Politics and framing the issue

This might be a good time to discuss framing. Why, because we are in a period in which Americans and perhaps the whole world are trying to comprehend the killing and destruction in Iraq and the whole Middle East.

Framing is a means for placing a matter into a context for discussion and contemplation. “Frames are the mental structures that allow human beings to understand reality—and sometimes to create what we take to be reality�. “Thinking Points�—George Lakoff

An example of framing is what happens when we speak about economics. The ‘market’ is often the frame used in economic matters. The word ‘market’ has been developed such that when we invoke the concept we are invoking a ‘force of nature’, not to be ‘tinkered with’ or ‘regulated’. When facing a force of nature one can only show ‘due diligence’, ‘flexibility’, one can only ‘ride-out’ the ups and downs.

The market is in fact a human institution with rules developed by humans; but our culture has framed the market as a force of nature not to be messed with, a common ideological practice. This fact never becomes an issue because the frame does not include it.

A similar thing happens with education. Education is framed in economic terms and market forces. Our schools and colleges produce graduates prepared for the job market. Teachers become educational resources.

Our schools compete with one another based upon productivity and the degree upon which they produce the graduates with the best job offers. Technology is engaged to facilitate mass production. When schools compete, everyone wins. Expenses are cut and teachers paid the minimum allowed by supply and demand. Vouchers will fit within the competitive frame because parents are given a choice of product.

“War on Terrorism� is a good example of faming. Both ‘war’ and ‘terrorism’ carry a great deal of useful baggage for those who create the frame.

Any kind of action becomes justified by war; terrorism creates terror that permits easy manipulation of the population by government. Colin Powell suggested ‘crime’ as the proper frame and one can easily see the difference between fighting crime or fighting war; also a great deal of difference between fighting criminals versus fighting terrorists. I suspect no one would have considered torture as a proper tool for fighting crime.

Can you think of any other frames that people often use such as pro-choice or pro-life?

Was General Petraeous linked to ‘betray us’ as another useful frame?

My post isn't related to what you wrote right now, but more of to what you write in general. Normally I wouldn't bother, but since these debates are important for you I'll offer some advice.
Also, it's vague since I'm sleepy.

From what I see, you try to identify fundamental problems in society and ask peoples opinions on them, though (at least in this post) you don't state any ideas on how to solve them.

Now, this is my opinion only so you can disregard it, but personally I think that since most of us are already aware of these issues, instead of presenting your thread as "Problem: opinions?" you should consider presenting it as "Problem: possible solutions. Opinions?" Or "Solution: critique?"

Just a thought. Not sure about others, but I'd find that more engaging.

P.S. Also, it's highly irritating and reeking of pseudo-intellectualism or "media speak" when you speak for everyone.

Sentences like "An example of framing is what happens when we speak about economics" (Who are these "we" that you speak of?) or "I suspect no one would have considered torture as a proper tool for fighting crime" are a pet peeve of mine.