Why Independents are not so, well, Independent.By Steve Elliott (Grassfire) | March 16, 2007 02:45 PM |
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
![[article image]](/imagelib/276b79f3f57a4c75-64d0a290-1115c3e3dfb-206-212806436.jpg)
We call them "Independent," but I call them "blenders." Here's why...Every election cycle, we hear the virtues of the “independent” voter touted afresh and anew. Now that the political/election cycle never really ends, the clamoring for the independent voter is ongoing as well. But are these people in the murky middle really “independent”? The Culture and Media Institute (CMI) of the Media Research Center recently released the results of a “Cultural Values Survey” (survey results here, survey summary here) which brought this discussion to the forefront of my mind once again. Upon analysis of the data form the survey, CMI grouped respondents in to three broad categories: Orthodox, Progressive and Independent. The “orthodox” are those who see religious values are central to their worldview. Progressives downplay the role of religion and instead look to natural/secular sources for worldview inspiration. Then there’s the independents. Here’s how CMI describes “independents”: “Their guiding principle is neither religious revelation nor secular ideology .” They “generally respect the Biblical values” but “their moral compass is their own judgment.” CMI found that about one-third of Americans are orthodox, one-sixth are progressive and nearly half are in this syncretic middle. Sounds about right. What are "Independents," really? But are they “independent”? Certainly they are not more “independent” than either the religiously or secular-oriented folks, and they actually might be less . It a reasonable deduction that ideologues on the right and left are less likely to be swayed by the next turn in public opinion or pop culture fad than this “independent” group. So that would mean the “independents” are, in reality, less independent. Just because one does not have a clear moral compass or ideological framework does not mean one is independent. To the contrary -- the less certain one’s moral or ideological framework, the more dependent one is on external inputs to determine a course of action. Plus, why should we give those who are the most uncertain about their ideological framework the benefit of the moral high ground of the powerful, strong “independent” label? It’s time to call out independents for what they really are! But what is that? Introducing... the Blenders I propose that those in the murky middle should be called “Blenders.” After all, their thinking and actions are the result of a continual “blending” of ideas, opinions and worldviews. All the inputs from American society get thrown into their personal blender and out comes a result. If the inputs are heavy on one side (i.e. Iraq war is bad; Bush is to blame), the blend moves them in that direction. Not from independent ideology, but rather from a blending of thousands upon thousands of inputs (in marketing terms, ad “impressions”). Of course, every human being is at some level a “blender.” That is how we sort through the millions of inputs we face every year and at times change our opinions and actions. But the difference is, for Blenders this is their guiding principle. The orthodox use their faith as the main guiding principle. The so-called progressives use secular ideology to guide. The Blenders use the blend as the guide. They are ideological Blenders. In actuality, it is the blend that is guiding the not-so-independent Blenders. Think it isn’t so? How come over $140 billion annually is poured into advertising? It’s all about trying to create the right blend to sway the Blenders. And that’s why politicians and marketers and evangelists and educators clamor for the vast American murky middle… the not-so independent minded among us. Yes, Blenders rule, but not because of their independence. Rather, it’s their lack of it that gives them the center stage in the cultural debate. | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
 |
 |
||||||||||||||
| Why Independents are not so, well, Independent. | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Post New Comment to the Discussion | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
You must login to discuss this item. |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Sponsored Links |
|
|
