Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster and framing guru responsible for such Orwellian phrases as “death tax” and “Contract with America,” admits to being spooked by the success of the Occupy movement:
“I’m so scared of this anti-Wall Street effort. I’m frightened to death,” Luntz said. “They’re having an impact on what the American people think of capitalism.”
In fact, he’s so scared about what the Occupiers have done to the “capitalism” brand, that he’s advising his fellow Republicans to stay the hell away from the word:
“I’m trying to get that word removed and we’re replacing it with either ‘economic freedom’ or ‘free market,’ ” Luntz said. “The public . . . still prefers capitalism to socialism, but they think capitalism is immoral. And if we’re seen as defenders of quote, Wall Street, end quote, we’ve got a problem.”
You don’t have to like Luntz or his political agenda to recognize his genius; he’s been helping Republicans kick Democratic ass at the framing game for the better part of two decades. So I can’t help but take comfort in Luntz’s professed Occupyphobia.
So… um… you still think the Occupy movement isn’t achieving anything, simply because it doesn’t look anything like the kind of traditional political movements we’ve grown accustomed to?
Orwellian – Very nice! Reclaim the word itself…
If “achieving” means getting Republicans to change the words they use to describe the same policies, then yes, the movement has succeeded!
Remember, every tax giveaway to the rich bankers is a dollar stolen from the job-creating US middle class.
@2
Think of it more as dragging the goal posts a few inches back.
Bullshit, Luntz isn’t being genuine about fearing OWS, he’s just playing some angle or another, as always.
I love that the GOP has to keep changing their vocabulary as soon as enough Americans learn what the GOP’s definition is for each word. It makes them seem all that much more ridiculous. Not that it matters to their mouth-breather base, but it’s entertaining for the rest of us.
Actually, unless Occupy gets some leadership soon, this is terrifying, because it means we’ve finally annoyed the big boys enough to make them fight back. They will squash us if we don’t get coordinated.
It pisses me off to no end that the whole fields of study involving all kinds of discourse etc, from Foucalt, Said, Chomsky, on down, is overwhelmingly and staunchly leftist, and yet WHERE THE HELL are all the left-wing political strategists focused on language and messaging? (Obama is the only candidate with some fiercely amazing writers [including himself] behind him in the 2008 campaign, though he has subsequently been fumbling the ball.)
Luntz is buffoon, but he’s a practical buffoon. While the rest of the lefty academic world is tangled up in theory, he just picked up their shit and actually APPLIED IT in the real world (what those lefty theorists call “praxis” aka REALITY).
And for that practical application alone, Frank Luntz is a fucking genius.
Sure he builds on the infrastructure of talk radio and mainstream news, but he has dominated the framing and language for the right, so anytime a Democrat walks into a debate, they’ve already lost because the left is ALWAYS debating against their language from the get-go. The GOP crushes the left on language, and it avoids any real engagement with the asinine fascism of their actual idiotic ‘ideas.’
For all the people who rant and rave about the Koch brothers, or Karl Rove, or Roger Ailes, fuck you: you want to understand how the curtain works? you look at the amicable geniuses like Frank Luntz who don’t give a shit about the stupidity of the idea, they simply invent a language to sell it to you.
Can anyone tell me what’s happening at Occupy Olympia?
I think there were 5 or 6 Stranger Editors down there to check things out, but I haven’t seen any reports on SLOG for a coupla days now. What’s up with that? Is Occupy Olympia over and done with now?
@9: I was in Olympia Monday and Tuesday, and am heading back down there tomorrow.
@8
Wait, are you suggesting us that the Obama campaigns are the only lefty efforts that have even tried to catapult the propaganda?
If so, then what’s all this I’ve been hearing lately about “the 99 percent”?
@8
What is this “left-wing” in the U.S. that you’re going on about? Genuinely curious. Kiss kiss.
@10
Oh, good. I tend to look to The Stranger for original, primary-source reporting on local issues like this; it will be nice to get back to that.
At least he didn’t say “quote unquote Wall Street.” He’s a literate Republican, which is refreshing.
He should give Philistine a new whirl.
Goldy,
Um, no the Occupy Movement will not achieve much:
http://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm…
Alas, the movement has faltered. They are being evicted.
Because it “doesn’t look like the kind of traditional political movements we’ve grown accustomed to”…
Would those be ones where something actually changes?
If Republicans hold their nose around Occupants, it is because after a few weeks of innovative street marketing, the whole thing fizzed. There’s one thing that American’s hate the smell of more than urine…it’s L.O.S.E.R.S.
Viva La RetailUtion!!!
The sad thing is, Luntz and his ilk succeed because they dumb things down to the lowest possible level, even though it smells of lies and rank hypocrisy. (Much worse smelling, by the way, than an #Occupy camp on its worst day!) If a majority of Americans are stupid enough to buy into it, then perhaps we have the political leaders, public policy, and country that we deserve.
oh no……
Will Occupy succeed in making ‘capitalism’ as much a dirty word as “Liberal” is now?
When the Occupiers get behind candidates and win elections and have a seat at the table, then I will think it has achieved something.
70% of what the Occupiers stand for, the people believe in or want. Until those same people get involved and vote, it will mean nothing to the politicians who’s goal is to get re elected and to get re elected they need to do favors for people with as much cash as possible.
It would serve the country’s best interest if he were literally frightened to death.
Frank Luntz is exploiting Democracy for it’s weakness. That is, truth does not resonate with the people as strongly as the lies they want to believe. He engineers words much like an investment banker decides to invest stock. He analyses the data and he goes with his findings.
