George Lakoff on Framing
What you need to do in this case is first admit that George Bush got something right: Three years ago when he stood on that aircraft carrier and said “Mission Accomplished” he was right because a war is a conflict between two armies over territory, and we won that war. And right after we won that war, when he was standing on that carrier, the occupation began. We have been an occupying power in Iraq for over three years. But our troops were trained not to be occupiers but to be combatants in a war. They were not trained for an occupation, they were not equipped for an occupation, they didn’t know the language, they didn’t know the culture, they didn’t have the armor, they didn’t’ have enough troops. And the result was that they were betrayed by our president and the administration, and sucked into being an occupying force which they weren’t trained to be. The result is that they’ve been cut down, they’re dying, they’re going a bit nuts killing other people. They’re under tremendous pressures and they’re not really helping.
The issue in an occupation is not winning or losing because you can’t win and occupation, you can only leave. So the question is a practical one: Are we welcome? For many Iraqis we’re not welcome. Are we helping? Well, the situation seems to be getting worse not better. There’s a civil war going on there, and that civil war was predicted by our generals if we went in this direction. They knew in advance that a civil war was a real possibility under these circumstances but they went ahead anyway. This is not a good thing, and moreover the US has pretty much given up on reconstruction. There’s not a dime in the present budget for Iraqi reconstruction. So it’s not clear that we’re helping very much at all.
That's right, George W Bush has never been able to run an organization anywhere except into the ground! Why does HE get to be the Stern Father Figure? Especially since he's been acting like a spoiled fratboy lately.
4 Comments:
The Neoconservatives, the PNAC, is masterful in their use of language. They have hijacked the language of compassion and turned it upsidedown. They use fear as their major motivator. They are truly evil, sociopathic, monsters.
On the other hand, the liberals have forgotten how to appeal to the hearts of their basic constituancies, and are so off-track that they barely exist as a viable force at this moment. Steamrolled by the shadow-use of the language, the liberals are scattered, and afraid for their own re-election.
I'm gonna add you to my blog roll.
I agree with DivaJood. Arch-conservatives in general have indeed hijacked the language of compassion - and in doing so have turned day into night. Democrats allowed this to happen; and so far have done precious little to change people’s perceptions. Were there a viable progressive third party - I would jump on board. As it is - it seems we are stuck with Democrats; very few of whom seem to have even a superficial understanding of what has gone wrong in America. Good article, by the way. I’m not sure I agree with everything he says – but he makes some powerful points.
Why, thank you, Divajood, and welcome to my caravan.
On the other hand, the liberals have forgotten how to appeal to the hearts of their basic constituancies, and are so off-track that they barely exist as a viable force at this moment.
So true, and when we do find someone who speaks truth, and elucidates our values, (like Lamont) the beltway morons pounce and destroy them and all our work.
Hey TFLS,
I went online and bought the book(used heh heh). It's essential for some of us to actually figure this sh*t out, and if the beltway morons won't....
Lately? When has he ever not acted like a spoiled, sadistic frat boy?
Post a Comment
<< Home