The first rule of new warfare? It’s the paradigm of attack that matters; not the direction of the attack.
Anti-Trump bluster and “Crooked Hillary” confers on us an impression that it is the frame, above all else, that matters. When Donald J Trump, the President-elect, elected to designate his Republican rivals with “killshot” titles, the over-arching context of their candidacy was appropriated, leaving a damaged image in the place of what might have been an upstanding citizen with a distinct contribution.
The emasculation of Rubio, the dismissal of Jeb and a confirmation bias wet-dream in the form of Lyin’ Ted Cruz were some of the highlight dispatches of Trump’s assailment on the establishment, but it’s not just American warfare. If you are pro-Brexit then white supremacist might also be apt, with xenophobe certainly ranking on the list of possible slurs. It’s the new agenda of emotional appeasement with Feelers and leftists strangling the West in a chokehold of forced societal norms.
As a global variable for the subroutine of the West’s tempered decline, the frame, set and match back-and-forth has been firmly established. Remain vigilant, avoid the wrath of Human Resources and perhaps the laymen might survive, but to thrive the average joe must learn the existence of a new game, the game of frames.
As a cultural commentator that stirs the spot like I am prone to do, Pat Stedman comments with his interpretation of frame:
“Frame is the set of assumptions subconsciously agreed upon by people.“
The key word here is “assumption”. Absent the guidance of a presumption, assumptions are shots in the dark, shortcuts of thinking that often operate on the basis of consensus – i.e. keeping the peace. The sticking point, as all preeminent persuaders would attest, is that to the uninitiated or oblivious a frame can be engineered should a skilled architect oversee the blueprint.
In a flash, like Keyser Soze announcing to the world he boasts a devilish gait, the wool is pulled over your eyes. Sometimes the wool becomes so comfortable, it becomes difficult to remove. For a fervent flock, the wool becomes a part of a larger identity, until objectivity of perception becomes a subjective concept. In a clichéd cause-and-effect, sheep follow sheep, and the cycle begets a persistent bleating. As Stedman identified, frames are what we follow; cultural momentum is a driving force.
Sultans of spin
The sultans of spin generate the news cycles. Strap in and pay attention, because that’s exactly what they desire. The preeminent forces that guide our media, that guide our social exposure, do not develop great influence through mere happenstance. The climb is artificial; Everest can be scaled, but it takes craftsmanship, for the tools to aid the ascent. The manipulation that stirs just out of sight to the masses carries such a magnificent convolution that it is almost impossible to observe. From rapid-rise celebrity sensations to the redrawing of the Overton window, the schema is a constant, maintained by nefarious forces.
National Geographic, once an impressive editorial collection with intricate maps and fascinating photo-diaries has keeled over in response to the left’s enormity of persuasion. The gender revolution, as titled in the January issue for 2017 dictates an agenda that doesn’t feel to excuse itself. The message is clear, this is a revolution. Ignore the nature of their explanation, and the collection of beliefs that brought the cover into existence because times are changing. You wouldn’t want to be out-of-date, would you? The acceptable face of the new frame is winning the game of frames. Tolerance. We are a tolerant society, and the intolerant are intolerable. Though Nat Geo excuses itself as commenting on an interesting talking point, the title does not mince words. This is how the game is played, through the selection of language.
As an interesting thought experiment, consider that there are people who believe that the media was behind Donald Trump; the evidence speaks for itself. The media supported Clinton in every manner it could, setting the stage for a clear attempt to undermine the nationalist uprising as reports followed that Russia, of all places, perpetrated Trump’s achievement. When the cause is just, the media elite dig up the great distraction, the Soviet throwback. It’s the frame of fear, it’s the weapon of control that has outstayed its welcome, as the “weapons of mass destruction” buzzphrase had rather a short tail in comparison. These matters make up the macro aspect of frame, the sultans are those rulers that set our agenda, through the media and the press.
In matters of frame, the devil is in the details with one-to-one situations, and all types have a particular sway. The micro-framing in our lives are the interactions that govern the standards we place on one another. With a woman that firmly views a man as an alpha, he can get away with murder. Should he evince a beta perspective, the quality of his dominance might afford him a potent disbelief from the female. This, is what frame means in the daily rigour. Similarly a beta through an account of pandering and ill-thought reticence will evoke an impassioned reaction if he deigns to affect force of will. The incongruity highlights the frame mismatch, which is why first impressions count. You are setting the frame, and therefore the expectations.
