As the mid-term elections near, many "at risk" conservative incumbents and their influential allies (e.g., the current administration) will be working overtime to persuade voters that, despite considerable evidence to the contrary, they are deserving of re-election. My own research as a psychologist suggests that certain appeals will be especially prominent in their public statements. And I have put together a list of these, along with illustrative video and audio clips, in a video entitled Dangerous Ideas: How Conservatives Exploit Our Five Core Concerns (available for viewing online at
http://www.eidelsonconsulting.com/...)
My general thrust is that the principal concerns of our daily lives revolve around five key issues: vulnerability, injustice, distrust, superiority, and helplessness. Leaders whose public statements engage any of these five concerns are therefore well-positioned to garner support for their policies. Such appeals can be entirely legitimate and quite valuable in the pursuit of progressive ends, but many conservatives instead use them to pursue a narrow agenda that benefits the few while leaving most of us worse off.
Presented in the form of arguments, here are the "top ten" appeals we should be ready for, along with the underlying concerns they tap into:
1. Argue that your current or future actions are necessary in order to protect the public from dire threats. (Vulnerability)
2. Argue that the policies promoted by others will create new dangers and thereby make the public less safe. (Vulnerability)
3. Argue that your actions are necessary as a response to others' wrongdoing and in order to prevent even greater injustices from occurring. (Injustice)
4. Argue that criticism of your policies is unjust and that your critics are the ones guilty of wrongdoing. (Injustice)
5. Argue that your actions are required by the opposition's dishonesty and reflect your own integrity. (Distrust)
6. Argue that those opposed to your policies are disloyal, misguided, or lacking in good judgment. (Distrust)
7. Argue that the people you represent are special, and that your policies are based on high moral principles. (Superiority)
8. Argue that those disadvantaged by your actions are contemptible and undeserving of consideration. (Superiority)
9. Argue that you persevere and succeed when faced with obstacles and that your actions empower the people. (Helplessness)
10. Argue that setbacks or failures could not have been avoided, and that you are therefore blameless. (Helplessness)
If you do take a look at the video, I'd be very interested in any comments or reactions. It's my first effort of this sort.
Roy Eidelson