This article performs an ideographic analysis of the bipartisan political deployment of the slogan <family values> during the 1992 Presidential election campaign. The analysis shows that <family values> talk functioned during that campaign to scapegoat Black men and poor Americans for social problems. However, the <family values> ideograph also is invested with a gendered utopian narrative that makes its scapegoating less apparent and more persuasive. Ultimately, in constructing the family as the site of all responsibility and change, the rhetoric of <family values> privatizes social responsibility for ending poverty and racism.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dana L. Cloud (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: