Your father taught you WHAT? Part 1.

Psychologist George Lakoff, author of Moral Politics. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. Author: Jere Keys from San Francisco,

 

By Kathie Malley-Morrison

In its inaugural issues, Engaging Peace introduced the work of cognitive political psychologist, George Lakoff—particularly his work on political conservatism and liberalism.  Our presentation of his theory included posts on Why We Fight, Countering the Ubiquitous Argument, A New Way of Thinking, and Values and Rhetoric.  Today we begin sharing highlights from Lakoff’s psychological analysis of today’s conservative Republicans, such as the supporters of Presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Bottom line, according to Lakoff, is that conservatives generally grow up in a strict father family system. In his view, “In the strict father family, father knows best. He knows right from wrong and has the ultimate authority to make sure his children and his spouse do what he says, which is taken to be what is right.”

Lakoff goes on to say, “The basic idea is that authority is justified by morality (the strict father version), and that, in a well-ordered world, there should be (and traditionally has been) a moral hierarchy in which those who have traditionally dominated should dominate. The hierarchy is: God above Man, Man above Nature, The Disciplined (Strong) above the Undisciplined (Weak), The Rich above the Poor, Employers above Employees, Adults above Children, Western culture above other cultures, America above other countries. The hierarchy extends to: Men above women, Whites above Nonwhites, Christians above nonChristians, Straights above Gays.”

In regards to renditions of those values in this election year, Lakoff says, “We see these tendencies in most of the Republican presidential candidates, as well as in Trump, and on the whole, conservative policies flow from the strict father worldview and this hierarchy.”

Lakoff also notes that, “Family-based moral worldviews run deep. Since people want to see themselves as doing right not wrong, moral worldviews tend to be part of self-definition — who you most deeply are. And thus your moral worldview defines for you what the world should be like. When it isn’t that way, one can become frustrated and angry.”

What do you think of Lakoff’s views?  Do you know any conservative Republicans,  personally?  If so, do you know anything about their families, their personal histories?  To what extent do they seem to support  a strict father morality, a father (authority) knows best morality, a WASP-centered morality? Are they frustrated and angry? Are they going to vote this year?

 

Who knows why we fight? George knows.

 

Linguist George Lakoff lecturing on the relationship between words and politics. Flickr: Pop! Tech 2008. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

In the early days of this blog, we published a series of posts about George Lakoff’s views on wars between values and nations; we revisit some of those posts today.

Lakoff is an activist cognitive psychologist/linguist who devotes great attention to the conflict in values between liberals and conservatives, and the ways in which the family values that are communicated to children can play out in the readiness of adults to make love or war.

For example, in his book Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think, Lakoff argues that while conservatives value a “strict father” morality (using punishment to establish respect for authority), liberals value a “nurturant family” morality emphasizing empathy and democratic forms of conflict resolution.

Lakoff also emphasizes the role of metaphor in the decisions people reach regarding political issues.  Many judgments are propelled by a “nation-as-person” or “nation-as-family” metaphor in which industrial nations are viewed as “mature” and knowledgeable while other nations are seen as “primitive,” “backward,” and needing to be taught a lesson.

In his book, The Political Mind, Lakoff explains that ideas with a strong emotional component (e.g., regarding the extent to which wars are considered necessary and winnable) are influenced not just by information but also by how they are framed, the language in which they are embedded, and the effects of that language on the brain.

To learn more about Lakoff’s views about how family values connect with major political philosophies and behavior read this article and tell us what you think.

 

 

 

Give the gift of peace

Christmas is meant to be the season of peace, love, and goodwill to all. If you are a Christian, think of your favorite carols and their messages. None of them says, “spend, spend, spend, buy, buy, buy.”

Christmas gifts in colorful wrappings
Give the gift of peace. (Image in public domain)

If you share the belief that the holidays have become too commercialized, and that the main purpose of the season seems to have become the pressure to buy toys that will be broken within a month, think of ways to give the gift of peace.

For example, consider family activities that promote cooperation–such as volunteer service, non-competitive board games, reading stories about peace, or outdoor hiking. Take time to discuss the true meaning of Christmas with your loved ones.

Pose questions such as:

  • What do the terms “peace” and “goodwill” mean in our daily lives?
  • What prompts us each to feel peaceful, and what fosters antagonism?

We also encourage you to learn more about ways to green your holidays and gift-giving that is environmentally friendly.

The gift of peace education

As wars continue to bedevil and destroy both human lives and the environment, there is a growing movement towards peace education that has produced books and other materials designed to promote peace and reconciliation in children and adults, and to foster awareness of the need to resist the destruction of our environment in the endless pursuit of money.

We provide below a sampling of books for children and adults, as well as films that are season-appropriate gifts. For additional suggestions, see our pages of resources for adults and kids.  As you do your holiday shopping, please consider these suggestions.

Children’s books about peace

101 Relaxation Games for Children: Finding a Little Peace and Quiet In Between (SmartFun Activity Books)
Can You Say Peace?
Three Cups of Tea: One Man’s Journey to Change the World… One Child at a Time ( The Young Reader’s Edition)

Books for adults about war and peace

The Book Thief
The Lacuna: A Novel (P.S.)
Moral Politics : How Liberals and Conservatives Think
Washington Rules: America’s Path to Permanent War (American Empire Project)

Films about peacemaking

Joyeux Noel (Widescreen)
Forgiving Dr. Mengele
Howard Zinn – You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train
Invictus

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology
Pat Daniel, Managing Editor of Engaging Peace

Conservative and liberal world views

George Lakoff's book Moral PoliticsOne of the theorists to be considered in greater detail in later posts is George Lakoff.

We introduce several of his main ideas here because they are relevant to how readers are likely to respond to this blog; specifically, Lakoff has provided a brilliant analysis of moral reasoning in liberals and conservatives.

In his book, Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think, Lakoff argues that liberals and conservatives hold different values.

Specifically, liberals value:

  • Empathetic behavior and promoting fairness
  • Helping those who cannot help themselves
  • Protecting those who cannot protect themselves
  • Promoting fulfillment in life
  • Nurturing and strengthening oneself in order to help others.

By contrast, conservatives value:

  • A “strict father” morality (using punishment to establish respect for authority)
  • Self-discipline, responsibility, and self-reliance
  • The morality of reward and punishment
  • Protecting moral people from external evils
  • Upholding the established moral order.

Traditionally, liberals have been viewed as doves and conservatives as hawks; however, within both sectors there are pro-war and anti-war activists who differ primarily in their moral reasoning:

  • Pro-war conservatives often refer to the evilness and moral inferiority of the identified “enemy” and view protestors against war as unpatriotic.
  • Pro-war liberals are more likely to use the rhetoric of helping others.

In regard to this blog, it is the liberals who are more likely to be sympathetic to advocacy of peace activism. Would you agree? Why is this likely to be so?

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology