It's all about taking common economic practice (or conventional wisdom) and asking why, and then why to that, and so on, until we reach a collection of basic, simple assumptions which can be intuitively challenged. Alternatives to these challenged assumptions should also be intuitive, and form the core of the message (or maybe the Lakoffian frame towards which we should try to steer any discussion of economic policy).

Any thoughts?

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper