Plus Twenty

The ideas of free-market fundamentalists and social conservatives may be taken for granted now, but 30 years ago they were considered unpopular – even extreme. Generations of conservatives have devoted themselves (and their wallets) to selling unpopular ideas like war, privatization, and IR reforms. The following dot points are an attempt to list the main ingredients in the “neo-con’s cookbook”.

   1. Identify yourself with the culture of the people you want to win over – especially if they’re going to be harmed by what you’re doing.
   2. Either adopt the language of your opponents, or attach negative connotations to their key phrases and buzzwords.
   3. Claim the middle ground. Always describe your position as ‘centrist’, ‘mainstream’, representative of ‘common sense’ or ‘ordinary people’. Other groups have ideologies – you have conclusions based on overwhelming evidence.
   4. If you are in the minority, talk as if you are in the majority. If you are in the majority, talk as if you are part of an oppressed minority.
   5. Presume inevitability – frame your desired changes as necessary measures for coping with the inevitable.
   6. Undermine the credibility of your opponents’ key organisations and spokespeople, while pretending to support the most moderate version of their goals.
   7. When you lack public credibility on an issue, cultivate more trusted voices to advocate your position.
   8. Have a “positive” vision for change. Repeat after me: “things are getting better, getting better all the time…”
   9. Use language that is popular but ambiguous. Go heavy on ‘motherhood’ concepts like freedom, democracy, choice, and values.
  10. Criticise all your opponents for their lack of transparency, while maintaining tight control of information about your own operations (especially on your sources of funding, who your agenda will benefit, and who will be disadvantaged by your agenda).
  11. Invest in the future. Create networks and programs to foster the careers of conservatives, and dedicate resources to promoting their ideas. Fund chairs at universities, establish journals and think-tanks, and put money into research that supports your agenda.

Many progressives are now looking at the success of the tactics employed by conservatives and saying, "we can do that". Indeed, many of the things on the above list are just common sense, and some of them were stolen from the left in the first place (e.g. the turn of the century populist movement in America).

However, it's important to be aware of the two main problems facing any attempt to adopt conservative strategies.

Firstly, conservatives aren't just dominant because of the way they do things but also because of the money & power behind what they do. And if politics comes down to nothing more than a battle over money & media, it’s pretty clear that progressives aren’t going to win. We have less of both in our pockets. No matter how much we invest in well 'framed' TV ads or think-tanks, we're still going to find it hard to compete with 'money power'. Most progressive goals are therefore unlikely to be achieved or sustained without grass roots organising and support.

Secondly, it can be hard to use the tactics of your enemy without starting to resemble them. Where is the line drawn between communicating effectively and communicating manipulatively? Which parts of the above list make you uncomfortable? Which would be unnecessary or undesirable for a progressive agenda, and why?

Food for thought…