Red Bull Politics
Every once in awhile you learn something new. Of course, the reality is that we rarely ever learn anything truly new. It simply is that we learn something that reinforces something we already knew in a unique way. In this case, another commentator stumbled on an idea that illustrates something we all have known for most of our lives.
I peruse a number of sites every day just to keep up with the times and to check out other writers I enjoy reading. I am a regular at John Pavlovitz’s site, I am a regular reader at Heather Cox Richardson’s site. I also go over to the Bulwark. It is a center-right blog that features a group of never Trumpers that used to be establishment conservative thinkers. Yeah, I know what you’re thinking. Yet, reading them has given me insight into the conservative mindset. One of their writers passed along an interesting nugget about Red Bull and Elon Musk.
Last (the author) pointed out something I didn’t know. Red Bull doesn’t actually manufacture Red Bull. In fact, the company doesn’t manufacturer anything. They outsource it to someone else and just handle the marketing. Their YouTube page and other social media are revolutionary. They are highly successful and they don’t make a damn thing.
The four largest car manufacturers sold more than 25 million cars last year alone combined. Musk’s Tesla made just over 500 thousand. Who made more? If you guessed Tesla you’d guess right. It is truly the triumph of style over substance and we are seeing the same in our politics.
This really isn’t anything new. Literature experts tell us that there are really only about 100 original stories in literature. Everything else is a riff on one of those original stories. Plato described this phenomenon in his “Allegory of a cave” in the Republic. Perception is reality and no amount of facts are really going to change that.
The book “Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus” described the differences between the sexes back in 1992. I haven’t read the book admittedly, but the general idea is that men and women are wired differently. Well duh. Yet, the same notion would probably best describe Republicans and Democrats. I hate to paint people with such a broad brush, but the two groups just don’t process the same way.
Progressives and conservatives by and large think differently. I could make value judgments, but suffice it to say that when you want systemic changes your mind goes to policy initiatives. Policy initiatives require facts and specific aims. When your goal is to say no to more government you don’t need the specifics. You think in generalities.
The aforementioned book is actually pretty relevant here. We mistakenly thought that relevant facts and trusted sources of information were persuasive. They certainly are to people that speak the same language, but some people honestly distrust all of that stuff. Conservatives are great at communicating simple points in quick bursts. They frame issues quickly and convincingly. Progressives usually shoot themselves in the foot when they try to frame issues.
The long and short of it is that we cannot get through to most people by citing facts and discussing policy aims. They just aren’t wired that way. Trump never had a specific policy and never made good on virtually any of his campaign promises. That didn’t seem to matter. So, pointing those things out really won’t work. We need something else. The alternative is to continue to bang our head against the wall.
“The book “Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus” described the differences between the sexes back in 1992. I haven’t read the book admittedly, but the general idea is that men and women are wired differently. Well duh.”
Nick, please do me a solid and pick another book for this. Men are From Mars… Is a “how to” manual of the patriarchy and a book of excuses for bad behavior for men. It is the single most annoying book I have ever read and time and money I will never get back.
I loathe this book so much that I am afraid I am missing your point.
1Fair enough. Like I said, I had not read that particular book. My point really doesn’t change much without the book reference.
2Years ago, I read an essay about the beginnings of “civilization.”
Everyone started out believing that anyone outside of their own group was an enemy. Other hunters were just competition for food.
Eventually, people realized that, if they worked together, they could create more food for everyone. Farming.
Conservatives. Progressives. Too simplistic?
3Nick, maybe if we focus in on one aspect? You covered a lot of territory. “We need something else.” There have been several discussions around “Democratic messaging” in general, so perhaps more specifics of what you have in mind.
“Progressive policy aims” … forget about communicating with conservatives for a moment, and focus on linking specific goals and objectives with Joe Manchin, ‘centrist’ Democrats and if one or two can be located, ‘moderate’ Republicans. Or, how do we work with the centrists and moderates to communicate that Dubya, the former guy and Senate Republicans have have taken us so far right since 2000 that to arrive at “center” policies Bernie, AOC and The Squad have proposed aren’t not particularly radical.
I will concede that the US is basically a centrist country. The discussion in terms of policy is how to achieve the progress that has been lost since the 60s.
In short, we’re in a deep ditch. Solutions?
4You are quite right Jane and PKM. What it comes down to is identity politics. Conservatives are able to successfully attach policy to a feeling. Ask people what they think of the ACA and they say they love it. Ask them what they think of Obamacare and they hate it. It’s the exact same thing. Somehow, they have been able to successfully attach people’s feelings about Obama to their feelings about the policy itself.
