If you reply to this long (14kB) post please don't hit the reply
button unless you prune the copy of this post that may appear in your
reply down to a few relevant lines, otherwise the entire already
archived post may be needlessly resent to subscribers.
********************************************
ABSTRACT: Russ Hunt, in his POD post "Bunkum Awards " has given some
valuable insights and references on conservative think tanks. In one
of Hunt's references, David Callahan quotes Robert Reich on the
importance of "framing" the national debate. In turn, I quote
excerpts from linguist George Lakoff's "Don't Think of an Elephant"
on the cognitive rationale for framing, and on the smart conservative
vs naive progressive strategies for influencing policy.
********************************************
In response to my post "Bunkum Awards (was Education Research by
Conservative Think Tanks)," Russ Hunt (2007) wrote [bracketed by
lines "HHHHH. . . . "; slightly edited so as to employ standard
academic references; my inserts at ". . . .[insert]. . . ."]:
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
A number of times recently I've read articles about the advent of
these "thinktanks." See, for instance:
1. "No Mercy: How Conservative Think Tanks and Foundations Changed
America's Social Agenda" [Stefancic & Delgado (1996)].
2. Review of Stefancic & Delgado (1996) [Brennan (1998)].
3. "Excerpt of '$1 Billion for Ideas: Conservative Think Tanks in
the 1990's' " [Callahan (1999a)].
4. "Think Tanks" [Source Watch (2007)].
Something it's important to know -- before you even think about. . .
.["Think Tank Review Project"
<http://epsl.asu.edu/epru/thinktankreview.htm>]. . . ., which looks
great to me -- is that many of them have been specifically set up and
lavishly funded by people whose interests lie in enhancing the wealth
of the rich, to pursue that aim. They have, usually, virtually
unlimited funding. We have a few of them in Canada as well -- one
local one styles itself the "Atlantic Institute for Market
Research,". . . .[<http://www.aims.ca/default.asp>]. . . . . and they
publish an annual report on education in the Maritime provinces. No
one in the media ever asks why we care what a market research
institute has to say about education (I suppose someone might ask if
they published a report on dentistry or civil engineering): the
papers print their reports as though they had some sort of authority.
Oddly enough, it usually turns out that private enterprise could do
it better.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
For the Source Watch (SW) (2007) analysis of the "Atlantic Institute
for Market Studies" see <http://tinyurl.com/2lwqej>. SW wrote:
"Like its sister think tank in western Canada, the Fraser Institute
in Calgary, Alberta,. . . .[<http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/>]. . . .
the Atlantic Institute of Marketing Studies issues annual 'report
cards' for public schools in Atlantic Canada, which lead to the
impression that public schools provide poor education and receive a
great deal of media coverage . . . . . [see e.g.. "AIMS' 5th Annual
Report Card on Atlantic Canadian High Schools: No excuses: Success
comes in every school package" (AIMS, 2007)]. . . . . . Many
leading academics and universities in the region have sharply
criticized the methodology of the AIMS study of public schools,
saying the results are without scientific merit."
Hunt's third reference, Callahan (1999), quotes Robert Reich
<http://www.robertreich.org/reich/biography.asp>:
"How the national debate is framed. . . . [e.g., the "No Child Left
Behind" act]. . . ., and what options are put before the public, can
be more important ultimately than the immediate choices made. The
framing defines the breadth of the nation's ambitions, and thus
either raises or lowers expectations, fires or depresses
imaginations, ignites or deflates political movements. " George
Lakoff <http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/people/fac/lakoff.html> in
"Don't Think of an Elephant" [Lakoff (2004)] provides an insightful
discussion of framing and the effective conservative vs the generally
ineffective progressive strategies for influencing policy. On pages
16-17 (online at
<http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/DTE_Sampler.pdf> ) he writes [my
insert at ". . . . . [insert]. . . .", my CAPS]:
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
When the amount of research money spent by the right over a period of
time is compared with the amount of media time during that period, we
see a direct correlation. In 2002 four times as much money was spent
on research by the right as by the left, and they got four times as
much media time. They get what they pay for.
This is not an accident. Conservatives, through their think tanks,
figured out the importance of framing, and they figured out how to
frame every issue. They figured out how to get those frames out
there, how to get their people in the media all the time. . . . . .
Nothing like this happens in the progressive world, because there are
so many people thinking that what each does is *the* right thing. It
is not smart. It is self-defeating. And what is worse is a set of
myths believed by liberals and progressives. These myths come from a
good source, but they end up hurting us badly.
The myths began with the Enlightenment, and the first one goes like this:
"The truth will set us free. If we just tell people the facts, since
people are basically rational beings, they'll all reach the right
conclusions."
