the arctic, and fall as record snows.

We depend on nature — on clean air, water, food, and a livable climate. And we find beauty and grandeur in nature, and a sense of awe that makes life worth living. A love of country requires a love of nature. And a fair and thriving economy requires the preservation of nature as we have known it.

Summary

OWS is a moral and patriotic movement. It sees Democracy as flowing from citizens caring about one another as well as themselves, and acting with both personal and social responsibility. Democratic governance is about The Public, and the liberty that The Public provides for a thriving Private Sphere. From such a democracy flows fairness, which is incompatible with a hugely disproportionate distribution of wealth. And from the sense of care implicit in such a democracy flows a commitment to the preservation of nature.

From what I have seen of most members of OWS, your individual concerns all flow from one moral focus.

Elections

The Tea Party solidified the power of the conservative worldview via elections. OWS will have no long-term effect unless it too brings its moral focus to the 2012 elections. Insist on supporting candidates that have your overall moral views, no matter what the local issues are.

A Warning

This movement could be destroyed by negativity, by calls for revenge, by chaos, or by having nothing positive to say. Be positive about all things and state the moral basis of all suggestions. Positive and moral in calling for debt relief. Positive and moral in upholding laws, as they apply to finances. Positive and moral in calling for fairness in acquiring needed revenue. Positive and moral in calling for clean elections. To be effective, your movement must be seen by all of the 99% as positive and moral. To get positive press, you must stress the positive and the moral.

Remember: The Tea Party sees itself as stressing only individual responsibility. The Occupation Movement is stressing both individual and social responsibility.

I believe, and I think you believe, that most Americans care about their fellow citizens as well as themselves. Let's find out! Shout your moral and patriotic views out loud, regularly. Put them on your signs. Repeat them to the media. Tweet them. And tell everyone you know to do the same. You have to use your own language with your own framing and you have to repeat it over and over for the ideas to sink in.

Occupy elections: voter registration drives, town hall meetings, talk radio airtime, party organizations, nomination campaigns, election campaigns, and voting booths.

Above all: Frame yourselves before others frame you.

This article was published at NationofChange at: http://www.nationofchange.org/framing-memo-occupy-wall-street-1319120927. All rights are reserved.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS
From: GUEST,999
Date: 22 Oct 11 - 02:34 PM

Frank, post the title of the Google place and I'll link it for you if possible.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS
From: GUEST,999
Date: 22 Oct 11 - 02:36 PM

http://www.truth-out.org/how-frame-yourself-framing-memo-occupy-wall-street/1319031142

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of Occupy Wall Street
From: katlaughing
Date: 22 Oct 11 - 06:25 PM

Thank you, Frank and Bruce, for the link. More tears and "YES!!" There is hope!

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Oct 11 - 07:57 PM

I'm not all that impressed...

The right wing is licking it's chops to get OWS to get into the details... That;s where their immense paid blogger advantage will twist and maul the details and the movement will be reduced to arguing over the meaning of "what is means"...

Here's the other **********************major*********************** problem... The Tea Party was never anything but a Republican PR game financed with hundreds of billions of corporate $$$!!! If you don't have the dough, or even much access to BIG MEDIA, then you ain't gonna run any candidates and you ain't going to get your message out, no matter how well you frame it...

No, OWS is about changing out culture... Not 200 page policy "white pages"... I will say this over and over and over... I don't care how badly the right wing wants to lure us into their little trap... Screw them... This is our movement...

Stop the wars and tax the rich... Period...

This is what democracy looks like... Period...

We are the 99%... Period...

Hey, the right wing has lived at the bumper sticker positions for 40 years and has been successful with it...

Now they are pissed because OWS has taken a page out of their play book...

Tough!!! Boohoo!!! Here, have a hankie...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Stringsinger
Date: 22 Oct 11 - 08:53 PM

Lakoff transcends the Dems and Repubs parties and talks about the personalities that
go for authoritarian or nourishing points of view. The ones that contain both elements, he calls "biconceptuals".

Rather than bang away at the Reactionaries, it's best to emphasize the positive aspects of
a nourishing society and that privatization comes from the public quarter. The monied wealth of this country owe we the people for allowing them to have it and now they want to hoard it all and steal money from us.

The one percent are robbing us. They won't get away with it now. The genie is out of the bottle and the OWS will not go away because it affects so many lives.

