Don't Think of an Elephant! This book explores why people have different perceptions of the same issue. It teaches us how to gain an advantage over others, how to get attention, and how to direct public focus onto a specific topic. Attracting attention is not easy, especially in this age of technology and social media, which is filled with so much interesting information.
Next, we will start with an example to help you easily understand what this book aims to teach us. During the 2016 US presidential election campaign between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump campaigned on building a border wall between the United States and Mexico to completely prevent illegal immigrants from entering the United States. Later, because of this single statement, the whole world strongly condemned Donald Trump for what they saw as racism. There were protests and heated debates surrounding this issue. So, what were the positive and negative impacts of this statement on Donald Trump? Although this topic led to strong criticism and condemnation, we know the eventual outcome: Donald Trump was elected the 45th President of the United States, serving from 2017 to 2021.
You have to understand that before a topic is used in an election campaign, it's not just said casually. There is a large team of talented people behind the scenes, responsible for planning and executing every activity to attract votes. He also knew that if he said those words, many people would condemn and insult him. But every time people thought about this issue, they would surely think of Donald Trump. Then, they would likely think further, "Why build a wall like this? It's like we're in ancient times." At this point, the issue becomes even more interesting and heated. More and more people raised this issue, and social media and the internet were filled with people talking and fiercely debating it.
Although in the end, the construction of the wall on the border between the two countries was not accepted by the public or the international community, for Donald Trump, it was a very effective marketing tool for gaining votes. In addition to this, it appealed to the American people who dislike illegal immigrants who are perceived as poor, immoral, and uneducated entering their country. And when it sounds like a form of nationalism, it's not surprising that Donald Trump won a majority of the votes in that election.
Let's analyze this a bit. In a context like this, it's quite strange. Whenever we talk about this issue, some people will surely support it, and others will oppose it. But no matter the outcome, whenever you think about this issue, you will surely think of another related story or another person involved. It's like there are two people, Person A and Person B. Person A says, "Elephants are so gentle; they are lovable." Whereas Person B says, "Elephants are vicious; they are hateful. Don't go near them."
Regarding the topic of whether the elephant is good or bad, whether Person A is right or Person B is right, the one who gets the most attention is neither A nor B. It's the elephant itself. Because no matter if you ultimately like or dislike the elephant, the elephant has already deeply entered your mind and your thoughts.
So how can we make our words influential? This point isn't about telling us to argue or debate just to win. But what we want in this case is to attract everyone's attention. Therefore, winning or losing at this moment is not important. What's important is that you get what you wanted. The question is, how do you create a scenario that gets people's attention?
First, you have to remove yourself from the event or the story itself. Then, create the story or event. This means if you want everyone to talk about an elephant, you must know how to create an elephant yourself. When everyone is talking about the elephant, whether it's good or bad, the elephant becomes the topic that everyone pays attention to and remembers forever.
You can't learn this kind of technique in school, and no teacher will teach it to you. This technique, you have to learn from top experts, like the author of this book. The author of this book is named George Lakoff, who is an expert in linguistics and literature. He is a professor at the University of California and is recognized as a teacher to US presidents. It's not that he teaches presidents directly, but when it comes to his books, every presidential candidate has read them.
Howard Dean, a former congressman, a prominent politician, and chairman of the Democratic Party, once commented, "If we had read George's book, we might not have lost the opportunity to control the White House." This book is slightly biased towards the Democratic Party, as we see many points raised to attack the Republican Party. This is likely due to the author's own political history and leanings. Even the title of this book has a jab at the Republican Party. "Don't think of that elephant," because the logo of the Republican Party at that time featured an elephant as its symbol.
But that's okay. Let's not think about the author's political leanings. What's important is what knowledge we can gain from this book. Next, I will break down the important content of the book into two parts.
Part one: What principles make a story famous and capture the attention of the general public? How does the process of conveying that information happen?
And part two: We will discuss the practical application techniques. How can we compose a scenario that makes everyone turn their attention and focus on a certain issue?
Without wasting any more time, let's get to the first important point. What principles can make a story famous? First, let's understand a key term that the book calls a "frame." It is the mindset and perception of each individual. You could say it is the framework of thinking for everyone. It is the pattern of considering something without necessarily using conscious reasoning.
For example, you are a knowledgeable person. Suppose you have to explain to someone who is sweeping the streets what Bitcoin is. It's difficult to explain, isn't it? Because his level of understanding, or his "frame," cannot comprehend much beyond what is already in his existing mindset.
Let's look at another, simpler example. An ant is a creature that exists in 2D. Its coordinate system is a flat plane. In its world, it has never known what height is. It only knows left or right. There is no up or down. Even if it climbs a wall, it thinks of it as a flat surface. If you take a pen and draw a circle around an ant, it will not dare to go outside that circle. Because it thinks this is a fence, a waterline that it can never swim across.
Similarly, an elephant with a strong body and immense power... do you think the chain attached to its leg can really hold this elephant in one place? It can't. But because it has been tied up like this since it was young, it tried to break free but couldn't. Until it grew to full strength, it still thought it couldn't break free. So it accepted this fate. Its mindset has already been set that it can never break free from the chain on its leg. In reality, if it just thought a little bigger, it could do it.
Let's look at another strange scenario that happened during a US presidential election campaign. The two major parties are the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, which have been fierce competitors for a long time. The views of these two parties are completely opposite. Disagreements in the political arena are normal. The Democratic Party always sides with the poor to get votes. Their strategy is to say things that appeal to people with difficult lives, such as promising to give money to the poor or improve public welfare.
As for the Republican Party, it leans towards the rich. Their campaign strategy is to announce that they will cut taxes. There's even a saying: "We don't care about those poor people, because those people are lazy. They don't want to work, just eat and sleep. They get sick and then want us to pay for it." When people with less fortunate lives hear these words, they will surely get angry.
But what's strange is that in the end, those poor people vote for the Republican Party instead. To explain this phenomenon, another author wrote a book with the title: "Just How Stupid Are We?" meaning, "How stupid are we, people?" The author explained that this story is not as simple as we think. It's not because the American people don't understand politics. It's because the Republican Party created a scenario that made the majority of the public believe in them.
They don't look down on the poor, but they don't like the poor. If you don't want this country to decline, to lose its power as the number one superpower in the world, you have to work hard. You have to make yourself a capable person, with money and knowledge. If you don't prosper, we will leave you behind. Everyone wants to have things, to be prosperous, to develop, right? Even if some people are poor now, they also want to be rich, to have a better life, to prosper. When they become rich, they will surely receive support and benefits from a government led by the Republican Party.
Let's look at the Democratic Party over here. The character they create is a kind-hearted one. They support the poor, wanting the poor to have a better life. Compared to the Republican Party, which is like a cruel father, the Democratic Party is like a gentle and kind-hearted mother. So why did those poor people vote for the Republican Party instead? It's because they had already been brainwashed by their campaign that they would make America have only strong people, continuing to be a superpower. The American people must be strong and have a lot of money. They repeatedly said, "Make America Great Again." If you are poor and weak, you will have no place to stand, and your life will be even more difficult. Therefore, all of you must work hard.
This view, at first, seems a bit difficult to listen to and accept. But when they pull you into this scenario, even if you are poor now, you have to vote for this party. Because from the moment you agree with this view, everything they say later on seems correct and reasonable. Because you have already entered their framework.
The above is the first important content that we have brought to show all of you, about how important it is to arrange a scenario to fit people's way of thinking. If what you say aligns with the views or mindset they already have, it's easy to get your message across to them. But if it doesn't align with their mindset, no matter how much you talk, they won't believe you. As the saying goes, "People only hear what they want to hear." So, what you need to think about is not what to say. You need to spend most of your time thinking about what you need to say that they want to hear.
So, how should that scenario be arranged? This is the most important content in this book. In fact, each person has a different mindset, life path, and experiences, which makes them have different mindsets. To introduce a scenario to make them change their thinking is not an easy thing. What is meant by a "mindset"? The word "mind" is already "set," meaning that in their head, it's like something is already engraved, making it difficult to change.
For example, at work, you are a very strict boss. With your team and subordinates, you are known as a fierce boss. But at home, you are a gentle mother. If one day you invite your work team to your house, they won't dare to joke around with you much. Only after knowing each other more closely for a while can they change their thinking about you from a strict boss to a gentle housewife. Only then can they joke with you normally.
Therefore, if you can change their mindset, everything else becomes easy to talk about. To do this, the author has suggested many techniques. Here, we will only raise three important techniques to talk about.
Step one is to find the cause and effect of those stories and put them together again. Most of the time, big phenomena don't happen by chance. They all have their causes and effects. A cause is the root of a story, the fundamental reason that makes that story happen. An effect is the result of those stories. But the result can be different depending on the scenario. If we compare it, it's like water flowing in a river. Its direction can change due to many factors such as the current, the wind direction, or rocks, for example. These factors will lead the water to different directions. In short, the stories that happen in society are like a complex system. Therefore, if we know the cause and effect, we can then craft a scenario that will ultimately end with the result we want.
The author raised an example. It relates to the retirement pension that is given to employees or civil servants when they get old. We understand that it is a portion of our salary that we will receive when we retire and are no longer able to work. Therefore, regarding this issue, most people don't have any objections because when you get old, you don't have to work but still get a salary, which is a good thing, right?
But some political parties take this issue and expand it. They use it to attack the government, which can cause the public to protest and debate this issue. They explain that this money is our salary that we should have received a long time ago, right? It's the government that cuts our salary every month. They just keep it, save it, and when we get old, they give us that salary. In fact, it is our money that we should have received a long time ago. There is no merit in it at all.
When they change the mindset, pulling us to think from this angle, we will surely change our thinking immediately, and we think, "Hey, that makes sense."
Another example relates to the tax on transferring assets. In their country, when parents transfer their assets to their children, they also have to pay tax. Some people think, "It's my family's assets, my money, my children. Why do I have to pay tax?" But after we investigate the cause and effect and talk about it again, we will see the story from a different angle.
For example, Bill Gates's father told his children, "Paying this tax is like paying for the services that we provide back to society. We earn money because of this society. We have a duty to pay this tax to the state so they can build various infrastructures. Only then can we earn that money. If we are smart, that money will eventually run back into our pockets anyway." Bill Gates and his father were not the ones who invented the internet, but they understood it better than anyone else. When the world started using it, they were already prepared. Bill's family earned hundreds of millions of dollars from the internet. In fact, Bill Gates was not a poor kid who started a company out of a garage like you all might have thought.
Therefore, if we grasp the cause and effect of a story clearly, we can then explain it to many people from a different angle. Their perception might change 180 degrees. Each person has a very complex way of thinking. Sometimes, when we are not them, we can't understand their decisions or views. The thing is, they have their own reasons and causes. Therefore, if you want to change their mindset, to make them see what we have seen, we must first explain the cause and effect to them.
Knowing only the cause and effect is not enough. The second step is that you must know how to choose the right words or sentences to explain your views and reasons to them so they understand and it's easy to spread. This point is very important. If you don't know how to use short, concise, and easy-to-understand words that sound impactful, then no matter how good your views are, they won't listen.
Let's read to the two sentences below and see how they differ. Sentence one: "Work hard to do something well, even if you don't get results in a short time, you must keep fighting." Sentence two: "As a person, you must have a long-term vision; you must not only see the benefits in the short term." How do you feel after reading? The first sentence is too common; it sounds ordinary. As for the second sentence, it sounds broader in meaning. For example, the keywords "vision" and "benefits." These are all words that politicians like to use. These two sentences have similar meanings, but they give a different feeling to the listener. This is why the speeches of politicians or diplomats all go through careful crafting and writing by experts.
Like the case of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The crashing of civilian airplanes into the World Trade Center in New York City was initially described using the phrase "an illegal attack" to describe this event. Therefore, people all over the world understood it as an attack. If it's illegal, you have to find the people. Arrest the people and bring them to justice, and it's over. But if it's like this, the United States loses too much. A huge loss like this, just arresting three or four people and bringing them to justice, and it's over, right? No, it can't be.
Later, they used a new word instead, saying this is a declaration of war against the United States. But if it's a war, you have to know who the enemy is, where to fight, and how to wage the war. But at that time, they hadn't found who the mastermind was yet. If you call it a war, it's not right either, because you don't know who to wage war against. Later, they used the most suitable word: "terrorism." This one word became the reason that led the United States to deploy troops all over its territory, spend money, and investigate in any country they suspected, because they considered this an act of international terrorism. It is a violation that threatens the peace and security of all humankind. This is why the United States declared war on countries like Iraq and Iran, which they suspected were involved in this matter. The international community did not condemn the United States either, because they understood that in this sense, America is the big brother stepping up to seek justice for humanity in the world.
The word "terrorism" is enough for America to attack these countries without any hesitation, because you have committed an act that threatens the peace of the entire world, not just attacking the United States. America says, "I am the protector of world peace. As long as you do anything that threatens world peace, I must destroy you, no reason needed." This is the power of using keywords and their influence.
The author also advises us that if they are the ones who create a scenario or a keyword that everyone is talking about, and you use that keyword to protest or argue with them, then you will be at a disadvantage. It's like fighting on their territory. We need to create a new keyword, create a new scenario for ourselves, and make the public see it from two different angles first. Because words are power. For your words to be powerful, you must first stand in an advantageous position.
Step three: When it's time to make our voice heard louder than our competitors. At this point, it no longer depends on technique, but on money, power, and resources. At this point, we won't raise too much. Using social media and news networks, making public speeches, and doing charity events are all effective ways to disseminate information.
The above are the most important points in the book on how to create a scenario or a framework for people to play in. The first step is to find the connections, causes, and effects. The second step is to create a keyword to describe those stories so that the public can easily understand and discuss it. And the third step is to use the resources you have to disseminate it as widely as possible.
The summary of the book "Don't Think of an Elephant" that our team has prepared for you all today is just this much. Let's briefly review the important content in the book. How to change a person's perception? It's not by introducing information that they have no prior basis for. And you certainly can't go directly against the views they already hold. You need to create a scenario to change their mindset first. Because people stand on different viewpoints, they will surely see the same thing from different angles.
When we know how to adjust their mindset to make them see things from the same angle as us, our words will become more powerful. Whatever we say, they will think it's reasonable. The reason they titled this book "Don't Think of an Elephant" is that when they say this, the first thing that comes to mind is an elephant. Then, we will try to find reasons and other stories related to the elephant to support the perception we already have. If you want to change someone's perception, you must apply the techniques in the book above.
Next, we will start with an example to help you easily understand what this book aims to teach us. During the 2016 US presidential election campaign between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump campaigned on building a border wall between the United States and Mexico to completely prevent illegal immigrants from entering the United States. Later, because of this single statement, the whole world strongly condemned Donald Trump for what they saw as racism. There were protests and heated debates surrounding this issue. So, what were the positive and negative impacts of this statement on Donald Trump? Although this topic led to strong criticism and condemnation, we know the eventual outcome: Donald Trump was elected the 45th President of the United States, serving from 2017 to 2021.
You have to understand that before a topic is used in an election campaign, it's not just said casually. There is a large team of talented people behind the scenes, responsible for planning and executing every activity to attract votes. He also knew that if he said those words, many people would condemn and insult him. But every time people thought about this issue, they would surely think of Donald Trump. Then, they would likely think further, "Why build a wall like this? It's like we're in ancient times." At this point, the issue becomes even more interesting and heated. More and more people raised this issue, and social media and the internet were filled with people talking and fiercely debating it.
Although in the end, the construction of the wall on the border between the two countries was not accepted by the public or the international community, for Donald Trump, it was a very effective marketing tool for gaining votes. In addition to this, it appealed to the American people who dislike illegal immigrants who are perceived as poor, immoral, and uneducated entering their country. And when it sounds like a form of nationalism, it's not surprising that Donald Trump won a majority of the votes in that election.
Let's analyze this a bit. In a context like this, it's quite strange. Whenever we talk about this issue, some people will surely support it, and others will oppose it. But no matter the outcome, whenever you think about this issue, you will surely think of another related story or another person involved. It's like there are two people, Person A and Person B. Person A says, "Elephants are so gentle; they are lovable." Whereas Person B says, "Elephants are vicious; they are hateful. Don't go near them."
Regarding the topic of whether the elephant is good or bad, whether Person A is right or Person B is right, the one who gets the most attention is neither A nor B. It's the elephant itself. Because no matter if you ultimately like or dislike the elephant, the elephant has already deeply entered your mind and your thoughts.
So how can we make our words influential? This point isn't about telling us to argue or debate just to win. But what we want in this case is to attract everyone's attention. Therefore, winning or losing at this moment is not important. What's important is that you get what you wanted. The question is, how do you create a scenario that gets people's attention?
First, you have to remove yourself from the event or the story itself. Then, create the story or event. This means if you want everyone to talk about an elephant, you must know how to create an elephant yourself. When everyone is talking about the elephant, whether it's good or bad, the elephant becomes the topic that everyone pays attention to and remembers forever.
You can't learn this kind of technique in school, and no teacher will teach it to you. This technique, you have to learn from top experts, like the author of this book. The author of this book is named George Lakoff, who is an expert in linguistics and literature. He is a professor at the University of California and is recognized as a teacher to US presidents. It's not that he teaches presidents directly, but when it comes to his books, every presidential candidate has read them.
Howard Dean, a former congressman, a prominent politician, and chairman of the Democratic Party, once commented, "If we had read George's book, we might not have lost the opportunity to control the White House." This book is slightly biased towards the Democratic Party, as we see many points raised to attack the Republican Party. This is likely due to the author's own political history and leanings. Even the title of this book has a jab at the Republican Party. "Don't think of that elephant," because the logo of the Republican Party at that time featured an elephant as its symbol.
But that's okay. Let's not think about the author's political leanings. What's important is what knowledge we can gain from this book. Next, I will break down the important content of the book into two parts.
Part one: What principles make a story famous and capture the attention of the general public? How does the process of conveying that information happen?
And part two: We will discuss the practical application techniques. How can we compose a scenario that makes everyone turn their attention and focus on a certain issue?
Without wasting any more time, let's get to the first important point. What principles can make a story famous? First, let's understand a key term that the book calls a "frame." It is the mindset and perception of each individual. You could say it is the framework of thinking for everyone. It is the pattern of considering something without necessarily using conscious reasoning.
For example, you are a knowledgeable person. Suppose you have to explain to someone who is sweeping the streets what Bitcoin is. It's difficult to explain, isn't it? Because his level of understanding, or his "frame," cannot comprehend much beyond what is already in his existing mindset.
Let's look at another, simpler example. An ant is a creature that exists in 2D. Its coordinate system is a flat plane. In its world, it has never known what height is. It only knows left or right. There is no up or down. Even if it climbs a wall, it thinks of it as a flat surface. If you take a pen and draw a circle around an ant, it will not dare to go outside that circle. Because it thinks this is a fence, a waterline that it can never swim across.
Similarly, an elephant with a strong body and immense power... do you think the chain attached to its leg can really hold this elephant in one place? It can't. But because it has been tied up like this since it was young, it tried to break free but couldn't. Until it grew to full strength, it still thought it couldn't break free. So it accepted this fate. Its mindset has already been set that it can never break free from the chain on its leg. In reality, if it just thought a little bigger, it could do it.
Let's look at another strange scenario that happened during a US presidential election campaign. The two major parties are the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, which have been fierce competitors for a long time. The views of these two parties are completely opposite. Disagreements in the political arena are normal. The Democratic Party always sides with the poor to get votes. Their strategy is to say things that appeal to people with difficult lives, such as promising to give money to the poor or improve public welfare.
As for the Republican Party, it leans towards the rich. Their campaign strategy is to announce that they will cut taxes. There's even a saying: "We don't care about those poor people, because those people are lazy. They don't want to work, just eat and sleep. They get sick and then want us to pay for it." When people with less fortunate lives hear these words, they will surely get angry.
But what's strange is that in the end, those poor people vote for the Republican Party instead. To explain this phenomenon, another author wrote a book with the title: "Just How Stupid Are We?" meaning, "How stupid are we, people?" The author explained that this story is not as simple as we think. It's not because the American people don't understand politics. It's because the Republican Party created a scenario that made the majority of the public believe in them.
They don't look down on the poor, but they don't like the poor. If you don't want this country to decline, to lose its power as the number one superpower in the world, you have to work hard. You have to make yourself a capable person, with money and knowledge. If you don't prosper, we will leave you behind. Everyone wants to have things, to be prosperous, to develop, right? Even if some people are poor now, they also want to be rich, to have a better life, to prosper. When they become rich, they will surely receive support and benefits from a government led by the Republican Party.
Let's look at the Democratic Party over here. The character they create is a kind-hearted one. They support the poor, wanting the poor to have a better life. Compared to the Republican Party, which is like a cruel father, the Democratic Party is like a gentle and kind-hearted mother. So why did those poor people vote for the Republican Party instead? It's because they had already been brainwashed by their campaign that they would make America have only strong people, continuing to be a superpower. The American people must be strong and have a lot of money. They repeatedly said, "Make America Great Again." If you are poor and weak, you will have no place to stand, and your life will be even more difficult. Therefore, all of you must work hard.
This view, at first, seems a bit difficult to listen to and accept. But when they pull you into this scenario, even if you are poor now, you have to vote for this party. Because from the moment you agree with this view, everything they say later on seems correct and reasonable. Because you have already entered their framework.
The above is the first important content that we have brought to show all of you, about how important it is to arrange a scenario to fit people's way of thinking. If what you say aligns with the views or mindset they already have, it's easy to get your message across to them. But if it doesn't align with their mindset, no matter how much you talk, they won't believe you. As the saying goes, "People only hear what they want to hear." So, what you need to think about is not what to say. You need to spend most of your time thinking about what you need to say that they want to hear.
So, how should that scenario be arranged? This is the most important content in this book. In fact, each person has a different mindset, life path, and experiences, which makes them have different mindsets. To introduce a scenario to make them change their thinking is not an easy thing. What is meant by a "mindset"? The word "mind" is already "set," meaning that in their head, it's like something is already engraved, making it difficult to change.
For example, at work, you are a very strict boss. With your team and subordinates, you are known as a fierce boss. But at home, you are a gentle mother. If one day you invite your work team to your house, they won't dare to joke around with you much. Only after knowing each other more closely for a while can they change their thinking about you from a strict boss to a gentle housewife. Only then can they joke with you normally.
Therefore, if you can change their mindset, everything else becomes easy to talk about. To do this, the author has suggested many techniques. Here, we will only raise three important techniques to talk about.
Step one is to find the cause and effect of those stories and put them together again. Most of the time, big phenomena don't happen by chance. They all have their causes and effects. A cause is the root of a story, the fundamental reason that makes that story happen. An effect is the result of those stories. But the result can be different depending on the scenario. If we compare it, it's like water flowing in a river. Its direction can change due to many factors such as the current, the wind direction, or rocks, for example. These factors will lead the water to different directions. In short, the stories that happen in society are like a complex system. Therefore, if we know the cause and effect, we can then craft a scenario that will ultimately end with the result we want.
The author raised an example. It relates to the retirement pension that is given to employees or civil servants when they get old. We understand that it is a portion of our salary that we will receive when we retire and are no longer able to work. Therefore, regarding this issue, most people don't have any objections because when you get old, you don't have to work but still get a salary, which is a good thing, right?
But some political parties take this issue and expand it. They use it to attack the government, which can cause the public to protest and debate this issue. They explain that this money is our salary that we should have received a long time ago, right? It's the government that cuts our salary every month. They just keep it, save it, and when we get old, they give us that salary. In fact, it is our money that we should have received a long time ago. There is no merit in it at all.
When they change the mindset, pulling us to think from this angle, we will surely change our thinking immediately, and we think, "Hey, that makes sense."
Another example relates to the tax on transferring assets. In their country, when parents transfer their assets to their children, they also have to pay tax. Some people think, "It's my family's assets, my money, my children. Why do I have to pay tax?" But after we investigate the cause and effect and talk about it again, we will see the story from a different angle.
For example, Bill Gates's father told his children, "Paying this tax is like paying for the services that we provide back to society. We earn money because of this society. We have a duty to pay this tax to the state so they can build various infrastructures. Only then can we earn that money. If we are smart, that money will eventually run back into our pockets anyway." Bill Gates and his father were not the ones who invented the internet, but they understood it better than anyone else. When the world started using it, they were already prepared. Bill's family earned hundreds of millions of dollars from the internet. In fact, Bill Gates was not a poor kid who started a company out of a garage like you all might have thought.
Therefore, if we grasp the cause and effect of a story clearly, we can then explain it to many people from a different angle. Their perception might change 180 degrees. Each person has a very complex way of thinking. Sometimes, when we are not them, we can't understand their decisions or views. The thing is, they have their own reasons and causes. Therefore, if you want to change their mindset, to make them see what we have seen, we must first explain the cause and effect to them.
Knowing only the cause and effect is not enough. The second step is that you must know how to choose the right words or sentences to explain your views and reasons to them so they understand and it's easy to spread. This point is very important. If you don't know how to use short, concise, and easy-to-understand words that sound impactful, then no matter how good your views are, they won't listen.
Let's read to the two sentences below and see how they differ. Sentence one: "Work hard to do something well, even if you don't get results in a short time, you must keep fighting." Sentence two: "As a person, you must have a long-term vision; you must not only see the benefits in the short term." How do you feel after reading? The first sentence is too common; it sounds ordinary. As for the second sentence, it sounds broader in meaning. For example, the keywords "vision" and "benefits." These are all words that politicians like to use. These two sentences have similar meanings, but they give a different feeling to the listener. This is why the speeches of politicians or diplomats all go through careful crafting and writing by experts.
Like the case of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The crashing of civilian airplanes into the World Trade Center in New York City was initially described using the phrase "an illegal attack" to describe this event. Therefore, people all over the world understood it as an attack. If it's illegal, you have to find the people. Arrest the people and bring them to justice, and it's over. But if it's like this, the United States loses too much. A huge loss like this, just arresting three or four people and bringing them to justice, and it's over, right? No, it can't be.
Later, they used a new word instead, saying this is a declaration of war against the United States. But if it's a war, you have to know who the enemy is, where to fight, and how to wage the war. But at that time, they hadn't found who the mastermind was yet. If you call it a war, it's not right either, because you don't know who to wage war against. Later, they used the most suitable word: "terrorism." This one word became the reason that led the United States to deploy troops all over its territory, spend money, and investigate in any country they suspected, because they considered this an act of international terrorism. It is a violation that threatens the peace and security of all humankind. This is why the United States declared war on countries like Iraq and Iran, which they suspected were involved in this matter. The international community did not condemn the United States either, because they understood that in this sense, America is the big brother stepping up to seek justice for humanity in the world.
The word "terrorism" is enough for America to attack these countries without any hesitation, because you have committed an act that threatens the peace of the entire world, not just attacking the United States. America says, "I am the protector of world peace. As long as you do anything that threatens world peace, I must destroy you, no reason needed." This is the power of using keywords and their influence.
The author also advises us that if they are the ones who create a scenario or a keyword that everyone is talking about, and you use that keyword to protest or argue with them, then you will be at a disadvantage. It's like fighting on their territory. We need to create a new keyword, create a new scenario for ourselves, and make the public see it from two different angles first. Because words are power. For your words to be powerful, you must first stand in an advantageous position.
Step three: When it's time to make our voice heard louder than our competitors. At this point, it no longer depends on technique, but on money, power, and resources. At this point, we won't raise too much. Using social media and news networks, making public speeches, and doing charity events are all effective ways to disseminate information.
The above are the most important points in the book on how to create a scenario or a framework for people to play in. The first step is to find the connections, causes, and effects. The second step is to create a keyword to describe those stories so that the public can easily understand and discuss it. And the third step is to use the resources you have to disseminate it as widely as possible.
The summary of the book "Don't Think of an Elephant" that our team has prepared for you all today is just this much. Let's briefly review the important content in the book. How to change a person's perception? It's not by introducing information that they have no prior basis for. And you certainly can't go directly against the views they already hold. You need to create a scenario to change their mindset first. Because people stand on different viewpoints, they will surely see the same thing from different angles.