Hi Paul, thank you for the essay above. I found your thoughts on narrative identity and national security interesting and useful. As I was reading, I had several questions. I hope you will find these questions worth answering.
1) what is your bullet list of our core American values, or heritage values?
2) do you conceptualise values as always positive? do we also hold negative values?
3) can and should core values (and therefore core narrative identity) evolve and change?
4) can we differentiate positive value evolution from negative evolution (or 'value decay')?
5) have there always been deep value divides in American culture, which are now more evident but not different in kind than the identity split during the Civil War (first, not current!)?
6) how do we differentiate 'accurate' from 'inaccurate' values? perhaps you mean 'authentic' rather than accurate, since values are by definition about meaning rather than truth values (to quote you from elsewhere).
7) does the national security community truly own the mission to restore American values to Americans? or is that a more intrinsically civil society task? As a retired member of the national security community, I heartily endorse American citizens owning the responsibility for maintaining, communicating, and cultivating our foundational values. Outsourcing the maintenance and development of core American values to our security community puts us at the mercy of that community, should it fall into toxic narrative psychosis. I tend to conceptualise the nat sec community as having the responsibility for communicating positive American values through every means possible, but particularly through enactment both at home and abroad.That includes the ability to reflect those values in key strategic narratives accurately, authentically and effectively. However, I tend to think that nat sec should reflect the best of what we are, rather than attempt to build Americans into our current forms of 'be best.' (you know where that got us!)
I'm finally getting around to your next question. 3) can and should core values (and therefore core narrative identity) evolve and change?
This is one of the most important questions in your list. This is easily a dissertation, but I'll try and hit the highlights as succinctly as possible.
1. Core values are based on our own unique, NI/ Narrative Identity. They cannot simply be imposed on a group of people, state, individual or nation. They must fit snugly with how each sees their core values. At the birth of the US, our core values were very much the same as Britain's with the primary deviation being religious freedom and citizens with full citizenship rights, such as freedom to vote in free and fair elections, minus the stamp of approval by a monarch, and freedom of speech. (This is a very rough paraphrase of a far more complex situation.)
2. All NIs evolve over time for the simple reason that humans and history evolve. Still, core, deeply ingrained identity traits evolve far slower. The best analogy is a river changing course over millennia with only the biggest and most dense boulders holding on longer.
3. For example, most everyone is familiar with the "Ten Commandments" which are the core of most global national values, in one form or another. Even they were based on more ancient codes of values, often grounded in religious beliefs regarding morality. These core values are the boulders in the river slowly changing course.
4. Identities within homogenous societies cannot absorb a set of values that are in conflict with the core values of said identity. The evolution though of NIs can be accelerated by conscious "shaping" over time. As an example, the version of American identity, based largely on our history of internalizing a common set of values has been slowly and consistently modified by FOX media here in the states, over the past 40 years or so. They have partially recreated an easily triggered, modified identity. In short, they have manipulated the NI of their unique audiences to include a modified/ alternate version of our national identity.
5. This is what at the core of US hyper partisanship. People are not fighting over politics. Both partisan "sides" are trying to establish their own dominant metanarrative for the entire nation. Most Americans reject the FOX version because it's an outsider identity that they reject instinctively.
The bottom line is that yes, our NI evolves but unless intentionally reshaped over a long period of time it's a slow process and must include our historical core values in order to be internalized. As we saw this Tuesday, the FOX, false narrative competing to become the national identity has peaked and is now devolving. This is a dangerous phase because it leaves their audiences untethered to reality and looking for an identity to align with. Like a power vacuum, others will compete to absorb this audience. The only question is, will the good guys act decisively?
I do hope this helps Maggie. If not, please don't hesitate to response seeking more clarity.
Thank you for your patient and careful explanation of NI core values above, Paul. I appreciate your generosity in the time and effort you put into your explanations. m
Hi Maggie, and no, I didn't forget to get back to you. It has simply been a very busy and time-consuming few days, with little hint of abating.
