Outrageous trial-balloon positions let the right shift debate ground without debating facts

Evidence

The fact that the right is “using value-laden and pejorative language when discussing benefits and welfare” is not some moral or intellectual error on its part — it is a crude but remorselessly effective form of neuro-linguistic programming, designed to create a series of enduring associations which become embedded in the political unconscious. … The Tories know that if phrases and memes are repeated enough times, facts can be suspended. The reality technicians running the right understand that, as Freud said, there is no negation in the unconscious. No matter how much Owen Jones refuted the “arguments” of the right on radio and TV last week, they made hegemonic ground simply by the fact that they had managed to create a chain of equivalence connecting a child murderer with welfare. … The Mail fulfilled its usual role as outlier, floating an “outrageous” position which it inevitably tempts other media outlets into propagating, thus allowing Cameron and Osborne to “respond” in an apparently more measured — but actually only minimally distanced — way. The right won ground by the sheer fact that the “debate” was happening, and anything we do could only ever be a question of clawing back territory. — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk, 1691

Categorization

• XREF: Connects with Hall’s work on ideological reproduction and the construction of consent through common sense, and how hegemony works through redefining what is sayable rather than winning arguments. — connects to: Controversial rulings shift debates rather than settle them — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3363; Factual hearings rarely shift entrenched public opinion — Dorothy A. Brown, Getting to Reparations: How Building a…, 1145; Challenging consensus triggers dismissal of the arguer rather than the argument — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk: The Collected and Unpublished…, 2389 (+1 more)
• SEED: The ‘outlier outlet floating an outrageous position so others can respond moderately’ dynamic (Mail then tabloids then Cameron) could make a strong explainer essay on how manufactured debate cycles work.

Broader Connections

• Controversial rulings shift debates rather than settle them #expands (0.82) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 3363
• Presenting disconfirming evidence to partisans strengthens rather than weakens their views #corroborates (0.78) — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 132
• Factual hearings rarely shift entrenched public opinion #corroborates (0.75) — Dorothy A. Brown, Getting to Reparations, 1145
• Challenging consensus triggers dismissal of the arguer rather than the argument #expands (0.75) — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk, 2389