One of the skills that many successful politicians have is the ability to speak separately to two audiences using the same words. It used to be that you could speak to different groups by just saying different things — go visit them, and tell them what you want them to hear. But these days, the default assumption is that everything you say in every context is up on YouTube the next day, so you have to be more subtle. A great strategy, if you can master it, is to use code words — language that seems sensible but unremarkable to the majority of listeners, but carries special meaning for a particular audience. George W. Bush is a master of the technique, but both winners of last week’s Iowa caucuses have also demonstrated the ability.
For Barack Obama, the particular audience is African-Americans. He rarely brings up race directly, but continually hammers on the theme of bridging divides and bringing people together. The surface appeal is to overcoming the tensions between Blue and Red America, but the parallels with Black and White America are pretty clear. More subtly, he borrows phrases from the civil rights movement — “the fierce urgency of now” — that have powerful resonance for the people who fought in those struggles.
For Mike Huckabee, the particular audience is evangelical Christians. A good example of Huckabee’s use of code words was flagged by Josh Marshall, who picked up on the repeated use of a notion of “vertical thinking.” Without much explanation, Huckabee drops this phrase liberally into his speeches, and it is displayed prominently on his website.
What’s going on there? Marshall found explanations here and here. I suppose context has given away the secret by now, but “vertical thinking” refers to how we conceptualize the role of God as the origin of all things.
“Horizontal thinking,” meanwhile, is what happens when you leave “Man” to figure it all out by himself.
Count me as a committed horizontal thinker. There’s a great benefit to recognizing that it’s we human beings who are conducting an ongoing conversation about how the world works and how we should live our lives, rather than taking instructions from a (literally) higher authority — namely, we can change our minds when we realize that we’ve been making a mistake. If we’re beholden to a set of ancient cryptic mythological texts that were all about reinforcing the prevailing norms at the time, we get stuck with vertical thinking of the form “Wives are to voluntarily submit themselves to their husbands as the head in their marriage.”
Most of we horizontal thinkers didn’t even notice Huckabee’s formulation, I’m sure. It will be interesting to see what happens if he wins another primary or two.
January 8th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
“Vertical thinking” sounds like one of those ugly corporate-speak concoctions like “out of the box thinking” and “six sigma”, and although I have been following the machinations of the religious right for a long time, I must admit that this is the first time I have noticed the phrase.
Of course, since God does not exist, vertical thinking is simply wishful thinking. It may make you feel good, but it doesn’t get you anywhere.
January 8th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Your post raises an interesting question about the “vertical thinkers” who believe they are “horizontal thinkers”. I don’t want to be specific, but I guess this kind of people are even harder to deal with than the true “vertical thinkers”.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Darn, I’m a horizontal thinker like you are and I totally missed this. Code words are frightening. I bet I would miss the majority of religious code words in use today, so the politicians’ tactic against me would be successful.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
“Vertical Thinking” seems to require a belief in some sort of (external, pre-ordained) “destiny,” whereas “Horizontal Thinking” seems to require the creation of one’s future by one’s actions (bootstrapping).
Colour me a horizontal thinker.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
While “vertical” does seem to be a code word for some evangelicals, and Huckabee certainly knows this, he also uses the word in a slightly different sense–”vertical” as in bringing the country “up,” instead of getting caught in side-to-side, left-right political bickering.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
I’m a vertical thinker – I fall asleep when I’m horizontal.
Sorry, but it was irresistable.
January 8th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
I’m a convective thinker- vertical when too hot or cold, horizontal at other times.
January 8th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
[...] out this post on “vertical thinking” and other rhetorical code. And when you sit down to watch the next debate, don’t forget to break out your super-secret [...]
January 8th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
“Vertical search” is currently a buzzword in the search industry.
Wikipedia on vertical search
Maybe Huckabee is trying to appeal to all those Google PhDs at the same time!
January 8th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
I checked out the Vertical Thought website that Sean linked to and have to admit that it is just plain scary…
January 8th, 2008 at 8:40 pm
In Australia, we refer to this (especially when applied to terms that a racist would pick up on) as “dog whistle politics”. The implication is that words and phrases act like a dog whistle: dogs can hear the noise, humans can’t.