Your second question, like the others is very good. Good values are like beauty, "are in the eye of the beholder." There is largely universal agreement on most values but with perspectives that vary based on a long list of factors. For example, a Jirga Circle within Pashtun culture is a very spartan but faithful version of democracy. Still, the US and our allies spent a generation in the nation attempting to build our version of democracy. This failed for a variety of reasons but mostly because in most cases, we failed to understand the identities contained in the rich human terrain of different ethnicities, cultures, tribes, etc.
A society's claimed values are very rarely considered negative by that particular group. That doesn't mean that there aren't behaviors that have been identified and described within the value system that are negative. To use Pashtuns again as an example, they primarily live via an honor code called, "Pashtunwali." There are prescribed actions to be taken in support of honor that would be considered negative, outside Pashtunwali. Revenge/ Badal is one of these. A dishonorable action against a family or tribal member, must be dealt with according to the code and some of the prescribed reclamations of honor include severe actions, such as a murder for a murder. We know this in the West and Middle East as, "an eye for and eye."
Around the world, understanding a target audience's unique identity or rather, "NI/ narrative identity" is the key to determining their perceptions.
I hope this helps and answers your questions, Maggie. If not, please let me know and I'll give it another try.
Thank you, Paul, for another insightful response. Perhaps identifying those overlapping core foundational values can help us build the internarrative identity bridges we so desperately need, whether to understand Pashtunwali or Trump followers.
Thanks for the excellent questions, each deserving of a dissertation. Considering that together your questions would cumulatively fill a book, please allow me to address them over time.
1. "what is your bullet list of our core American values, or heritage values?" All Americans have a slightly different perspective of our traditional values. Still, most of us have a long list of "shared layers" of our NI/ Narrative Identity that make us a homogenized grouping. Our traditional values, though varying in precise language revolve around the language of our founding documents, most especially, our "Declaration of Independence." For example, "life, liberty and pursuit of justice." Variations of all of these. While that over time, our national identity has slowly evolved and become more nuanced, the core values are what can trigger our narrative identities most easily. As an example, pursuit of life and defined within the phrase, "inalienable rights" could mean defending freedom fighters around the world to the relatively extreme, denying abortion regardless of rape or incest. Most importantly, we must not allow politicians to reframe our core values into something they aren't. Here in TX, being patriotic doesn't match our core values. The party in power says that guns, Christianity and the subjugation of minorities is part of the party platform. This includes religion in schools which is in direct conflict with our constitution.
This all may be a bit ambiguous but at the end of the day, we all see life a little different than anyone else, due to countless factors attached to our own unique identity. The short answer is that I'd look at our Declaration of Independence for core American values.
Great questions and thank you. I will get to the others as soon as time allows.
Thank you for the great reply, Paul. I particularly like your emphasis on the Constitution as a key text/foundational American discourse. Using our Constitution as a tool, we can identify a number of political values - separation of church and state, checks and balances on political power, political accountability, limitations on the power of the state, and a strong emphasis on traditional liberal human rights, including equality of citizens (clearly still a work in progress!), and respect for human dignity. If we add in the Declaration of Independence as a key text/foundational discourse, we can identify these recurring themes there as well.
Heather Cox Richardson quoted Joe Biden in her November 2 newsletter, Biden emphasising key values of decency, dignity, liberty, opportunity, justice, and above all, democracy and respect for the democratic process. Again, all traditional 'liberal' (in the longview historical meaning of the term) values. In the historical understanding of liberalism as a political philosophy, there is clearly no conflict with traditional 'conservative' values...I'd say these values are where our political spectrum Venn diagrams have overlapped in the past, and do indeed form the political foundation of our national narratives and American narrative identity. Thank you for helping me think more and better on the concept of American values.
You're quite welcome Maggie. I'm happy that you found the comments thought-provoking.
Our common national values are as you noted, "not in conflict with opposing political belief systems." They are also the key, if narrated properly, to our national resilience against adversarial influence.
Thank you. Today's favorite quote: "Our common national values....are the key, if properly narrated, to our national resilience against adversarial influence."
Thank you, kindly Maggie, and yes, this quote regarding resilience is a concept, that we at Narrative Strategies are trying to get across to US and Allied national security communities. Without a sustained and properly formed, campaign of narration, it will be nearly impossible to obtain a resilient citizenry.