But we know from cognitive science that people do not think like
that. PEOPLE THINK IN FRAMES. The strict father and nurturing parent
frames each force a certain logic. To be accepted, the truth must fit
people's frames. If the facts do not fit a frame, the frame stays and
the facts bounce off. . . . . . .[as anyone who has attempted to
bring Aristotelian thinkers (motion requires a force) into the
Newtonian World can testify- see, e.g,. Hake, 1987)]. . . . . . Why?
Neuroscience tells us that each of the concepts we have-the long-term
concepts that structure how we think-is instantiated in the synapses
of our brains. CONCEPTS ARE NOT THINGS THAT CAN BE CHANGED JUST BY
SOMEONE TELLING US A FACT. We may be presented with facts, but for us
to make sense of them, they have to fit what is already in the
synapses of the brain. Otherwise facts go in and then they go right
back out. They are not heard, or they are not accepted as facts, or
they mystify us: Why would anyone have said that? Then we label the
fact as irrational, crazy, or stupid. That's what happens when
progressives just "confront conservatives with the facts." It has
little or no effect, unless the conservatives have a frame that makes
sense of the facts.
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>
"[The elder William Simon] convinced some very wealthy people -
Coors, Scaife, Olin - to set up the Heritage Foundation . . .
.[<http://www.heritage.org/>]. . . ., the Olin professorships, the
Olin Institute at Harvard. . . . . .
.[<http://www.wcfia.harvard.edu/olin/>]. . . ., and other
institutions. These institutes have done their job very well. People
associated with them have written more books than the people on the
left have, on all issues. The conservatives support their
intellectuals. They create media opportunities. They have media
studios down the hall in institutes so that getting on television is
easy. Eighty percent of the talking heads on television are from the
conservative think tanks."
George Lakoff (2004, p. 15-16)]
REFERENCES
AIMS. 2007. "AIMS' 5th Annual Report Card on Atlantic Canadian High
Schools: No excuses: Success comes in every school package," online
at <http://www.aims.ca/aimslibrary.asp?ft=1&id=1641>.
Brennan, M.C. 1998. Review of Stefancic & Delgado (1996). Journal of
American History 85(3): 1171-1172; online to Jastor subscribers at
<http://tinyurl.com/3albv6>.
Callahan, D. 1999a. "Excerpt from Callahan (1999b); online at
<http://www.commonwealinstitute.org/ncrp.callahan.1.htm>.
Callahan. D. 1999b. "$1 Billion for Ideas: Conservative Think Tanks
in the 1990's." National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy.
Hake, R.R. 1987. "Promoting student crossover to the Newtonian
world." Am J. Phys. 55(10): 878-884; online at
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/PromotingCrossover.pdf> (788
kB).
Hake, R.R. 2007. "Bunkum Awards (was Education Research by
Conservative Think Tanks)," online at
<http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0706&L=pod&O=D&P=9279>. Post
of 13 Jun 2007 17:44:21-0700 to AERA-D, AERA-L, ARN-L, ASSESS, EDDRA,
EdResMeth, EvalTalk, Math-Teach, PhysLnrR, and POD.
Hunt, R. 2007. "Re: Bunkum Awards (was Education Research by
Conservative Think Tanks)," POD post of 13 Jun 2007 22:38:38-0300;
online at
<http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0706&L=pod&O=D&P=9556>.
Lakoff, G. 2004. "Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and
Frame the Debate." Chelsea Green. Information at
<http://www.chelseagreen.com/2004/items/elephant>; excerpts at
<http://www.chelseagreen.com/images/DTE_Sampler.pdf> (1 MB).
Source Watch. 2007. "Think Tanks." online at
<http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Think_tanks>.
Stefancic, J. & R.Delgado. 1996. "No Mercy: How Conservative Think
Tanks and Foundations Changed America's Social Agenda," Temple Univ
Press. Amazon.com information at <http://tinyurl.com/3avkf3>. The
Midwest Book Review opines: "No Mercy reveals the rather shocking
truth about how the New Right Conservatives have managed to gain the
advantage in setting the country's political agenda through sheer
ingenuity, determination, focused efforts and persuasive use of the
media. The authors offer an alarming call to action urging the
Political Left to adopt the same dedication and economy of effort
that have proven so effective for the Right (e. g. English Only,
Immigration Reform, Race and Eugenics, the abolition of Affirmative
Action, Welfare Reform, Tort Reform, and the discrediting of Campus
Multiculturalism). Stefancic and Delgado seek to inform Americans
about how the juggernaut operates (not to celebrate but to combat it)
before it's too late. No Mercy is a national wake-up call that should
be on every political science department's library shelf."
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