January 8th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Vertical sounds like a hot stud. Horizontal sounds like somebody who has too much beer.
January 8th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Can we please do a less scary thought experiment, like maybe talking about what could happen if lab-generated black holes escaped?
January 8th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
#9, lylebot
The references on that Wikipedia page are all 2005 or younger, which tends to confirm my theory: that it’s a new buzzword on an old ‘Net concept – the specialist search engine. The joys of Web 2.0; everything old is new again! And probably in perpetual beta.
January 8th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
Yeah; we’d never have known he represents the antithesis of our own world-view if not for this post, since he’s just so subtle!
Close shave there.
January 9th, 2008 at 9:49 am
“Most of we”? “MOST OF WE”?
When I saw that, I forgot what the rest of the post was about. Perhaps that’s Sean intended…
January 9th, 2008 at 10:51 am
What, you’d prefer “most of us horizontal thinkers”?
“[many, most, some, few, etc.] of we [collective noun]” is correct English.
January 9th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Sean — you might want to have a look at Gary Younge’s analysis of Obama in relation to the Civil Rights movement, which was published in Monday’s Guardian (UK). Younge has a history of incisive writing about that movement and its legacy, and I think what he says is quite insightful. You can have a look here.
When I read your entry last night, I was wondering why that rhetoric hadn’t seemed to speak to anyone in my circle who participated in those struggles, and I think this article answers that question.
January 10th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
I disagree strongly (even though no one’s reading this thread anymore). “Of” is a preposition, the following noun of which will always take the objective case. “We are horizontal thinkers, most of whom didn’t notice Huckabee’s formulation.”
January 10th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
TomC, I think you’re right. I wrote the “we horizontal thinkers” first, and modified it later. But I’ll leave it as it is, as we’re now the number one Google hit for “most of we”, and that can’t be bad, can it?
January 10th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Absolutely, Sean. No such thing as bad publicity for we horizontal thinkers.
January 10th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
[...] Of course, Huckabee takes direction directly from his god; note the constant use of the term “vertical…. [...]
January 10th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Thanks, TomC. It was giving me a slight itch, but I have heard it used before, and said itch has produced false positives before. I knew “most of us [whatever]” was very wrong. Perhaps I should have said “more correct.”
Of course, the correct formulation also grates slightly – but that’s merely my dislike for the passive voice( unless absolutely necessary).
January 11th, 2008 at 6:02 am
@Tacitus: That in itself is an expression of faith, hence ‘vertical thinking’ in the opposite direction. Cf. Rush’s song ‘Freewill’
January 11th, 2008 at 6:32 am
Um, not so much. It may be faith, but there’s no ‘vertical thinking’ to go with it. Vertical thinking, in this case, is believing everything is dictated by God (whatever that means). Rather difficult when you thoroughly believe there isn’t one….
January 17th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
I know it is difficult to consider such a notion seriously, but what kind of notoriety would a scientist gain if s/he were able to prove the existence of divinity?
January 29th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
[...] There’s an interesting blog post linked about Mike Huckabee’s use of [...]
January 29th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
Fauth, my foot, it’s worse….
It isn’t vertical thinking, as one word. READ, firstly. Huckster stated “…vertical [comma] who is thinking”.
Vertical reads as a referral to being ‘upright’, like man, not primate. Period. Adding thinking, reads as a referral to said first comment, inferring that primates do not think. A slur, period.
Good riddance to your rubbish, Huckabee. We don’t love thee.
January 29th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Or there’s the direct translation: basically, “The President needs to be alive, and possibly allergic to sitting, and needs to in possession of a pair of frontal lobes”.
Probably the only reading that accurately describes the next incumbent, too. “,)
What a shining example of complete bullshit that statement is.
January 30th, 2008 at 1:18 am
[...] ved første og neste anledning. Cosmic Variance peker på eksempler i den amerikanske politikken Code Words på Cosmic Variance: For Barack Obama, the particular audience is African-Americans. He rarely brings up race directly, [...]
January 31st, 2008 at 3:50 pm
interestingly, this use of interpellation can also be used as a means of pacing; speaking directly to a subject in such a way that (s)he becomes a split spectator, establishing the character of subsequent encounters as pertaining to a sense of defensive heightened awareness – establishing the grounds to suggest a state of trance.