Picking the Right Wing's Brain: The Overton Window

Today I bring you insidious genius in the form of the Overton Window. This is a technique developed and employed by right-wing think-tanks to shift public debate in a direction favorable to their policy goals.

The fundamental premise is that each idea exists in one of six phases vis a vis the collective mind of the masses:

— Unthinkable
— Radical
— Acceptable
— Sensible
— Popular
— Policy

These categories exist as a continuum through which ideas can move in either direction. For example, legal slavery was once official U.S. policy and is now unthinkable. Allowing women to perform brain surgery was once unthinkable and is now policy. Gay marriage has moved from unthinkable to somewhere in between radical and policy, depending on where you live; national polling indicates that a majority of young Americans now find the notion acceptable.

The goal of the Overton Window is to allow one to think strategically about moving an idea through the continuum. Foreign policy towards Iran presents a useful case study. Bombing Iran was a radical position seven years ago, and now appears to be teetering somewhere around acceptable. While I personally think the act unthinkable, my thought is irrelevant. As a party engaged in attempting to impact policy, my job is to understand how most people (not my cavalcade of progressive acquaintances) feel about bombing Iran and engage in the debate accordingly. Scoffing at the notion of bombing Iran when it comes up in conversation (while doing so feels quite natural to me) won't get me anywhere; arguing that it's not sensible for a variety of reasons would be a far more effective rhetorical strategy for me to adopt, given my understanding of the notion's position in the Overton Window.

This stuff works. Really works. Just ask Rush Limbaugh, or take a look at public debate regarding privatization of Social Security. It's time to appropriate the master's tools.