Messaging & Intro to George Lakoff – Indivisible Benton County

Some ideas from George Lakoff include:

🧩 1. The Core Idea of “Framing”

Lakoff’s central claim is that the way we think is shaped by mental “frames.”
A frame is a structure of concepts that organizes how we perceive and interpret the world.

A frame defines what counts as relevant, what causes what, who is responsible, and what moral lessons are drawn.
When we hear or use words, those words activate certain frames in our minds — often unconsciously.

Example:

“Tax relief”
This phrase activates a frame in which taxes are an affliction, the taxpayer is a victim, and the government is a villain — implying that cutting taxes is “helping” or “rescuing.”

By contrast:

“Public investment”
activates a frame in which taxes fund shared goods, cooperation, and future benefit.

So, frames shape political reasoning before facts are even considered.

💭 2. How Frames Work in the Mind

Lakoff draws from cognitive linguistics — meaning and reasoning arise from embodied experience, not just logic or abstract rules.
Frames are stored in neural circuits: repeated language and experience make them stronger.
When a frame is activated, it inhibits competing frames.
→ Hearing one kind of story about an issue (“crime as war”) makes it harder to think in another (“crime as public health”).

That’s why Lakoff warns: “Don’t negate your opponent’s frame.”
If you say “Don’t think of an elephant,” you’ve already activated the “elephant” frame.

🧭 3. “Values” and Moral Systems

Lakoff argues that politics is really a conflict of moral worldviews, each built on different core values — and these are structured by family metaphors.

Two main moral models (especially in U.S. politics):

Model	Metaphor	Core Values	Typical Associations
Strict Father	The nation as a family with a strong father who enforces discipline	Authority, self-reliance, punishment for wrongdoing, moral order	Conservative worldview
Nurturant Parent	The nation as a family where parents care and empower	Empathy, fairness, protection, helping others grow responsibly	Progressive worldview

Each side sees its values as moral truths.
So, for example, “freedom” means different things depending on the frame:

For conservatives: freedom from government interference (strict-father autonomy).
For progressives: freedom to realize one’s potential (nurturant support).

🧠 4. Why “Framing” Matters Politically

Lakoff’s point is that facts alone rarely change minds.
People interpret facts through frames that align with their moral values.

Thus, successful political communication requires:

Knowing which frames your audience uses,
Framing your own ideas in terms of shared values, not just data,
Avoiding the repetition of opponents’ frames (which strengthens them).

📚 5. Key Books

If you want to go deeper, Lakoff’s main works on this are:

Don’t Think of an Elephant! (2004, updated 2014) — practical, political focus.
Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think (1996, expanded 2016) — theoretical foundation.
The Political Mind (2008) — about cognitive science, metaphors, and how the brain processes politics.
Metaphors We Live By (with Mark Johnson, 1980) — not political per se, but introduces the idea that metaphor is conceptual, not just linguistic.

Guide to how this becomes practical ie;

Here’s how to recognize and decode frames when you encounter political language, news coverage, or even everyday conversations.

🧭 1. Look for the Metaphors Behind the Words

Frames are often built from conceptual metaphors — everyday images that structure complex issues.

Example phrase	Hidden metaphor (frame)	Implication
“War on drugs”	Crime is war	We must defeat an enemy, not heal addiction.
“Moral decay”	Society is a body	Immorality is a disease; needs cleansing or discipline.
“Economic engine”	The economy is a machine	Needs to be fueled, tuned, fixed — people are parts.
“Tax relief”	Tax is an affliction	Government is a burden, taxpayers are victims.

When you hear strong metaphorical words — war, fight, drain, fix, cleanse, save — ask yourself:
“What picture of the world is this activating?”

🏛️ 2. Notice Who the Actors Are

Frames often assign roles: hero, victim, villain, rescuer.

“Hardworking taxpayers” → hero
“Welfare cheats” → villain
“Government handouts” → villainous rescuer
“Small businesses” → virtuous underdogs

Ask:

“Who is being made morally good or bad in this story?”
“Whose agency is emphasized or erased?”

If government is always the villain and the market the hero, that’s a Strict Father moral frame.
If government is the caring parent that ensures fairness, that’s a Nurturant Parent frame.

💰 3. Check for Moral Language Disguised as Facts

Lakoff says there’s no such thing as purely neutral language in politics — words carry values.

Example:

“Entitlement programs” implies undeserved claims.
“Social insurance” implies shared protection.
Both describe the same thing (Social Security, Medicare) but invoke different moral logic.

So, when reading headlines, notice adjectives:

“burdensome,” “reckless,” “responsible,” “job-killing,” “family-friendly” — each reflects a value, not just a fact.

🧩 4. Identify Implicit Goals and Causation

Frames determine what counts as the cause of a problem and what the “solution” looks like.

Example:

“Crime is caused by moral weakness” → solution = punishment.
“Crime is caused by poverty and neglect” → solution = social support.

Different frames produce completely different policy conclusions even with the same data.

Ask:

“What is being assumed about why this problem exists?”
“What kind of solution sounds ‘natural’ in this frame?”

🧠 5. Be Aware of Negations and Traps

Lakoff warns: “Don’t use your opponent’s language to rebut them.”

When someone says “Don’t think of an elephant,” your brain activates the “elephant” frame — even if you’re denying it.

So instead of saying:

“We’re not against freedom.”

You would reframe:

“We stand for the freedom to live with dignity.”

That is, replace the frame — don’t argue within it.

📰 6. Watch for Journalistic Neutrality Framing

Even “objective” reporting often adopts dominant frames unconsciously:

“Law and order” frame: emphasizes crime as moral threat, legitimizes crackdowns.
“Middle class tax relief” frame: presumes taxes are harm, not contribution.
“Border crisis” frame: activates invasion metaphor, fear, defense.

Journalists often inherit these metaphors from official sources.
Lakoff calls this the “framing trap of balance” — appearing neutral but reinforcing one moral system’s assumptions.

🧩 7. Practice Reframing

Once you spot a frame, try rewriting it with a different moral logic.

Example:

Original	Reframed
“Welfare dependency”	“Economic security”
“Climate change regulation”	“Clean energy freedom”
“Tax burden”	“Shared investment in our future”
“Border protection”	“Fair and humane immigration system”

You’re not changing facts — you’re changing the story those facts live in.

🪶 8. How to Train Your Ear

Highlight key nouns and verbs in an article.
Ask what metaphors they imply.
Look for repetition. Frames are strengthened by repeated phrases.
Compare two sides’ language on the same issue — note how each defines morality, responsibility, and identity.
Write both frames side by side. This makes their moral contrast visible.

Would you like me to make a practical worksheet (in table format) you could print — with columns like “Phrase,” “Frame it invokes,” “Opposing frame,” “Your reframe version”?
It’s an easy way to practice spotting and reshaping frames in real-world examples (news headlines, campaign slogans, etc.).