Political Cortex: Brain Food for the Body Politic

>>> Nurturant Parent: In the Nurturant Parent family, it is assumed that the world is basically good. And, however dangerous and difficult the world may be at present, it can be made better, and it is your responsibility to help make it better.  Correspondingly, children are born good, and parents can make them better, and it is their responsibility to do so.  Both parents (if there are two) are responsible for running the household and raising the children, although they may divide their activities.  The parents' job is to be responsive to their children, nurture them, and raise their children to nurture others. Nurturance requires empathy and responsibility.

In the Nurturant Parent family, the highest moral values are Empathy and Responsibility. Effective nurturing requires empathy, which is feeling what someone else feels -- parents have to figure out what all their baby's cries mean in order to take care of him or her.  Responsibility is critical, since being a good nurturer means being responsible not only for looking after the well-being of others, but also being responsible to ourselves so that we can take care of others.  Nurturant parents raise children to be empathetic toward others, responsible to themselves, and responsible to others who are or will be in their care. Empathy connects us to other people in our families, our neighborhoods, and in the larger world.  Being responsible to others and oneself requires cooperation.  In society, nurturant morality is expressed as social responsibility.  This requires cooperation rather than competition, and recognition of interdependence.

In contrast...

>> Strict Father: In the conservative worldview, it's assumed that the world is, and always will be, a dangerous and difficult place. It is a competitive world and there will always be winners and losers. Children are naturally bad since they want to do what feels good, not what is moral, so they have to be made good by being taught discipline. There is tangible evil in the world and to stand up to evil, one must be morally strong, or "disciplined."

In the 'Strict Father' family, the father's job is to protect and support the family. Children are to respect and obey him. The father's moral duty is to teach his children right from wrong, with punishment that is typically physical and can be painful when they do wrong. It is assumed that parental discipline in childhood is required to develop the internal discipline that adults will need in order to be moral and to succeed. Morality and success are linked through discipline. This focus on discipline is seen as a form of love -- "tough love."

The mother is in the background, not strong enough to protect and support the family or fully discipline the children on her own. Her job is to uphold the authority of the father and to care for and comfort the children. As a "mommy," she tends to be overly soft-hearted and might well coddle or spoil the child. The father must make sure this does not happen, lest the children become weak and dependent.

Competition is necessary for discipline. Children are to become self-reliant through discipline and the pursuit of self-interest. Those who succeed as adults are the good (moral) people and parents are not to "meddle" in their lives. Those children who remain dependent--who were spoiled, overly willful, or recalcitrant--undergo further discipline or are turned out to face the discipline of the outside world.

When everyone is acting morally and responsibly, seeking their own self-interest in a self-disciplined fashion, everyone benefits. Thus, instilling morality and discipline in your children is also acting for the good of society as a whole.

In Strict Morality, the Strict Father is the Moral Authority, determining right from wrong, and protecting the family from a world that is chaotic and threatening. Evil is a major force in the world that must be fought using Moral Strength, which has the highest moral priority. Evil is both external and internal. Internal evil is fought with self-discipline and self-denial to achieve "self-control." "Weakness," and the tolerance of it, is immoral since it implies being unable to stand up to evil. Punishment is required to balance the moral books: If you do wrong, you must suffer a negative consequence.

Competition is necessary for a moral world; without it, people would not have to develop discipline and so would not become moral beings. Worldly success is an indicator of sufficient moral strength; lack of success suggests lack of sufficient discipline. Dependency is immoral. The undisciplined will be weak and poor, and deservedly so.

Strict Father Morality demonstrates a natural Moral Order: Those who are moral should be in power. The Moral Order legitimizes traditional power relations as being natural, determining a hierarchy of Moral Authority: God above Man; Man above Nature; Adults above Children; Western Culture above Non-western Culture; America above other nations. (There are other traditional aspects of the Moral Order that are less accepted than they used to be: Straights above Gays; Christians above non-Christians; Men above Women; White above Non-whites.)