Hi Paul, thank you for the essay above. I found your thoughts on narrative identity and national security interesting and useful. As I was reading, I had several questions. I hope you will find these questions worth answering.
1) what is your bullet list of our core American values, or heritage values?
2) do you conceptualise values as always positive? do we also hold negative values?
3) can and should core values (and therefore core narrative identity) evolve and change?
4) can we differentiate positive value evolution from negative evolution (or 'value decay')?
5) have there always been deep value divides in American culture, which are now more evident but not different in kind than the identity split during the Civil War (first, not current!)?
6) how do we differentiate 'accurate' from 'inaccurate' values? perhaps you mean 'authentic' rather than accurate, since values are by definition about meaning rather than truth values (to quote you from elsewhere).
7) does the national security community truly own the mission to restore American values to Americans? or is that a more intrinsically civil society task? As a retired member of the national security community, I heartily endorse American citizens owning the responsibility for maintaining, communicating, and cultivating our foundational values. Outsourcing the maintenance and development of core American values to our security community puts us at the mercy of that community, should it fall into toxic narrative psychosis. I tend to conceptualise the nat sec community as having the responsibility for communicating positive American values through every means possible, but particularly through enactment both at home and abroad.That includes the ability to reflect those values in key strategic narratives accurately, authentically and effectively. However, I tend to think that nat sec should reflect the best of what we are, rather than attempt to build Americans into our current forms of 'be best.' (you know where that got us!)
Hi Maggie,
I'm finally getting around to your next question. 3) can and should core values (and therefore core narrative identity) evolve and change?
This is one of the most important questions in your list. This is easily a dissertation, but I'll try and hit the highlights as succinctly as possible.
1. Core values are based on our own unique, NI/ Narrative Identity. They cannot simply be imposed on a group of people, state, individual or nation. They must fit snugly with how each sees their core values. At the birth of the US, our core values were very much the same as Britain's with the primary deviation being religious freedom and citizens with full citizenship rights, such as freedom to vote in free and fair elections, minus the stamp of approval by a monarch, and freedom of speech. (This is a very rough paraphrase of a far more complex situation.)
2. All NIs evolve over time for the simple reason that humans and history evolve. Still, core, deeply ingrained identity traits evolve far slower. The best analogy is a river changing course over millennia with only the biggest and most dense boulders holding on longer.
3. For example, most everyone is familiar with the "Ten Commandments" which are the core of most global national values, in one form or another. Even they were based on more ancient codes of values, often grounded in religious beliefs regarding morality. These core values are the boulders in the river slowly changing course.
4. Identities within homogenous societies cannot absorb a set of values that are in conflict with the core values of said identity. The evolution though of NIs can be accelerated by conscious "shaping" over time. As an example, the version of American identity, based largely on our history of internalizing a common set of values has been slowly and consistently modified by FOX media here in the states, over the past 40 years or so. They have partially recreated an easily triggered, modified identity. In short, they have manipulated the NI of their unique audiences to include a modified/ alternate version of our national identity.
5. This is what at the core of US hyper partisanship. People are not fighting over politics. Both partisan "sides" are trying to establish their own dominant metanarrative for the entire nation. Most Americans reject the FOX version because it's an outsider identity that they reject instinctively.
The bottom line is that yes, our NI evolves but unless intentionally reshaped over a long period of time it's a slow process and must include our historical core values in order to be internalized. As we saw this Tuesday, the FOX, false narrative competing to become the national identity has peaked and is now devolving. This is a dangerous phase because it leaves their audiences untethered to reality and looking for an identity to align with. Like a power vacuum, others will compete to absorb this audience. The only question is, will the good guys act decisively?
I do hope this helps Maggie. If not, please don't hesitate to response seeking more clarity.
Thank you for your patient and careful explanation of NI core values above, Paul. I appreciate your generosity in the time and effort you put into your explanations. m
Hi Maggie, and no, I didn't forget to get back to you. It has simply been a very busy and time-consuming few days, with little hint of abating.
Your second question, like the others is very good. Good values are like beauty, "are in the eye of the beholder." There is largely universal agreement on most values but with perspectives that vary based on a long list of factors. For example, a Jirga Circle within Pashtun culture is a very spartan but faithful version of democracy. Still, the US and our allies spent a generation in the nation attempting to build our version of democracy. This failed for a variety of reasons but mostly because in most cases, we failed to understand the identities contained in the rich human terrain of different ethnicities, cultures, tribes, etc.