Capitalism is a word with no meaning. If you ask a Democrat, an honest Republican (a joke, right?) and a Classical Liberal (I think you peeps call them Neo-Libs?), you will get three different meanings. Therefore, the word has no meaning to Luntz. Especially when he is trying to stir up support for Republicans who, within themselves, are totally divided and have no idea what Capitalism means.
Your average Occupier/Seattleite would say something like “Capitalism is the system by which banks buy politicians and use our government to exploit the working middle class” and they couldn’t be further from the truth.
The current system is a byproduct of accumulated legislation over the last 100 years, passed by both Democrats and Republicans, who on one end favor big business and on the other end favor stronger regulating agencies and government services. You have half the population rooting for Godzilla and the other half of the people rooting for Megalon. Meanwhile, all the people are getting trampled under the feet of giants and living under the false impressions that one of these monsters is going to save us.
That system is not Capitalism. Is it Democracy?
being a genius is easier if there are millions and millions of dollars and a media dedicated to helping you do your work.
This is great news. If true – we need to watch the right wing to see if they follow this advice to be sure, but there is little reason to doubt Luntz’s sincerity.
That said, don’t celebrate. All of this will mean nothing without a) getting the Democrats aboard (that means joining them and giving up silly third party notions) and winning the next election.
I genuinely think right-wing pundits/influence-peddlers do recognize the Occupy movement as a legitimate (however still not entirely effective) threat to most folks’ investment in capitalism in this country. It hasn’t been this statement by Luntz, but all the statements by various folks either mocking it (smelly hippies trope, “occupy a job” trope) or fear-mongering about it — all of which is meant to delegitimize it. There is never any allowance among right-wing folks of a substantial analysis of the critiques of our economic system put forward by different folks in the Occupy movement.
Occupy’s success has been precisely what Luntz has claimed, getting folks to question capitalism, or at least “capitalism” as we call it in this country (really, we have a mix of socialism and capitalism). But to move forward, folks need to start developing more deeper critiques, and suggesting why this or that element of the Occupy “platform” (however diffuse it can sometimes seem) is a legitimate way to address that issue. A prime example would be some specific facts around whether cutting corporate taxes or taxes on the wealthy actually really does create jobs or not, and what the alternative (closing tax loopholes and providing tax cuts to the working poor and middle class instead) might mean instead. The right in this country relies so much on mythology and the left too frequently gets caught up in the surface of that mythology, instead of the foundations, that we never get anywhere. There is always going to be a bunch of folks that won’t accept any facts that support leftist positions, but there are a lot of independent folks or reasonably-minded folks who might listen to some actually well-crafted arguments.
@11: From a concerted and intentional political effort, yes.
Occupy has had a significant impact, and an important one on the discourse, but it’s kind of an outsider’s movement as far as politics goes. I think it’s very important, but Occupy’s impact isn’t the kind of designed and carefully intentioned long-term political strategizing of someone like Luntz. I think it’s had a comparable impact for right now, but as we’ve seen, Occupy has also been very good (for better or worse) at remaining very populist and somewhat vague.
Occupy has allowed discussion of things like ‘inequality’ and given cover to those supporting increases in taxes. But I don’t think it’s anywhere near the decades of work on the right to frame what have largely been un-refutable language arguments on things like the ‘death tax,’ ‘small businesses,’ ‘small farms,’ ‘the job creators,’ ‘the free market,’ ‘small government,’ ‘pro-life,’ ‘right-to-work’ etc. I’m all for pushing simple but powerful concepts like ‘the 99%’ because ‘the middle class’ has lost its argumentative power altogether (since it largely doesn’t exist anymore), but it is only a small start. The right has a huge institutional think-tank infrastructure as well, that feeds all these talking points everywhere. What does the left have? Brookings? Please. They’re centrist at best.
@12: A rather large number of people and opinions who, in the absence of really hearing their perspectives aired in popular discourse and the media, consider themselves to be a rather miniscule minority in what is falsely assumed to be a heavily conservative country. Perhaps I’m being hopeful (or naive), but I think there’s a lore more left-wing opinion out there, people have just been beaten down to insecurity in their ideas over the last 40 years because of the supposed ‘popularity’ of Ronald Reagan and the work of people like Luntz, Heritage, Cato, etc.
We smell your fear, anti-American righties.
I notice that phrases with “free” in them remain popular with Luntz’s focus groups.
@25. Now that the right going to drop capitalism, can the left use responsible capitalism as a term? With all the silly talk of how we need to act like ‘adults’, it seems responsible is more fitting than free.
People misunderstand Luntz. He’s not referring to Occupy’s impact on politics per-se but more on the language of politics. I suppose it’s fair to draw connections between the language and the thing itself but to assume they are the same thing is to miss his point.
@30 considering politics are based on lies and lies only exist within the context of language. I’d say it’s fair to conclude it has had an impact.
@26
“pro-choice”
“medical marijuana”
“no nukes”
“coat-hangers”
“marriage equality”
“racial profiling”
“offshoring”
“universal health care”
“meat is murder”
“the 99 percent”
“equal pay for equal work”
“extraordinary rendition”
“save the whales”
“police brutality”
“banksters”
…and more, just ask.
We can work ourselves into a foaming rage over the “messaging” of the other side, but only if we willfully blind ourselves to the entirely deliberate and paid-for “messaging” of political organizations promoting agendas conveniently convivial to our own private personalities.