This can be interpreted as both a call to action and a call to stop activist work to placate the right. Can you clarify and, if you think action is important, what do you suggest?
I don't presume to voice a call to action to Americans - as much as I worry deeply about the effects that political events in the U.S. have on the rest of the world, it's up to Americans to decide what kind of government they want. That said, in any situation, I would never suggest placating the right, and particularly the kind of right that seems to be taking hold in the U.S. - one that is not just capitalist and imperialist (as if that isn't enough, but also destructive of human rights and freedoms - religious, sexual, reproductive, political, civil and just about any other category I can think of.
If there is a link of any kind between the upsurge of patriarchal and authoritarian values in American society, and the dominance of right-wing ideology in American politics, then it seems to me that if one wants to reverse the right-wing political trend - and I would be delighted to see this happen - then action is required not only within the political arena, but also in ways that challenge patriarchal and hierarchical systems and values wherever they are found in society.
By suggesting that (given that there is something to Lakoff's views and that there is in fact a link between patriarchal values and right-wing politics) American left-wing political activists might need "to influence the values that may well be feeding the march to the right," I mean that challenging patriarchal systems and beliefs with the intent of creating both a wider definition of families, and a more egalitarian approach to family roles in all family models, might also weaken the need to have that father figure holding the reins of government. I don't know enough about American society to suggest potential strategies, but I suspect there are many levels on which such activism can occur, from public education to offering new images through popular cultural products to reviving the consciousness-raising techniques of second-wave feminism to supporting pagan mother-based religions and so on. And of course, all of that comes in conjunction with political activism on both local and national fronts.
I am not certain what part the feminist backlash (which seems to be worst in the U.S.) plays in this. Again, the available data is not suffiecent to say whether the feminist backlash is a result of an increase in patriarchal values, or if both are indications of something else going on in American society. But, going back to the topic of framing, blaming feminism for an "erosion of values" begs the question - which I rarely see addressing in such debates - of whose values, and whether it might not be a good thing that those particular values are in fact eroding - if they are - to allow the development of a more just and egalitarian society.
I suspect the right has mounted such an attack on feminism because they know that feminism (sidestepping the issue of feminisms for now) has the potential to undermine the belief system they depend on to keep their soldiers, in and out of uniform, in line.
You make a good point about the binary oppositions of strict father/nurturant parent in Lakoff's models. I suspect it's part and parcel of what you have said elsewhere about the binary aspects of political thought in the U.S. - the model assumes two and only two family forms because the politics assumes two and only two political stances. So even though it's not a good model of real-life families, it may still work as a model within the political sphere.
Which leads me to what you say here: I personally think that social movements that advocate choices among the broad range of parenting/family structures that exist (absent, single, nuclear, extended, intentional, etc.) would be a place to motivate change in public consciousness and take us beyond that dichtomy into some real choices.
I think you're absolutely right, and this is indeed one of the kinds of activism that I think can be an approach to changing the patriarchal/authoritarian/right-wing trend in American politics and society.
And in my personal opinion, that would be a very good thing.
no subject
I don't presume to voice a call to action to Americans - as much as I worry deeply about the effects that political events in the U.S. have on the rest of the world, it's up to Americans to decide what kind of government they want. That said, in any situation, I would never suggest placating the right, and particularly the kind of right that seems to be taking hold in the U.S. - one that is not just capitalist and imperialist (as if that isn't enough, but also destructive of human rights and freedoms - religious, sexual, reproductive, political, civil and just about any other category I can think of.
If there is a link of any kind between the upsurge of patriarchal and authoritarian values in American society, and the dominance of right-wing ideology in American politics, then it seems to me that if one wants to reverse the right-wing political trend - and I would be delighted to see this happen - then action is required not only within the political arena, but also in ways that challenge patriarchal and hierarchical systems and values wherever they are found in society.
By suggesting that (given that there is something to Lakoff's views and that there is in fact a link between patriarchal values and right-wing politics) American left-wing political activists might need "to influence the values that may well be feeding the march to the right," I mean that challenging patriarchal systems and beliefs with the intent of creating both a wider definition of families, and a more egalitarian approach to family roles in all family models, might also weaken the need to have that father figure holding the reins of government. I don't know enough about American society to suggest potential strategies, but I suspect there are many levels on which such activism can occur, from public education to offering new images through popular cultural products to reviving the consciousness-raising techniques of second-wave feminism to supporting pagan mother-based religions and so on. And of course, all of that comes in conjunction with political activism on both local and national fronts.
I am not certain what part the feminist backlash (which seems to be worst in the U.S.) plays in this. Again, the available data is not suffiecent to say whether the feminist backlash is a result of an increase in patriarchal values, or if both are indications of something else going on in American society. But, going back to the topic of framing, blaming feminism for an "erosion of values" begs the question - which I rarely see addressing in such debates - of whose values, and whether it might not be a good thing that those particular values are in fact eroding - if they are - to allow the development of a more just and egalitarian society.
I suspect the right has mounted such an attack on feminism because they know that feminism (sidestepping the issue of feminisms for now) has the potential to undermine the belief system they depend on to keep their soldiers, in and out of uniform, in line.
You make a good point about the binary oppositions of strict father/nurturant parent in Lakoff's models. I suspect it's part and parcel of what you have said elsewhere about the binary aspects of political thought in the U.S. - the model assumes two and only two family forms because the politics assumes two and only two political stances. So even though it's not a good model of real-life families, it may still work as a model within the political sphere.
Which leads me to what you say here: I personally think that social movements that advocate choices among the broad range of parenting/family structures that exist (absent, single, nuclear, extended, intentional, etc.) would be a place to motivate change in public consciousness and take us beyond that dichtomy into some real choices.
I think you're absolutely right, and this is indeed one of the kinds of activism that I think can be an approach to changing the patriarchal/authoritarian/right-wing trend in American politics and society.
And in my personal opinion, that would be a very good thing.