Is Persuasion Possible?
Last week’s blog described persuasion as a “gentle art”. One reader raised a relevant question. “How do you account for Trump's persuasiveness for many? He doesn't follow the principles of ‘gentle persuasion’ does he?”
No, definitely not. Why then all his followers? Machiavelli, the medieval philosopher/politician, perhaps gives the best answer, “One who deceives will always find those who allow themselves to be deceived.”
Too much of our politics follows Machiavelli. Deception and manipulation are common and accepted. There is little attempt to persuade. Messages are not intended to change basic attitudes. Rather, like commercial advertising, they appeal to emotions, beliefs and prejudices that are already there, giving them permission to be expressed. Trump mastered the art.
One consultant told me during a campaign, “Much of this is intended to give voice to the doubts that already are in people’s heads. They don’t think about politics that much, and so we use poll-tested lines that we know they already have some belief in and parrot them back to them. And they become truth in their minds.”
All of the voters’ human weaknesses are used against them. The tools keep getting better. Every year, databases are more robust, information known about each individual increases, communication techniques are refined as new scientific research tells us more about how we learn and perceive. Manipulation becomes more sophisticated. We become more susceptible. The ease of manipulating emotions compared with the difficulty of persuading minds makes the temptation to manipulate almost irresistible.
Fear and prejudice are the emotions most commonly conjured. They are strong, easily aroused and politically useful in that they naturally put up a wall separating us and them. Much of what is said is intended to stoke the excitement or anger of supporters. We preach to the choir and condemn the unbelievers. Conflict and controversy follow.
Persuasion occurs only where there is connection and dialogue. Conflict and controversy are its enemies. The drama of conflict, however, attracts us like moths to a flame. It excites and motivates. It is in the books we read, the movies we go to. The television shows we watch. Persuasion and agreement are dull. We are captives of our human nature. Those who would influence us, take advantage.
Most of the actors in our politics today have adopted controversy as their business model or their political strategy. For the media, interest groups, consultants, pundits, candidates, political parties, elected officials, confrontation and conflict is the default mode.
Chris Hayes, the other night on MSNBC said, “Conflict and controversy, that is how the media works.” He was commenting on the topics reporters questioned Biden about at his first presidential news conference. There were 12 questions about the recent surge of migrants at the Mexican border, none on Covid-19. The border is a subject of partisan sniping. Covid, although affecting more people, is a developing success story.
Trump took credit for the historic high ratings of cable news networks the last four years and told them ratings would fall when he left. They would miss him. Ratings have fallen. They do miss him. And the continuous controversies, the easy news stories, he created. The networks are scrambling to find new controversies to keep the drama going and hold our attention.
The business model of the social media platforms is to keep us agitated … and clicking
The business model of many interest groups is also based on keeping members and clients agitated and donating. The recruiting and fundraising messages I receive are routinely about conflict and fear. “Join . . . send money . . . they are after us . . . protect what we have . . .” I have yet to receive a letter from any organization that starts, “We have just made a major compromise with … and we no longer need your money.” There is always a new threat, a new enemy. Conflict keeps organized interests financially healthy.
Conflicts are raised to the level of principle. Described in catastrophic terms. Making accommodation impossible. Winning is the only goal. Consider this exchange by two interest groups after a gun bill was voted down in the U.S. Senate several years ago. The words are heated. The opposition is demeaned. The specifics of the controversy are not mentioned. Principles that cannot be compromised are at stake.
“Yesterday, 45 senators chose to ignore their constituents and stand with the gun lobby. . . . Those senators made a cynical calculation that, at the end of the day, the gun lobby would be louder and stronger than we are. Yesterday was just round one. . . . The special interests have been at this longer, and they can do a real good job at scaring people by distorting the facts . . . We’re going to keep fighting, and someday soon, we will win.”
“Our feet are planted firmly in the foundation of freedom, un-swayed by the winds of political and media insanity. To the political and media elites who scorn us, we say let them be damned. . . . We will never surrender our guns, never.”
The current strategic model for political parties and office holders is the same. Stir up the base. Make them angry. Point them at an enemy. Warn them that their freedoms and the future of the nation is in the balance.
Following the example of Trump, Republicans have been much more extreme in their language. This week, the chair of the Michigan Republican Party referred to the Governor, Attorney General and Secretary of State as “witches” we need to “soften up” so they are “ready for the burning at the stake.” Asked about the two Michigan Republicans who voted to impeach Trump, the chair said, “Other than assassination, I have no other way than voting them out.”
Here in Wisconsin in the days following the insurrection at the Capitol, the chair of the St. Croix County Republican Party posted on the party’s website, “If you want peace, prepare for war …It's time to stand and be counted as a conservative warrior in the on-going fight to preserve our Constitutional Republic … We need to start local by removing leftist tyrants from all local and County positions in the future April elections."
The temptation is always to hit back. Democrats have called Sen. Ron Johnson a “terrorist sympathizer” and “traitor”. But using the excesses of others to excuse those of your own is a race to the bottom. There are no winners.
The gentle art of persuasion does not have many allies. Political, social and economic forces are not friends of persuasion. It is pretty much on its own. If we abandon persuasion, however, divisions will only harden, conflict will become more intense.
There are positives, however. Polling consistently shows that a majority of voters want politicians to agree and get things done. In the last several years approval of Congress has ticked up temporarily when a major problem has been addressed and legislation passed. Biden, who arguably was the least confrontational candidate in the Democratic presidential primary, won the nomination fairly easily. And with his non-confrontational approach, Biden has far higher approval ratings than Trump ever achieved.
Calm competence does sell. Voters approve.
Change is also bubbling up from the bottom. People tired of the divisiveness are getting together with others of unlike mind to have conversations and form a bond based on understanding, if not agreement. One such group, and there are many across the country, is Hands Across the Hills. Their website tells their story.
“Hands Across the Hills is grassroots group formed in 2017 and comprised of 25 individuals, residents of rural Western Massachusetts and residents of Eastern Kentucky coal country. Our goal was to meet face to face with people from a community that voted differently, in an attempt to better understand each other … feelings are expressed honestly and deeply … Hands Across the Hills has melted away stereotypes so that we can see each other’s human face. The bonds between us have become stronger than our political differences … We care about each other as friends.”
The fear and prejudice invoked by so many in our political discourse works because it obscures, intentionally, the human face of the other. When we see their human face, conversation can begin. Persuasion becomes possible.
Douglas Kane is the author of "Our Politics: Reflections on Political Life" published in 2019 by Southern Illinois University Press
[subscribe2]