The Tea Party does not represent the American people, it is manufactured and financed by Wall Street. When will the Tea Partiers get that? They are delusional because if they defend millionaires they think they might become one of them and that ain't gonna' happen. They've been sold a phony story about how everyone can make it here and that's just a lie.
Herman Cain is perpetuating that lie by telling working people that they deserve what they get. The Horatio Alger thing was never true, it was folklore like George Washington cutting down the cherry tree...it never happened.

There were ruthless business types who clawed and stole their way to the top, gamed the system and crapped on the rest of us. Now that has to change.

Back to Occupy Wall Street!

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Janie
Date: 22 Oct 11 - 09:01 PM

Thanks....and pondering.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: andrew e
Date: 22 Oct 11 - 09:33 PM

David Icke has some comments.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gV9A2IGShuk&feature=player_embedded#!

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Paul Burke
Date: 23 Oct 11 - 03:28 AM

I'm sure the right wing are anxious to "get into the details", because at the moment they control the only possible language in which economics is allowed to be discussed- uncontrolled free market capitalism. Their ownership of both the communication channels and the language of discourse means it is impossible to present an argued alternative which is taken seriously. The facts

- that capitalism has never delivered for the mass of people except when forced to do so by competition (communism 1900-1970)
- that it has wrecked the reconstruction of former Soviet block countries
- in doing so it has discredited democracy in most of the world
- it doesn't practise its own tenets of nonintervention in markets when they need your money (see banking and other crises passim)
- that living standards in the capitalist west have been static or decreasing since the free- market neocons got hold of our economies
- that it hasn't got a clue about mass unemployment
- etc etc

can be conveniently ignored.

And note that the alternative they present to unregulated markets is a return to the stone age, despite the fact that a cursory reading of hsitory shows that capitalism's greatest successes happened when it was heavily regulated.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Paul Burke
Date: 23 Oct 11 - 05:48 AM

I don't think the BBC really meant to write this headline about the UK offshoot of OWS, but it's probably pretty well true:

St Paul's Cathedral authorities urge protesters camping in the churchyard to move on amid health and safety concerns over loss of income.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Oct 11 - 08:09 AM

That's about right, Paul... The most telling part of what you have written is their absolute control of the discussion and the means of misinformation distribution... Fix that and the rest takes care of itself...

Garbage in = garbage out...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: GUEST,999
Date: 23 Oct 11 - 11:08 AM

"St Paul's Cathedral authorities urge protesters camping in the churchyard to move on amid health and safety concerns over loss of income."

Mr Burke, that is priceless. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 24 Oct 11 - 03:57 AM

I can't help thinking the movement is selling itself short by not adding a spiritual dimension. After all it was Christ that drove the moneylenders from the temple. And why should God in America confine himself to radio con artists and anadvocating Anti Abortion?

It was really the probity and decency of working class intellectuals from the chapel infested Welsh valleys that gave Britain its National Health service. It is a Christian duty to care for the poor and the ill, and dying. You would gain so much in support if you could get it over to Christians that it was a moral duty to support you.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 24 Oct 11 - 01:27 PM

It seems to be a "War on economic inequality". Which, without some mans of implementation, puts it in a lass with the "War on Terror" and "The War on Drugs".

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: GUEST,999
Date: 24 Oct 11 - 01:42 PM

"without some mans of implementation, puts it in a lass with"

Sorry, Dick. Was too good to let go.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 24 Oct 11 - 03:12 PM

Sorry. dropped a c. but remarks on implementation still apply.
BTW, Woody's guitar never killed any fascists.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Paul Burke
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 01:58 AM

On the contrary Dick. The "war on terror" and the "war on drugs" have absolutely massive- quasi infinite- means of implementation, from stop-and-search through small wars in far countries. That they don't appear to work is not due to lack of resources.

The "war on inequality" has only persuasion. You can argue about whether particular actions are effective persuaders, but you won't get listened to if there's a suspicion that you're against the whole enterprise anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 04:32 AM

"I can't help thinking the movement is selling itself short by not adding a spiritual dimension"

Not a good idea. This is a secular movement and by aligning it with one religious dogma or another you instantly exclude a whole raft of intelligent, concerned people. The truth is, support of OWS is a matter for the conscience of individuals, to be guided by their own moral codes and fogging the issue with any religion is the last thing we need. I refer you back to the quote from St. Paul's Cathedral plc.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: GUEST,The Lamenting Whelk
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 05:10 AM

Above guest was me - sorry.

The Lamenting Whelk

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 05:46 AM

You think Chritianity's voice in the USA should be Sarah Palin....?

