Walker Betrayal of Trust revealed – truth needs to be framed, then repeated…again and again

Unless you were living under a rock, or completely ignoring all local and national news outlets (not to mention Twitter, Facebook, Blogs, etc.), the release of court documents by Federal Appellate Court Judge Frank Easterbook  today shed much needed light on the conduct of Scott Walker, his campaign, and conservative allied groups leading up to the launch of the John Doe. Read Exhibit C of the released documents – which provide valuable insight into the campaign coordination that went on at a national level (read the links for in depth coverage). Perhaps the most revealing email exchange is from Scott Walker to Karl Rove on May 4, 2011:

Bottom-line: R.I. helps keep in place a team that is wildly successful in
Wisconsin. We are running 9 recall elections and it will be like running 9
Congressional markets in every market in the state (and Twin
Cities.)

This case before the 7th Circuit is the real deal. Judge Frank Easterbrook is no political hack, unlike Judge Rudolph Randa. Easterbrook is a University of Chicago graduate (JD) and senior lecturer, appointed by Ronald Reagan. Of Easterbrook, Dean of the U of C law school says:

Easterbrook is an important influence on legal education through his judicial opinions. Course after law school course has changed for the better as Judge Easterbrook’s opinions have made their way into the curriculum. So long as he decides cases, and decides them in a way that cuts to the heart of an issue with such skill and pressure, no area of law can be dull.

According to Wikipedia, another of Easterbrook’s colleagues calls him “the world’s greatest living jurist.”

The facts are clear – Walker coordinated with allied conservative groups at a national level during the recall election, and was answering to national conservative powerhouse Karl Rove. As we all know, the facts are not enough and are easily ignored. So how do we frame them effectively…so that even moderate conservatives will understand the significance of these activities?

For the sake of argument, let’s say that Walker et al walked the fine line just this side of the law. Why? Because conservative dominance of the courts means that decisions after Citizens United will err on the side of “money = speech.” What is more important are the moral implications of his (and the organizations’) actions. What is really important is the fact that Walker betrayed the trust of everyone who voted for him.

In the conservative moral frame (see previous posts and “Resources” page for detail), the worst thing the strict father can do is betray the trust of the family. The family metaphor applies to the state, and what Walker has done is (metaphorically) cheated on his Wisconsin family with powerful ideologues like Karl Rove. Worse, he is answering NOT to his Wisconsin constituents, but to Karl Rove – someone much more powerful and wealthy than the typical Wisconsinite. Walker has betrayed the trust of the people. 

This frame cascades to every issue in this campaign – who has reaped the benefits of the current administration’s economic policies (and who has been harmed)…who has benefited from his education policies (and who has been harmed)…the give away of our state’s natural beauty to powerful and wealthy profiteers…the list goes on and on.

In greater detail, the public (government) and those who serve the public have a moral obligation to protect and empower those they serve, to the best of their ability. In the progressive moral frame, that means acting on our empathy to be responsible for others as ourselves, and expanding freedom and opportunity for as many people as possible without impinging on the freedom of others (responsibility for others – and again, the mere pursuit of wealth through greed is not a freedom). Even in the conservative frame, there is the idea of accountability to the tenets of being faithful to one’s family – metaphorically, the state.

The way to make these truths about Walker exposed in the John Doe resonate with both progressives and conservatives – say WHY it matters:

Walker betrayed the trust of  Wisconsinites who elected him with people more powerful and rich than they are…

Then say how.

Then say it again.

And again.

And again.

By doing so, you can cognitively change the way people think about this (and every other) issue, and it will have an impact far beyond any single election.

Marriage Freedom Fighters show the way…in messaging

Way behind on blogging to current events and progressive messaging right now,  and I have promised education and environment issue framing blogs to some folks…

But the recent ruling by Federal Judge Barbara Crabb overturning Wisconsin’s ban on marriage freedom is a perfect example of how powerful framing is – if done correctly. The rapid paradigm shift in public discourse on the issue provides a lesson and opportunity for progressives to continue moving public discourse forward on other issues just as rapidly. It has to do with education, the environment, and every other issue. So while we continue to follow this story and celebrate with people who continue to struggle against oppression and phobia, a lesson in neural power.

First, it is critical for us to understand why, for conservatives, marriage is a moral issue. Conservatives actually believe their position on gay marriage is moral, just as progressives believe they are moral on the issue. Why? It has everything to do with the metaphorical basis of the conservative ideology – the “strict authoritarian father.”

In the conservative moral frame, the strict father is the highest authority (see previous posts for more detail about the conservative frame). This means authority “over” the family, and the metaphor extends through a hierarchical structure to everything in the conservative moral frame. This is critical, as much of what progressives consider to be overtly racist, sexist, or homophobic is a natural function of the hierarchy in the conservative frame. The hierarchy is highly metaphorical, embedded, and everywhere: father over the family, men over women, man over nature, rich over poor, whites over non-white races, Christianity over all other religions, United States over other nations, and of course – straight over gay people. The hierarchy must exist in the strict authoritarian father frame, and as you instinctively know, it is everywhere. For conservatives, it is part of their moral frame.

For progressives, it is a moral issue as well. Fortunately, a little over one decade ago, the leaders of the pro-marriage freedom progressives in California recognized the morality of the issue – and framed it as such. While he was in Madison recently, George Lakoff conveyed the story.

Prior to a decade ago, as many in the LGBT community will recall, the issue of gay marriage was a “gay rights” issue. Professor Lakoff, cognitive scientist at UC-Berkeley met with the organizers in California. The organizers had conducted extensive research on how to message the gay marriage issue, and Lakoff encouraged them to do what they instinctively thought was effective framing of the issue. Lakoff encouraged them to stop talking about “gay rights” and “gay marriage” (the issue) and focus on why the issue is moral (values). Fortunately, they followed their hearts – literally.

The issue of “gay marriage” in the progressive frame is about love and freedom. That is how public discourse was changed so quickly. People, even those who consider themselves conservative in one way or the other (unless they are sociopaths), are capable of empathy for others. Communicating over and over again about “love” and “freedom,” in the context of gay marriage, reinforced and activated the progressive moral frame – and inhibited the conservative frame – in millions of people across the country. This is, quite simply, how public discourse changed. It is also how progressives can continue actively changing public discourse in Wisconsin.

The progressive value of freedom applies to every issue, and needs to be talked about again and again. Quite simply, we want our communities and our state to expand freedom, not impinge upon freedom. We want communities where we care for (love) all of our neighbors. Through the Public (government), we must all act together to empower and protect everyone’s freedom in Wisconsin to…(insert issue i.e. get a great public education, marry the person they love, enjoy and protect our pristine land and water, etc.). And “expanding freedom” cannot mean impeding other’s freedoms for personal greed (sorry Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce).

By following the example set so beautifully by “Marriage Freedom Fighters,” we can work together to change public discourse and move Wisconsin Forward again!

 

 

Your donation will help keep this critical work going in Wisconsin…