Since to participate in the promotion or preservation of immorality is itself immoral, it is a moral requirement to eradicate immorality--through "tough love" if possible but through punishment if necessary--in every aspect of life, public and private, domestic and foreign.

For instance, those with a strong Strict Father model are likely to support a more punitive welfare or foreign policy than someone with a strong Nurturant Parent model, who are likely to favor more cooperative approaches. Those with a strong Nurturant Parent model are more likely to favor social policies that ensure the well-being of people such as health care and education, whereas someone with a strong Strict Father model would object to social programs in favor of promoting self-reliance.

It only takes a single read through the description of the 'Strict Father' model to see where virtually every single conservative initiative originates. Such eye-opening insight is what we need to counter the frames of the right.

To make the battle lines crystal clear, here are some contrasting characteristics of the 'Nurturant Parent' (NP) and the 'Strict Father' (SF).

NP desires Freedom
SF desires Control

NP desires Fairness
SF desires Survival of the Fittest

NP desires Communication
SF desires Dictation

NP desires Cooperation
SF desires Competition

NP seeks to Foster Trust
SF seeks to Command Loyalty

NP desires Openness
SF seeks to Limit Information to Those Who Need to Know

NP desires Honesty
SF desires Action

NP insists that it 'Takes a Village'
SF insists that individuals 'Pull Themselves up by the Bootstraps'

At this point it doesn't take much to see why conservatives are so willing to look past Bush's innumerable assaults on honesty and focus on his conviction and action, regardless of what those convictions and actions are. We also start to see the basis for conservatives' hatred for social programs, civil rights, and an open society. A slightly deeper look reveals the foundation for misogyny, racism, and general intolerance, A touch deeper and we see an acceptance of nepotism and inherited political power as a deserving reward for the 'moral'.

The family metaphor is incredibly useful and on-target. Thus we will use it throughout this project when describing each type of world view.

Yin and Yang

Note that neither world view dominates anyone 100%. Even the most progressive person has at least a hint of the 'strict father' flowing in them. Appealing to that aspect of each person's psyche is the goal of conservative framing. Similarly, progressives must aim to appeal to the 'nurturant parent' that lays in each of us. Whichever aspect gains the upper hand in a given debate determines the context (or frame) within which related decisions will be made. If the `nurturant parent' is activated, then decisions are made through a progressive filter. Likewise, if the 'strict father' is dominant, then the decisions will be made via a conservative filter. They are two sides of the same coin.

Though the coin is typically loaded, leaning to one side or the other, there are many with whom the sides are more equally weighted. These are the people whose 'nurturant parent' we must activate through framing. Moving to the center is NOT the answer. In fact it is more destructive than it is productive to our overall ideological goals.

Instead, we must present a progressive frame with which they can identify. This is a critical area where 'centrist' Democrats are simply wrong. Moving to the right will not bring anyone into our camp. It will only alienate current progressives and make us appear without principle to everyone else. It is a losing strategy. It always has been and it always will be. Instead we must convince people to identify with our values by invoking their `nurturant parent' using our progressive, value-based frames.

It is important to note that anyone could be a 'nurturant parent' in one aspect of life and a 'strict father' in another. While one is dominant, the other is dormant or subordinated. Also, in any given aspect of life, there is potential for the two types to gain or lose dominance (i.e. go dormant, or become alive) over relatively short periods of time. This is what we hope to do with framing -- present the issues in terms of progressive values that activate the 'Nurturant Parent' lying dormant in all people. Conservatives have been very successful with this regarding the activation of their 'Strict Father'.

Now it's time for the 'Nurturant Parent' to take charge and put the 'Strict Father' in his place.

• Framing: Primer for a Progressive Revolution
  
  
• Framing: Main Page
  
• Part I -- Philosophy and Rational for Framing
  
• Part II -- The Nurturant Parent Vs. the Strict Father
  
• Part III -- Techniques, Rules, and Execution
  
• Part IV -- Strategic and Slippery Slope Inititiatives
  
• Part V -- Implementation: Respond with 'Value-Based' Answers