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: GUEST,The Lamenting Whelk
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 06:54 AM

Well, the movement's moved beyond the USA, so it's global now and we have come together as ordinary people; there's a bigger picture here and it transcends any one country.

As for who represents Christianity, it's irrelevant and a separate matter. This is a movement against the corruption of our systems of government and the politicians, the power of big business and the rights of ordinary people. Any religious overtones of any kind is sidelining these issues. If this movement was co-opted by Christianity then what about the Muslims, aethists, buddhists, agnostics, pagans, countless native peoples etc etc etc? It would be profoundly arrogant to assume any one creed should be dominant. If you want a Christian voice start 'Christians for OWS' and come and join the collective voice of the people of the planet, together in our wonderous diversity.

It's a secular global movement, and should remain so.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: GUEST,999
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 09:01 AM

Excellent post, TLW. You said it much better than I would have. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 10:00 AM

BTW, I read yesterday that there is a diverse cross-section of religious services that are being conducted at OWS in New York... That's a good thing... No one feels like they are being bullied by any other group...

OWS is way ahead of the right wing noise machines here and not taking any of the bait... OWS is a major threat to greedy people everywhere... We learned during the Egyptian revolution that there were entire enclaves of extremely rich people there who hired private security firm to protect their neighborhoods... From what I have learned is that the income inequality that the US is seeing is part of a global trend of the rich scheming against their working classes...

Yes, this is a class war... Marx was entirely correct... It's all about timing... And the time has come...

I think that here in the US we owe a big "thank you" to the Kochs and their store bought Tea Party for making the greed so overtly obvious that even Helen Keller can see if from her grave... Thank you Kochs, Dick Armey, Freedom Works, the Tea Party, American for Prosperity (for whom??? haha), Eric "The Wiesel" Kantor, etc... Ya'll deserve all the credit in the world for OWS...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Stringsinger
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 02:08 PM

When Woody's guitar said "This machine licks fascists" he was talking not in literal terms but fascism as an ideology.

As to convincing Christians that they should act like Jesus in the Beatitudes, or Matthew,
forget it. If they need convincing, what good is their Christianity?

I agree that this is a secular (thereby inclusive) movement very much like the document called the US Constitution.

OWS should not be co-opted by single leaders (no matter how many politicians want to jump in front of the parade) and not denigrated by becoming a single-issue movement.
It remains diffuse because all injustices are intertwined and one is contingent on another, ie: diversion of funds for war, environmental destruction, educational deprivation, election fraud, campaign money, lobbyists, ALEC, homelessness, mortgage fraud....and more are all interconnected and that's what OWS teaches us.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Oct 11 - 02:13 PM

Not to fear, Strings... I think folks who are involved are also students of history and fully understand that OWS has an entirely different mindset...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: GUEST,John from Kemsing
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 12:43 PM

I don`t know if it is the same in New York and other cities where occupation demonstrations are taking place but independent verification in London has shown that large numbers of tents are un-occupied during the hours of darkness, their owners having gone home to bed. Also the movement has attracted "heavies" maintain security. Knowing what some of our "minders" can be like that is bloody scary!!

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Bettynh
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 02:15 PM

OWS may seem completely new, but the Nobody for president campaign ran in every election since 1976. The problem is that if that actually happens, and only the right wing votes for a physical body, then the whole thing is negated. I have hope that something rational will emerge in the next year, but it worries me.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Paul Burke
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 02:25 PM

That report has been largely discredited- a rightwing rag reporter claims he got it from a policeman, the Metropolitan police say they know nothing about it. I would have thought the Murdochs* affair would have taught you that the press lie, then lie about lying, then lie about their reasons for lying.

* From the French Merde, residue, and Ochs, a bull.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Stringsinger
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 03:32 PM

The system needs to be changed. It doesn't really matter who the president is because
the people have decided not to support the leaders since they don't represent the people any more. This is beyond the Republican recalcitrance or the Democratic compromises and betrayal.

I'm not worried about American protests as long as they are non-violent, calm, firm and resistant. As one of the Ninety-Niners, I know that we will win.

If MLK were alive, he would be part of the Ninety-Niners too. Certainly Tom Paine would.

The protesters today are a bulwark against the onslaught of fascism which could happen here.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: GUEST,999
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 03:43 PM

Good post, Strings.

Subject: RE: BS: The Meaning of OWS (Occupy Wall Street)
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Oct 11 - 05:33 PM

The sign I made and wore at last Saturdays rally read "Thomas Jefferson, Original OWSer"... The one the week before that read "Think 1776"

B~