Best political diary I've read in weeks.
Take a look. It's concerned with shifting the mainstream, the idea being that if you articulate positions far out of the mainstream, you shift what the middle ground is just by taking that extreme position. This has, apparently (and we get it straight from a rightwing think-tank member that this is what they've been doing) been GOP policy for a while, and it's yielded enormous results. Things which might otherwise have been completely unthinkable 20 years ago are part of normal discourse.
What's used in figuring out how to shift things is what's called an "Overton Window". Basically, you map out all the possibilities, from the extremes on each end, and your window is what's acceptable to the public. Just by talking about the extremes as if they're normal, you shift the window. The example used is education in Michigan. Here's the example list, with the window in bold, from 20 years ago:No government involvement in education.
All schools private with government regulation.
Voucher system with public schools.
Tuition tax credit with public schools.
Homeschooling legal.
Private schools restricted.
Homeschooling illegal.
Private schools illegal.
Children taken from parents and raised as janissaries.
Now, 20 years later, where are we?No government involvement in education.
All schools private with government regulation.
Voucher system with public schools.
Tuition tax credit with public schools.
Homeschooling legal.
Private schools restricted.
Homeschooling illegal.
Private schools illegal.
Children taken from parents and raised as janissaries.
That is a hell of a shift. And it's done by talking about the extremes. Introduce that discourse, normalise it, and people will perceive it as normal. The centre ground will shift. Now, let's apply this to Iran, shall we (my list)?:Nuclear strike followed by invasion
Nuclear strike
Invasion
Widespread airstrikes
Limited airstrikes
Trade Sanctions
Nuclear program without enrichment
Enrichment conducted abroad (Russia)
Enrichment allowed with oversight
Enrichment allowed
Enrichment to weapons grade allowed
Nuclear weapons program allowed
Free trade in nuclear materials allowed
I've bolded where I think we are right now. But notice what's happening here - talking about a nuclear strike is already part of the public discourse. That's a completely insane, extreme position. But just by talking about it, most of us would feel less outraged about a conventional strike. That's how it works. You talk about the extremes to normalise the positions a step towards that extreme.
So what's the solution? I wouldn't advocate starting to discuss allowing free trade in nuclear materials, but we could do far worse than start to advocate for Iran's right to enrich uranium, in an attempt to shift the window away from military action and towards what I'd consider to be the ideal, enrichment in Russia. It's worth noting that most of the talk about these extremes doesn't come from politicians themselves, but focus groups and other talking heads. That allows the politicians to then publically advocate for the acceptable positions, and doesn't leave them looking completely out of touch.
What's used in figuring out how to shift things is what's called an "Overton Window". Basically, you map out all the possibilities, from the extremes on each end, and your window is what's acceptable to the public. Just by talking about the extremes as if they're normal, you shift the window. The example used is education in Michigan. Here's the example list, with the window in bold, from 20 years ago:No government involvement in education.
All schools private with government regulation.
Voucher system with public schools.
Tuition tax credit with public schools.
Homeschooling legal.
Private schools restricted.
Homeschooling illegal.
Private schools illegal.
Children taken from parents and raised as janissaries.
Now, 20 years later, where are we?No government involvement in education.
All schools private with government regulation.
Voucher system with public schools.
Tuition tax credit with public schools.
Homeschooling legal.
Private schools restricted.
Homeschooling illegal.
Private schools illegal.
Children taken from parents and raised as janissaries.
That is a hell of a shift. And it's done by talking about the extremes. Introduce that discourse, normalise it, and people will perceive it as normal. The centre ground will shift. Now, let's apply this to Iran, shall we (my list)?:Nuclear strike followed by invasion
Nuclear strike
Invasion
Widespread airstrikes
Limited airstrikes
Trade Sanctions
Nuclear program without enrichment
Enrichment conducted abroad (Russia)
Enrichment allowed with oversight
Enrichment allowed
Enrichment to weapons grade allowed
Nuclear weapons program allowed
Free trade in nuclear materials allowed
I've bolded where I think we are right now. But notice what's happening here - talking about a nuclear strike is already part of the public discourse. That's a completely insane, extreme position. But just by talking about it, most of us would feel less outraged about a conventional strike. That's how it works. You talk about the extremes to normalise the positions a step towards that extreme.
So what's the solution? I wouldn't advocate starting to discuss allowing free trade in nuclear materials, but we could do far worse than start to advocate for Iran's right to enrich uranium, in an attempt to shift the window away from military action and towards what I'd consider to be the ideal, enrichment in Russia. It's worth noting that most of the talk about these extremes doesn't come from politicians themselves, but focus groups and other talking heads. That allows the politicians to then publically advocate for the acceptable positions, and doesn't leave them looking completely out of touch.