As US President Barack Obama begins his second term, heneeds a simple way to express his vision and policies for the economy – ametaphor around which support for his policies might crystallize, therebyboosting his administration’s political effectiveness. So, what makes asuccessful metaphor work?
The 2008 Obama campaign used the slogan “Change we canbelieve in.” But “change” is not a metaphor for a new government: it does notstand for any policies. Nor does “Hope” or “Yes we can!”
The 2012 Obama campaign used the one-word slogan “Forward!”Once again, it signifies nothing about policies or their underlying philosophy.Every politician, whether liberal or conservative, wants to move forward, notbackward.
Obama’s slogans are examples of “dead metaphors”: they arenot part of an overall conceptual scheme.
By contrast, in the 1930’s, President Franklin Rooseveltused a metaphor that remains very much alive today. The idea of a “new deal”was conceived during his first presidential election campaign in 1932, thoughat the time he was still very vague about what the term stood for.
Apparently, Roosevelt, or his speechwriters, borrowed itfrom A New Deal,a book by Stuart Chase that was published in 1932 and adapted the same yearinto a cover story for the magazine The New Republic. Chase described his new deal in general termsas “the drastic and progressive revision of the economic structure, avoiding anutter break with the past.” And, while the book’s specific policy proposalsbear little resemblance to Roosevelt’s subsequent actions, the title had an intrinsic appeal that hemust have recognized.
The New Deal created an image of a commercial transaction,like the buyout of a company or an incentivepackage for executives – something that contracting parties bargain over and agree to. It is notimposed. By calling it a “deal,” Roosevelt made clear that the plan was notanti-business: it sounded like an offer to work, to participate, to seize anopportunity. And, because deals can be good or bad, fair or exploitative, theword “new” provided metaphoric depth, suggesting that Roosevelt’s deal wasbetter, fairer, and more attractive.
The metaphor, overwhelmingly endorsed by voters, stood forRoosevelt’s mandate to fix the ailing economy along lines that were innovativebut still essentially capitalist. Some of his administration’s initiatives,such as the creation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, seemedanti-business to some at the time, but have long since been accepted as a boon to competition and dynamism by hemming in unfair or manipulative behavior.
Metaphors, it turns out, are not just words. Modern neuroscience is revealing that metaphors areintrinsic to creativity, for their use activates diverse regions of the brainassociated with their multiple meanings. Good metaphors are those that set offthe right intuitive connections in our brains. For example, much progress inunderstanding sound and light resulted when scientists imagined them in termsof sea waves.
Formulating a good metaphor for Obama’s second term isitself a task for intuitive creative thought that entails rethinking what hewill propose in his second term. A good metaphor might embody the idea of an“inclusive economy.” The word “inclusive” resonatesstrongly: Americans do not want more government per se; rather, they want thegovernment to get more people involved in the market economy. Opinion pollsshow that, above all, what Americans want are jobs – the beginning ofinclusion.
The parallel to Chase’s book today is the 2012 bestseller Why Nations Fail bythe economist DaronAcemoglu and the political scientist JamesRobinson. Acemoglu and Robinson argue that in the broad sweep of history,political orders that include everyone in the economic process are more likelyto succeed in the long term.
The time seems ripe for that idea, and it fits with thetriumph of inclusiveness symbolized by Obama himself. But another step inmetaphor-building is needed to encapsulate theidea of economic inclusion.
The biggest successes of Obama’s first term concernedeconomic inclusion. The Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) is providing morepeople with access to health care – and bringing more people to privately-issuedinsurance – than ever before in the United States. The Dodd-Frank financialreforms created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, so that privatelyissued financial products would serve the public better, and created incentivesfor derivatives to be traded on public markets. And he signed the JOBS Act,proposed by his Republican opponents, which aims to create crowdfunding Websites that allow small investors to participate in start-up ventures.
We have not reached the pinnacleof economic inclusion. There are hundreds of other possibilities, includingimproved investor education and financial advice, more flexible mortgages,better kinds of securitization, more insurance for a broader array of life’srisks, and better management of career risks. Much more progress towardcomprehensive public futures and derivatives markets would help, as wouldpolicies to encourage the emerging world to participate more in the US economy.(Indeed, the inclusion metaphor is essentially global in spirit; had Obama usedit in the past, his economic policies might have been less protectionist.)
The right metaphor would spin some of these ideas, orothers like them, into a vision for America’s future that, like the New Deal,would gain coherence as it is transformed into reality. On January 29, Obamawill give the first State of the Union address of his new term. He should bethinking about how to express – vividly and compellingly – the principles thathave guided his choices so far, and that set a path for America’s future.