The answer is partially in general education. Biden is doing some of that by trumpeting stuff he has already done with the last big Covid bill. Obama didn’t want to do that with the ACA. I think the more you flood the market with information the more people you will reach in general.
Another solution is not to try to reach everyone. If you eat around the margins you can impact a lot of issues dramatically. I’ve long taken a different approach (or thought differently) about wholesale issues. I’ve always thought we should go ahead and tackle the issues where we have enough agreement to get by and table the rest. Of course, a large part of the problem is that the modern GOP doesn’t want the progressives to have any legislative achievements, so they just stonewall everything.
From an electoral standpoint you simply want to remind people what they like to sharing polling data. The vast majority want freer elections, common sense gun control, and higher minimum wage, universal health care, and reduced college costs. Only one party delivers that.
5If you have not seen Jonathan Haidt’s Ted Talk on the 5 Foundations of Morality that is eye opening on Conservative vs. Liberal across the globe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SOQduoLgRw
I also would point out the concepts from book “Made to Stick” by the Heaths. It might give some insight into why Republican messaging is often stickier than the Democrat messaging. The use of sound bites and stories/anecdotes are a very effective messaging tool.
I would definitely recommend Democrats to use the Made to Stick model to improve their messaging to connect with more people.
6I recommend “The Righteous Mind”, by Jonathan Haidt. It is a tour de force explication of how conservative and liberal (not Republican and Democrat, necessarily) people differ in how they perceive the world and their place in it.
One of the more important aspects of this is something he calls the Moral Matrix. This is a set of six spectra the values of which are held to be more or less important by the Cs and Ls.
For instance, Fairness is highly valued by Ls, not as much by Cs. Purity is highly valued by Cs and not so much by Ls. Others are Care, Loyalty, Authority and Liberty. These are the foundations of the cultural wars being waged all over.
Think of the Purity spectrum vis-a-vis the whole lbgtq and trans brouhahas. Authority encompasses the BLM and Blue Lives imbroglio.
7“Musk’s Tesla made just over 500 thousand. Who made more? If you guessed Tesla you’d guess right. It is truly the triumph of style over substance”
You’re waaaay wrong about this subject also, Nick. I’ve lost faith in your opinion. Start a podcast instead. This ain’t JJ quality.
I’m not going to argue it, but I’m sure. I drive a five year old electric car. Can you guess what it is?
8The book you’re looking for may be George Lakoff’s “Moral Politics”, which lays out US politics as “Ayn Rand vs. FDR” (paraphrasing). That is, libertarian authoritarianism (isn’t that an oxymoron?) against communitarianism.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Politics_(book)
9Star and BillR thanks for the recommended reading material. More of a math person with limited time for reading, but at least I can speed read so hope to mine some gems that can be compressed into use, daily and over the long haul.
Was a time I could actually read or at least scan articles of interest from the weekend edition of Counterpunch. A time previously known as before children. With Covid and home schooling, we are not complaining – but our hearts sure go out to parents living the city apt. life with young children. We have the benefit of acreage on which to unwind with our boys safely with fun activities that wear them out and are good for us on so many levels; fun is always good.
10Well, somebody picked about the worst possible post for submitting a fact free negative comment. In 2020, Tesla produced 509,737 vehicles and sold 499,550 of them. Tesla had the top global market share, followed by Volkswagen. I realize stating these facts is a waste of time. They’re just not emotional enough to budge a binary belief system.
11It is a lack of clear language on my part. My apologies. Made more refers to more money and not more vehicles. I referenced the article that point came from within the post. If I referenced a bad source I apologize.
12For anyone wanting a bit more of an “on-point” discussion of Democrat/Republican differences, there is a short article last year in Scientific American: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/conservative-and-liberal-brains-might-have-some-real-differences/
“On the whole, the research shows, conservatives desire security, predictability and authority more than liberals do, and liberals are more comfortable with novelty, nuance and complexity. If you had put Buckley and Vidal in a magnetic resonance imaging machine and presented them with identical images, you would likely have seen differences in their brain, especially in the areas that process social and emotional information. The volume of gray matter, or neural cell bodies, making up the anterior cingulate cortex, an area that helps detect errors and resolve conflicts, tends to be larger in liberals. And the amygdala, which is important for regulating emotions and evaluating threats, is larger in conservatives.”
13