You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #46: You can apply Lakeoff's lessons in language, and i bet you do. I bet [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-26-06 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #44
46. You can apply Lakeoff's lessons in language, and i bet you do. I bet
you say "election fraud" instead of "voter fraud." If I'm right in my bet, then you do enbrace what Lakeoff is saying about framing an issue.

Just because Lakeoff writes about the tendencies of some progressives to attribute incompetence to the problems created by the bush administrations instead of blaming a conservative agenda, is no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water.

For instance, your use of the phrase "democracy is broken in this country," isn't very effective to bringing about the changes I assume you might want.

I would switch to saying "our election process is broken."

For one thing, the US is not now, nor ever has been a democracy. So the fact that something that never existed is broken doesn't worry me too much.

Second, democracy, which doesn't now and has never existed here, isn't a thing which can be broken, it's an idea, a concept. So how does an idea or concept become broken?

I do feel our election process is broken and has been for a long time. It is just more broken now with the advent of computerized vote casting and tabulation. However, the fact that 95% percent of the time the candidate spending the most money wins office (and has for years) is disturbing also. That points to the electorial process as being broken for a long time. The fact that we are statutorily limited essentially to 2 parties is also anti democratic, it's a form of intentionally limiting democracy. And gerrymandering is anti democracy.

So my advice is to learn from Lakeoff instead of attacking him because he dared to write about a subject which isn't your number 1 issue.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC