Alan Jenkins
March 27, 2007
Alan Jenkins is Executive Director of The Opportunity Agenda, an organization dedicated to building the national will to expand opportunity in America. The Opportunity Agenda is the co-producer, with the SPIN Project, of American Opportunity: A Communications Toolkit.
A recent article in USA Today asked the question, “Can Edwards win with an ‘us vs. them’ pitch?” Edwards’ challenge, according to USA Today’s Judy Keen, “is to convince voters in primaries and caucuses that he is a populist who would put their interests above those of big corporations and big government.”
I don’t know how Edwards’ particular message will fare with voters, but I do believe that Americans are ready—and, in some ways, eager—for a political discourse that confronts the steep and unequal barriers to opportunity that millions of Americans are facing and challenges the economic, educational, and political divides that are widening in our country. Importantly, though, the winning narrative will not be about “us vs. them,” but about whether and how we can rise together.
A recent CNN poll found that 54 percent of Americans feel that “the American dream has become impossible for most people to achieve.” And 55 percent say they’re dissatisfied with “current opportunities for the next generation to live better than their parents.” A poll of American workers commissioned by Change to Win found that 81 percent believe that “no matter what you hear about the economy, working families are falling behind.”
At the same time, though, voters are increasingly fed up with the politics of blame and division. They hold out hope that they will be wealthy one day, and don’t see corporations as inherently evil—even as they express concern that monied interests wield too much power in our society. And arguments that bash “big government” have the predictable effect of eroding their belief in a public sector that can help solve big problems like education, health care and poverty.
So how can candidates effectively challenge inequality and promote social justice in ways that galvanize a populist base while engaging new audiences? A growing body of experience, research and thinking provides some important answers.
First, evoking shared values is crucial. As George Lakoff and others have observed, social justice messages often devolve into a laundry list of problems and dry appeals to logic, failing to make the human connection to the values that we share with our audience. That is, the most well-intentioned candidates often forget to say why they care about an issue and why, in light of their own values, others should, too. Progressive politicians, in particular, are notorious for wringing the moral content out of issues like health care child care, and workers’ rights, that implicate clear and compelling societal values.
In this election, one of the most important values at stake is Community —the idea that we share a sense of responsibility for each other and draw strength from the unity of our many diverse communities. That value jeopardized by our failing profit-oriented health care system, by our disinvestment in public schools, by laws that punish immigrants and their families instead of helping to integrate them into the fabric of our society. Addressing those issues is not just about fixing individual problems, but also about building the kind of society we can all be proud of.
Far from being an “us vs. them” argument, this is an argument that we’re all in it together and that our policies must begin to reflect that. Communicating our concerns and goals in terms of our shared destiny and the forces—good and bad—that connect us opens up new conversations and moves us away from the politics of blame.
To be sure, the notion of rugged individualism plays a powerful role in the American consciousness. But Americans increasingly believe that public investment and societal responsibility are requisite in order for individuals to succeed. Restoring that balance, and the positive role that government must play in doing so, is an essential element of an effective social justice narrative.
Of course, a prerequisite to invoking shared values is actually knowing what you believe. There’s a crucial difference between searching your poll numbers for “values-based” positions and searching your soul for the values you hold dear and the society that you want to help create. Not only do voters know the difference, but starting from a place of honest commitment is crucial to moving policies that matter after the election is over.
As important as appealing to values is appealing to hope. Bay Area activist Van Jones points out that there’s a reason why Martin Luther King’s most famous speech was not called “I Have a Complaint.” Effective social justice leaders channel anger—which is certainly abundant among today’s voters—toward a positive, solution-oriented vision. An important challenge for all of the candidates will be their ability to make that transition, not just in terms of rhetoric, but in terms of ideas.
Finally, a conversation about rising together must speak to the imperative of dismantling barriers based on race, gender, class and other aspects of what we look like or where we come from. Yet few politicians of either party have found effective ways to engage this discussion in recent years.
The value of Community is again central. We should care about racial justice, immigrant rights, gay rights or the rights of women not because some Americans have “special” rights or privileges, but because we care about opportunity for all members of our society. That’s a subtle but important difference from the way most candidates currently talk about these issues. Rather than pitting communities of Americans against each other, it is a conversation about building a more inclusive, more prosperous society for everyone who lives here.
These challenges are hardly limited to the Edwards campaign. Candidates in both parties will be called upon to justify their past support for gay rights, immigrants and other positions that choose community over exclusion. Experience shows that the message that will resonate with voters will not be about “us vs. them,” but about what we can all do together.
