Cognitive Policy Works Rotating Header Image

A Politics that Works in the 21st Century

Changing our politics will involve significant shifts in political – and interpersonal – culture.

This may seem like a truism, yet it is common practice among progressive “political junkies” to place nearly all their attention on electoral campaigns and legislative battles. The assumption seems to be that if only we get more of our people in office the world will magically become a better place.

My colleagues and I advocate for an alternative approach that is more empowering for citizens. And we believe it is more likely to succeed.

Before telling you about what we recommend, it might be helpful to know where our thinking comes from. The community of experts gathering around Cognitive Policy Works is comprised of psychologists, media experts, analysts of future trends, linguists, educators, and systems theorists. We are the kind of people who look at the deep structures of society to discover how social institutions shape behavior. So, when it comes to politics, we don’t easily get caught up on superficialities.

This is important because our alternative is to look at the underpinnings of social cohesion to explain why people think, feel, and act the ways they do. We suggest that political change occurs when there is a significant shift in a cultural lens. In simple terms, if we change how we do politics we will change what politics is about.

President Obama seems to understand this. He has shifted the tone of political discourse by doing things in a different way, implying new social norms that include:

  • Disagreeing without being disagreeable (based on civility and mutual respect)
  • Treating members of both parties as patriots (emphasizing collaboration toward common goals)
  • Opening up the process to the public with virtual town hall meetings and weekly briefings to the public (promoting an expectation of transparency and openness among the citizenry)
  • Following the constitution as a moral guide for good behavior (taking oaths seriously and believing in the importance of laws for social order)

(You can learn more about Obama’s moral code here.)

Many progressives have gotten snagged on a political appointment they don’t like or a program that didn’t make its way into the final draft of a bill that they don’t see this fundamental change. There seems to be a wide-spread blindness to the cultural shift that is taking place in Washington and across society.

This doesn’t surprise me. When George Lakoff and I stumbled upon the idea of cognitive policy – the frames, values, and modes of thought that inform political understandings – we were attempting to communicate the importance of cultural values to policymakers in Congress. These were some very smart people, yet they weren’t able to see the significance of what we were saying. Their blindness led us to distinguish cognitive policy from material policy. The nuts and bolts of what is to be done – material policy – will only work if it makes sense to people and resonates with their core values.

The Key to a New Politics

The missing element, what I call the great political blind spot, is a recognition that the workings of our minds are central to politics. We are not “rational actors” who consciously deliberate the pros and cons of every choice to “maximize our self-interest.” Such a view is based on several flawed ideas: that we have conscious access to our thoughts; that our concepts literally correspond with an external reality (as if there were only one); that reason works best when divorced from emotion; and that everyone reasons in the same way. This understanding of the mind is what anthropologists call a folk theory. It is a commonsense notion of how the mind works.

And it is wrong in every respect.

The real workings of our minds tell a different tale. Much of what we call “thought” is structured outside conscious awareness. Our most important concepts are profoundly metaphorical in nature and are shaped by our bodily experiences in the world. Reason cannot possibly work without emotional sensibilities that shape what we pay attention to and how we respond to different things around us. And the logic of our reasoning is bound to particular contexts that can be contradictory from one person to another.

Why should you care about this? Because it demonstrates why so much of our politics throughout the last several decades has been dysfunctional. It just doesn’t work. And the reason is simple: We have assumed that political behavior works in a way that is completely off base.

A Vision for the 21st Century

Millions of citizens are turned off by the political process. This observation alone should be a mandate for a new kind of politics. Many reasons have been given for why so many Americans disengage from politics. People are apathetic. They only care about themselves and their immediate concerns. Negative political adds polarize staunch partisans and marginalize everyone else. There may be kernels of truth in each of these claims. But I contend that there is something deeper going on.

A good place to start unpacking this riddle is with our understanding of language. Recent work has shown that our thoughts are structured outside conscious awareness with cognitive “frames.” A common misconception is that these frames are about words and messages. Many people still think frame analysis is intended for sloganeering. The truth is that frames go much deeper, to the very foundations of how we understand things in the world.

When George Lakoff published Don’t Think of an Elephant! in 2004, there was a wave of excitement that ended with disappointment. What happened? Nonprofit leaders and political strategists “tried” the framing approach by tinkering with their word choices. This was like moving deck chairs around without realizing that there’s a massive block of ice below the surface. They had frames of their own about how language works, understandings that allowed no place for the profound depth of what George was saying. So they failed to realize that frames go to the core of what it means to be human.

And this is the key to politics in the 21st Century – realizing with clarity and depth how the political mind works. In a world based on this new perspective, things work very differently:

  • Citizens recognize fear-inducing news reports intended to inflate manufactured risks and hide awareness of genuine threats, thereby reducing the effectiveness of these manipulative tactics.
  • Journalists understand the consequences of how facts are presented and beliefs are promoted in the structure of news reporting, resulting in coverage that enhances—rather than erodes—the democratic process.
  • Policy-makers abandon contrived and faulty presumptions about “economic rational actors” and instead craft solutions to societal challenges that improve the lives of real people through deeper insights into the human condition, culminating in robust policies that stand the test of time.
  • Advocates articulate clear and compelling calls to action that resonate deeply with the values of the citizenry, thereby promoting greater civic engagement and community empowerment.

My colleagues and I are starting to lay the foundation for this new politics. At the heart of our work is a belief in the democratization of knowledge. Insights about the political mind are dangerous in the hands of the few. The best behavioral research money can buy has already been used to manipulate us in the past. The antidote is to make this knowledge available to everyone. We can develop tools for countering deception and make them part of the standard curriculum.

Our goal is both ambitious and simple – to bridge the gap between academia’s extensive knowledge about the human mind and the practices of our civic and political institutions. We seek to alleviate the immediate crises of frustration and recurring setbacks for progressive organizations, while also looking beyond the horizon to a world where citizens are empowered to know who they can trust and how they can participate in the betterment of society. A key element of this is revealing the various applications of psychology to politics.

This will require us to change the way we do things. Old school “think tanks” that spit out reports for public consumption are not good enough. That model is based on the flawed assumption that people only need to get the right facts and they’ll reason to the right conclusions. Our minds simply don’t work that way. Instead, we’ll have to create new tools, establish new practices, and envision new institutional forms.

Notions of wealth that underpin progressive philanthropy will also need to change. We can no longer apply corporate models of worker exploitation to our funding strategies and believe that we’ll succeed. Our institutions must reflect our core values – including human dignity and mutual respect – if we are to promote social well-being in the causes we address and instill our values in the broader culture. One cannot succeed without the other in the long run.

This process will only work if people are engaged more broadly than every before. Elite tactics that treat citizens as passive consumers will not get us there. We need to get personal, in two ways:

  1. Recognize that politics is fundamentally about personal concerns and perceived realities
  2. Understand that the culture of politics takes root in the interpersonal space of people engaged with one another

So it really comes down to relationships. How we relate to ourselves and the concerns that motivate us. And how we relate to those around us in common struggle. This is where social networking sites become foundations for successful campaigns (Obama’s campaign website is a great example.). It is also where leaders become facilitators for the creation of flourishing communities, drawing upon the wisdom of crowds to tap the tremendous capacity of citizens to participate in the creation of collective solutions.

It’s about the roles we fill and the relationships among us.

Creating new relationships in politics will require us to learn more about ourselves. We cannot solve big problems like the climate crisis by having our leaders do the work for us. Novel innovations will be necessary to cultivate the new ways of thinking and organizing behind our solutions. We’re going to have to trust each other. We’re also going to have to communicate across cultural boundaries (especially across the boundaries of different political communities) to find a common vision and set about the work of making it real. This will be easier to do if we understand the ways that different worldviews lead to divergent meanings.

Politics in the 21st Century will only work if it takes into account the political mind. The time is ripe for this change. Yesterday’s world is falling apart. We can’t go back. Tomorrow’s world will be shaped by the visionaries of today. It’s going to take all of us working together.

I’m ready to do my part. Are you?

——–

Enjoy this article?  Perhaps you’d like to sign up for our newsletter.

——–

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • Twitter

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

13 Comments

  1. [...] 3: Not satisfied with this strategy? Maybe you’ll want to build a different kind of politics that works in another [...]

  2. Joe Brewer says:

    Hi koot,

    I agree that we need to collectively intervene and we need to do it soon. My sense of urgency to begin this organization and attract like-minded people comes from the unfolding of global events that tells me to start taking action… and help others to do so.

    Best,

    Joe

  3. koot says:

    I may have said this before on this site.
    The Obama Administration is like a man trying to repair a car that has crashed. Whether or not the repair is sucessful, the car is being driven by alcholics who will go careening off after their next high, and will crash the car again as they have done in the past. The opportunity for an intervention is at hand.

  4. sariade says:

    Hi Joe,
    Please accept my apologies for addressing you as “Jim”. Brain-freeze :(

    I hope you will check out the site.
    Keep up the good work.

  5. sariade says:

    Hello Jim,
    While this is an excellent beginning, there is natural “blindspot” to your logic that needs addressing. You make the fatal assumption that all the individuals in this new politics will be a motivated and well-meaning as yourself. There is no taking into account the reality of the sub-clinical pschopathic personality, the non-violent ’snakes in suits’ that currently infest the coroporate and government structures we suffer under. Until the majority of the population have a firm grasp of the reality of these individuals and are adept at recognizing them before they are in a position to cause another Enron or Iraq, any attempt to bring about the sort of change you hope for is doomed to failure. History is littered with examples of shining vision twisted and debased to horrific reality. A good start would be the works of Robert Hare and Martha Stout. But for a real survey of how psychopathy corrupts the body politic, your best bet is Ponerology: A Science on the Nature of Evil by Dr. Andrew Lobaczewski. He and his fellow researchers secretly studied the pathology of Stalinism in Russia and Poland at the height of its power. It addresses for example, many of the concerns raised by Ms. Kline in her comments, such as sloganeering and the (deliberate) debasement of language. Sobering reading, but essential. Research is showing that psychopathy has a strong genetic component, so in one sense “they will always be with us”. But just as one avoids lions and poisenous snakes because we know about them, so will education about this dangerous sub-group of humanity give us the ability to defend ourselves. Read more here: http://www.ponerology.com

  6. [...] 3: Not satisfied with this strategy? Maybe you’ll want to build a different kind of politics that works in another [...]

  7. Jimw says:

    I don’t believe I characterized your work as merely positive thinking. I said that no amount of positive thinking would affect matters without first changing the underlying money system.

  8. Joe Brewer says:

    Hi Jim,

    I agree with you that we need to change the basis of our monetary system. I recommend that anyone following this discussion watch the video Money as Debt to get a sense of how our monetary system currently operates.

    But I don’t see the work we do at Cognitive Policy Works as merely being “positive thinking.” We are doing much more than wishing some future into existence. Our goal is to help people understand their own minds so that they can be more effective and strategic in their thinking.

    Best,

    Joe

  9. Jimw says:

    The foundation of our politics is that it is driven by money: “follow the money,” as the saying goes. A glance at Obama’s cabinet is revealing in this respect: basically a Goldman Sachs musical chairs scenario.

    The foundation of money in this culture is debt. All money issued today is debt money. Money, as it is issued, demands interest. Thus absolutely everything in this culture, and thus in its politics, is affected by the law of compound interest. Now, production can never keep up with the law of compound interest operating with the interest rates. Hence the crazy-necessary imperative of ceaseless growth. Nowaday, the entire world is in thrall to compound interest. You will never change anything durably here until you change the way money works. And given a well-nigh absolute ignorance of the matter, on the one hand, and the unlikelihood that they would ever easily give-up this power on the part of those who possess the money power, the prospects don’t look too brilliant for our country, or for that matter for most of the world. And no amount of “positive thinking” will change the reality: first you have to change the way the money works.

  10. [...] 3: Not satisfied with this strategy? Maybe you’ll want to build a different kind of politics that works in another [...]

  11. [...] Telling good stories well — has to be done. To penetrate the conflicts of interest and find that [...]

  12. Joe Brewer says:

    Hi Paula,

    Wow! All I can say after that is, “Keep it real.” Very nicely said.

    And thank you for the encouraging words of support. It means a lot to us.

    Best,

    Joe

  13. paulak says:

    I am so very pleased to see this article. For a long time I have been concerned about the inability to talk to republicans, and many other ’sleeping’ citizens, about any issue relating to social good or economic, health, and educational disparity in our country, not to mention the war, and our foreign policies.

    I agree it is time to get past sloganeering and to concepts that people really do value. I think most people do have similar values in loving their families, wanting good paying, stable jobs, and good education for their children, along with decent, affordable health care.

    I am also extremely concerned about the Orwellian shift in the meanings of words, so that freedom, for example, is confused with obtaining it at the end of a gun. It renders words almost useless, as if they didn’t represent anything real, that they can be molded, twisted, and shaped anyway at all and still retain meaning. How can we ever come to consensus when one group of people. like republicans. use words in a deceptive way?

    I am thrilled at the prospect of helping myself and others learn how to spot techniques of manipulation so as not to be prey to it anymore. That our journalists can return to an honorable profession of presenting information as a way to inform, and not create belief systems that will benefit one small segment of society. To return to our nation, and world, the idea of openness, not secrecy, in our dealings with each other and other nations, and to go back to the law of men, all men, not just the privileged few who have the money, education, and connections to change the laws to benefit themselves at the expense of all others on our beloved planet.

    We have it in our national heritage, in our blood, so to speak, to be Of The People, By The People, and For The People! I believe we can retrieve our roots and build upon that firm foundation that was set for us by the unique and amazing group of men called our Founding Fathers!

    When I read your article, I knew we were heading back there, and with the strength of science and reason behind it! With the foresight of how emotions and beliefs can guide us, as well as, interfere with progress for the many.

    Thank you for all your hard work and effort! Keep Fighting The Good Fight! You are appreciated!

    Peace, Paula Kline

Leave a Reply