In my office, a female busy-body feels (though it is the better form of pragmatism) that she should supervise the male sensitive soul who by all accounts, just wants to be left alone. She senses his intrinstic lack of masculine fervour. Case-in-point, she recently sat with a Spanish gent to discuss a process and in the following week mercilessly teased the gent that he was jealous over the attention. The subtle manipulations cast a light on the frame. Contrast her interactions with me, which are complimentary and have only been supportive of my “potential”. The frame is markedly different, as I display more of a traditional stoic generalship. Stoicism, staying above the noise and repurposing the events that unfold is a frame of its own.
An ENFJ accredited with remarkable social prowess that reacts to a dispassionate delivery of truth is common, and one will expect the social shame game to proceed. This becomes the new frame they seek to install. You are no longer providing an appraisal of truth, instead you are an aggressor with a focus on the personal. This is how the utterance is first twisted, what follows is the attempt to excise you from the group. Dominant Extraverted Feeling dictates an almost irrepressible obligation with maintaining the prevailing social norms from which a potent weapon is forged from once docile embers. The customs and norms become the context, which is subtlely distanced from your words. A pattern you will find across social media so often it would strike you as intentional, but no individuals are as deliberate as the spin doctors of the age – for whom Judging types excel.
“Intellectual subversion via misinformation & bias from faux experts is pervasive in our sphere, critical analysis reestablishes objectivity.” – @ethenes
The spin doctor is more of a surgeon; precise in cutting out the excess and slicing into the subject — the fuel for their reframing. You might come to admire the cultish thrall they impose on others. The spin doctor knows logic well, but it’s only a tool to be weaponised, creating a frame for manipulating the contents and embellishing the greater contributions of others, riding the coattails of his betters – the human beings he is distanced from.
Feeling undergoes the same process. It becomes a battering ram, punishing and opening the doors for a following to descend like vicious hounds at their master’s bidding. The emotionalism is harnessed to establish the context of undesirables. As shame is one of the more powerful cultural signals, in establishing an approval matrix, the followers attack the prey blind to the mechaninations that preceded.
The winner/loser dichotomy is often used as a segregating filter, and this snowballs to realise itself as a reflexive measure to fall under the banner of a higher standard, when it resembles the actual form of intolerance liberals protest their discontent with. Categorisation is the driving force; everything goes through the frame engine. Seeds of truth are regurgitated in influential flavour as if their inceception resembled an affront.
The frame masters consciously make moves.
If you are smarter than the doctor, then a social impairment is your designated condition. If you are not smarter, he bats you aside, humours you on occasion. If you are a well-rounded rational, he doesn’t see you as a threat, because the fragility of ego is the primary consideration; perhaps there is more to gain from holding you as an asset. The frame game is considerable in extent with such an alchemist, if you can twist it, it will be twisted. Your feelings are deemed irrational and castigated, then in the next breath a value is held as a desirable quality and reason is spun as the mark of the savage.
“What is tolerance? It is the consequence of humanity. We are all formed of frailty and error; let us pardon reciprocally each other’s folly – that is the first law of nature.” – Voltaire
Voltaire knew the truth of all human interaction, and so the spin doctor has a single weakness, a crippling weakness that cannot be hidden because the energy to maintain such elaborate manipulation is exhaustive — but I among others see past the people looking through the looking glass. There exists an abject absence of human consistency in such an individual, where the human consistency of inconsistency should prevail. Genuine character lets the humanity slip, it is those who appear immune to the flaws that will hold you under their influence and eventually run out of steam. While they may project character weaknesses, it will be a form of mimicry, with the source usually kept close using affirmation as insurance. We are social animals, we depend on an underlying contract of meaningful interaction to persist in our lives. The schemer outs themselves from the beginning, as the integrated individual does not enshroud their humanity.
I have seen many perform their piece in an attempt to rule through ideas in the great game of frames. Many vie for the spot, to redefine the efforts of others, so that their frame may stand alone. I welcome you to reject my frame, my truth, and find your own.