Comparing Lakoff to Luntz

Lakoff and Luntz both agree that the language you use to talk about something can make or break your argument, and they both know very well that entering a debate and using the language of your opponent is a spiritual and idealistic defeat, that will very probably lead to technical defeat as well. However, Lakoff is the one who gives more thought to why that might be. Luntz seems to believe that the words and phrases he urges politicians to use persuade people simply because they are true. Lakoff acknowledges that there are things called ‘frames’ that we use to make sense of reality, and that any information that does not fit in those frames is rationalized, ignored, or not even noticed. (For example, even good, kind, ethical white people were able to watch Africans enduring slavery and torture in the Deep South because those would be terrible things to do to people, and Africans did not fit in the frame of “people” held by those good, kind, ethical whites.) I believe that Lakoff’s point on frames is that people vote for Republicans, even knowing that they are going against their own self-interest, because something even more important to them than their health, prosperity or overall quality of life is that they be able to tell their friends tomorrow that they voted Republican. In other words, the most important thing to a person who votes Republican, whether they know it or not, is to be seen as the kind of person who votes Republican.

Luntz seems to believe that his relationship to the people is that of a knowing, benevolent teacher, given charge over a large group of students who do not want to think. His job is not to encourage them to think, but simply to guide them gently and cheerfully to the proper actions. In Luntz’s democracy, the people are stubborn children, and the government is the overworked parent that needs to know the right way to get the children to take their medicine. It is not the children’s job to ask why they have to pick up their toys and go to bed at 8:30, and it is not the parents’ job to tell them. The children should just trust that their parents know what is best for them, and obey without question or complaint. The government in this democracy should also work to ensure America’s financial, military, and moral superiority over all other nations.

Lakoff seems to think that his job is to show the American people how the present government deceives them, or at least does not tell the whole story. He believes that if Democrats would stop using the Republicans’ language and come up with an independent, proactive mission their own, they would find ways to tell the American people their point of view, thus presenting a whole truth. He acknowledges that people do things that very often do not seem rational, but manages to avoid insulting their intelligence. Instead of saying, “Most people don’t think because they’re lazy, so here’s how you can exploit that,” he says, “Most people have firm opinions that won’t change because that’s how human beings are, so here’s how you can challenge them to change.” In Lakoff’s democracy, the government is an institution, elected by the people to serve the interests of all people. The government’s primary job is to ensure that American citizens enjoy high quality of life, and its secondary job is to ensure that it does not infringe on other nations’ rights. If possible, it should extend help to other nations, ideally in the form of education and financial aid. Rather than punish other nations for daring to become our enemies, Lakoff envisions a government that would keep them from becoming our enemies in the first place.

--Laura W.