Thursday, May 04, 2017

Regulations are Protections, Taxes are Investments


George Lakoff is right - conservatives and liberals each have a compelling worldview, but conservatives have been better at framing theirs to appeal to the emotions of more Americans. Worse, liberals have let conservatives reframe the liberal worldview in an unflattering way.

Fighting back with reasoned argument alone misses the basic fact that we are emotional creatures first.

Lakoff names these contrasting worldviews as "strict father" vs. "nurturant parent."  These differences apply to family life and government equally. The different gender politics are also contained in the deliberate asymmetry between "father" and "parent."

At the government level, the liberal worldview sees regulations as protections, and taxes as investments. This is the kind of care for the whole that any good nurturing parent would do. The whole that is envisioned by liberals is all of the people in the nation, together.

Conservatives, by contrast, see regulations as limitations on freedom, and taxes as theft.  They want to toughen up each person under their charge to be personally responsible. The whole they envision is just us - our tribe, our kind, against all others.  The others are constantly trying to infiltrate our tribe, so we must be vigilant in punishing and expelling them, as well as any traitors who help the infiltrators.

There is a real difference in worldview, and each rests on a different metaphysic.  Worldviews grip us through our emotional stories first and most.

5 comments:

Gary said...

George Lakoff is right..both conservatives and liberals have a compelling world view however, given our country is split 50/50 I would say both have been effective promoting their ideals. Generally, the Liberals have used the academic institutions for decades to promote their ideals and the Conservatives have used religious institutions and traditional norms to further the cause. Also, conservative media has been an asset in recent years. I would caution, in assuming Americans , educated or not, are first and most influenced by emotion.

Thanks. Gary

Gruntled said...

I was with you until the last line. I think all people, but nature, are primarily moved by emotion. Emotions are not irrational, but rather are quick cognitive judgments. (See all my posts of Haidt for elaboration).

Mac said...

An interesting, if biased, way to present your argument. Of liberals, you say "This is the kind of care for the whole that any good nurturing parent would do. The whole that is envisioned by liberals is all of the people in the nation, together."

I would suggest that the liberal is an elitist. He or she presumes to have some special, superior knowledge as to what is "good." Having reached that point, the liberal presumes that it is his or her right to achieve a result that is evident to the liberal, using other people's time,nt, and treasure to achieve it.

of conservatives, you say "They want to toughen up each person under their charge to be personally responsible." And in that, you are right. The conservative values the individual, trusting that individuals are fully capable of making decisions regarding priorities. The conservative values security, so the conservative agrees to band together to do that, and only that, which the individual cannot do. National defense requires collective action, either through personal service or by paying for others to assume that responsibility. The same applies to fire and police protection and essential infrastructure. And those collective efforts which, by their very nature require some surrender of personal liberty are best administered at the lowest level possible. Thus, fire and police protection and basic education are best organized, administered, and funded at the local level.

Finally, those things which the individual is capable of doing through the application of personal effort are left to the individual. It is not, as you suggest that "The others are constantly trying to infiltrate our tribe, so we must be vigilant in punishing and expelling them, as well as any traitors who help the infiltrators." Punishment has no part in the equation. Rather, it is a reflection of an understanding that when government forcibly requires a redistribution of wealth in order to assume personal responsibilities for some of the group, there are always those who will abuse the collective largesse rather than taking personal responsibility.

Gary said...

Dr....yes, I agree humans as a living breathing species are moved by emotions. My point is, because we have progressed as humans , folks tend to think through their values more common as opposed to just reacting. Will say, We as people can be trusted no further than they are bound by their interests. Individuals act for their own benefit and not for the benefit of others unless both interests happen to be assimilated.

Thanks.

Barry said...

I used to be a conservative, however I would now describe myself as socially progressive and fiscally prudent. Considering the description of the two camps, my thoughts move to education and the current debate on common core which was originally endorsed by a Republican president, but as now become a conservative evil. This seems to be because of religion or more likely because of local control. As a recent president stated: The nation that out educates us today will out compete us tomorrow. Based on the political description of myself above and the lower standing of the US in recent education measures, I now think that we need a national emphasis and standards on education. I see in my rural community the insulation from the world and the lowered emphasis on education.