A society's claimed values are very rarely considered negative by that particular group. That doesn't mean that there aren't behaviors that have been identified and described within the value system that are negative. To use Pashtuns again as an example, they primarily live via an honor code called, "Pashtunwali." There are prescribed actions to be taken in support of honor that would be considered negative, outside Pashtunwali. Revenge/ Badal is one of these. A dishonorable action against a family or tribal member, must be dealt with according to the code and some of the prescribed reclamations of honor include severe actions, such as a murder for a murder. We know this in the West and Middle East as, "an eye for and eye."
Around the world, understanding a target audience's unique identity or rather, "NI/ narrative identity" is the key to determining their perceptions.
I hope this helps and answers your questions, Maggie. If not, please let me know and I'll give it another try.
Thank you, Paul, for another insightful response. Perhaps identifying those overlapping core foundational values can help us build the internarrative identity bridges we so desperately need, whether to understand Pashtunwali or Trump followers.
Hi Maggie,
Thanks for the excellent questions, each deserving of a dissertation. Considering that together your questions would cumulatively fill a book, please allow me to address them over time.
1. "what is your bullet list of our core American values, or heritage values?" All Americans have a slightly different perspective of our traditional values. Still, most of us have a long list of "shared layers" of our NI/ Narrative Identity that make us a homogenized grouping. Our traditional values, though varying in precise language revolve around the language of our founding documents, most especially, our "Declaration of Independence." For example, "life, liberty and pursuit of justice." Variations of all of these. While that over time, our national identity has slowly evolved and become more nuanced, the core values are what can trigger our narrative identities most easily. As an example, pursuit of life and defined within the phrase, "inalienable rights" could mean defending freedom fighters around the world to the relatively extreme, denying abortion regardless of rape or incest. Most importantly, we must not allow politicians to reframe our core values into something they aren't. Here in TX, being patriotic doesn't match our core values. The party in power says that guns, Christianity and the subjugation of minorities is part of the party platform. This includes religion in schools which is in direct conflict with our constitution.
This all may be a bit ambiguous but at the end of the day, we all see life a little different than anyone else, due to countless factors attached to our own unique identity. The short answer is that I'd look at our Declaration of Independence for core American values.
Great questions and thank you. I will get to the others as soon as time allows.
Kind regards
Thank you for the great reply, Paul. I particularly like your emphasis on the Constitution as a key text/foundational American discourse. Using our Constitution as a tool, we can identify a number of political values - separation of church and state, checks and balances on political power, political accountability, limitations on the power of the state, and a strong emphasis on traditional liberal human rights, including equality of citizens (clearly still a work in progress!), and respect for human dignity. If we add in the Declaration of Independence as a key text/foundational discourse, we can identify these recurring themes there as well.
Heather Cox Richardson quoted Joe Biden in her November 2 newsletter, Biden emphasising key values of decency, dignity, liberty, opportunity, justice, and above all, democracy and respect for the democratic process. Again, all traditional 'liberal' (in the longview historical meaning of the term) values. In the historical understanding of liberalism as a political philosophy, there is clearly no conflict with traditional 'conservative' values...I'd say these values are where our political spectrum Venn diagrams have overlapped in the past, and do indeed form the political foundation of our national narratives and American narrative identity. Thank you for helping me think more and better on the concept of American values.
You're quite welcome Maggie. I'm happy that you found the comments thought-provoking.
Our common national values are as you noted, "not in conflict with opposing political belief systems." They are also the key, if narrated properly, to our national resilience against adversarial influence.
Cheers and I will keep at the questions.
Paul
Thank you. Today's favorite quote: "Our common national values....are the key, if properly narrated, to our national resilience against adversarial influence."
Thank you, kindly Maggie, and yes, this quote regarding resilience is a concept, that we at Narrative Strategies are trying to get across to US and Allied national security communities. Without a sustained and properly formed, campaign of narration, it will be nearly impossible to obtain a resilient citizenry.
Kindest regards,
Paul