Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

14433RE: [GreenLeft_discussion] Re: Results in WA - technique of "framing"

Expand Messages
  • Sean Diggins
    Feb 28, 2005
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Ian Latto [mailto:ilatto@...]
      So I agree with you Sean - reframing is necessary.
      Turning now to this forum. I feel that framed debates do not discuss
      higher level distinctions. Reframing is not about policies IMO. It is
      about primary school. It is a language of simplicity. My view on
      framing is I spell check my article and get the reading grade level
      down low. I make sure I have lots of images and a few rhymes in the words.
      Yes, it is partly about dumbing down, I guess. Yes, it is partly about
      appealing to the base instincts of the "collective mainstream" (is that a
      reframing of the lumpen proletariat?)
      Yes, it is possibly a euphemism for "marketing" which presents as something
      less unpalatable to those from the left who despise terms such as
      "marketing"...and in this sense, it is about recognising that old
      terminologies may be better abandoned/renamed. We should no use terms such
      as socialist, alliance, marxist, communist etc etc, as they have be
      completely hijacked by the right and poisoned with respect to any useful
      political purpose (unless it is detrimental, such as when used by the right
      to denigrate)
      Can anyone seriously argue that ignoring such things is beneficial to their
      Increasingly, we see the SA and other groups which contain gifted thinkers
      being further marginalised by their stubborn refusal to think outside the
      existing boxes, or (perhaps more tellingly) lack of interest in moving
      beyond endless discussion/argument within the community of "believers".
      The right know how to recruit.
      Increasingly, the left do not.

    • Show all 15 messages in this topic