March 27, 2007
Alan Jenkins is Executive Director of The Opportunity Agenda, an organization dedicated to building the national will to expand opportunity in America. The Opportunity Agenda is the co-producer, with the SPIN Project, of American Opportunity: A Communications Toolkit.
A recent article in USA Today asked the question, “Can Edwards win with an ‘us vs. them’ pitch?” Edwards’ challenge, according to USA Today’s Judy Keen, “is to convince voters in primaries and caucuses that he is a populist who would put their interests above those of big corporations and big government.”
I don’t know how Edwards’ particular message will fare with voters, but I do believe that Americans are ready—and, in some ways, eager—for a political discourse that confronts the steep and unequal barriers to opportunity that millions of Americans are facing and challenges the economic, educational, and political divides that are widening in our country. Importantly, though, the winning narrative will not be about “us vs. them,” but about whether and how we can rise together.
A recent CNN poll found that 54 percent of Americans feel that “the American dream has become impossible for most people to achieve.” And 55 percent say they’re dissatisfied with “current opportunities for the next generation to live better than their parents.” A poll of American workers commissioned by Change to Win found that 81 percent believe that “no matter what you hear about the economy, working families are falling behind.”
At the same time, though, voters are increasingly fed up with the politics of blame and division. They hold out hope that they will be wealthy one day, and don’t see corporations as inherently evil—even as they express concern that monied interests wield too much power in our society. And arguments that bash “big government” have the predictable effect of eroding their belief in a public sector that can help solve big problems like education, health care and poverty.
So how can candidates effectively challenge inequality and promote social justice in ways that galvanize a populist base while engaging new audiences? A growing body of experience, research and thinking provides some important answers.
First, evoking shared values is crucial. As George Lakoff and others have observed, social justice messages often devolve into a laundry list of problems and dry appeals to logic, failing to make the human connection to the values that we share with our audience. That is, the most well-intentioned candidates often forget to say why they care about an issue and why, in light of their own values, others should, too. Progressive politicians, in particular, are notorious for wringing the moral content out of issues like health care child care, and workers’ rights, that implicate clear and compelling societal values.
In this election, one of the most important values at stake is Community —the idea that we share a sense of responsibility for each other and draw strength from the unity of our many diverse communities. That value jeopardized by our failing profit-oriented health care system, by our disinvestment in public schools, by laws that punish immigrants and their families instead of helping to integrate them into the fabric of our society. Addressing those issues is not just about fixing individual problems, but also about building the kind of society we can all be proud of.
Far from being an “us vs. them” argument, this is an argument that we’re all in it together and that our policies must begin to reflect that. Communicating our concerns and goals in terms of our shared destiny and the forces—good and bad—that connect us opens up new conversations and moves us away from the politics of blame.
To be sure, the notion of rugged individualism plays a powerful role in the American consciousness. But Americans increasingly believe that public investment and societal responsibility are requisite in order for individuals to succeed. Restoring that balance, and the positive role that government must play in doing so, is an essential element of an effective social justice narrative.
Of course, a prerequisite to invoking shared values is actually knowing what you believe. There’s a crucial difference between searching your poll numbers for “values-based” positions and searching your soul for the values you hold dear and the society that you want to help create. Not only do voters know the difference, but starting from a place of honest commitment is crucial to moving policies that matter after the election is over.
As important as appealing to values is appealing to hope. Bay Area activist Van Jones points out that there’s a reason why Martin Luther King’s most famous speech was not called “I Have a Complaint.” Effective social justice leaders channel anger—which is certainly abundant among today’s voters—toward a positive, solution-oriented vision. An important challenge for all of the candidates will be their ability to make that transition, not just in terms of rhetoric, but in terms of ideas.
Finally, a conversation about rising together must speak to the imperative of dismantling barriers based on race, gender, class and other aspects of what we look like or where we come from. Yet few politicians of either party have found effective ways to engage this discussion in recent years.
The value of Community is again central. We should care about racial justice, immigrant rights, gay rights or the rights of women not because some Americans have “special” rights or privileges, but because we care about opportunity for all members of our society. That’s a subtle but important difference from the way most candidates currently talk about these issues. Rather than pitting communities of Americans against each other, it is a conversation about building a more inclusive, more prosperous society for everyone who lives here.
These challenges are hardly limited to the Edwards campaign. Candidates in both parties will be called upon to justify their past support for gay rights, immigrants and other positions that choose community over exclusion. Experience shows that the message that will resonate with voters will not be about “us vs. them,” but about what we can all do together.
No comments:
Post a Comment