Thread. Be mean

If you’ve followed my work for any length of time you’ve no doubt heard me talk about connecting with your audience, looking for shared values, stressing the positive, and avoiding contentious debates.

But that could easily be taken to mean that being persuasive consists of putting on some phony “I love everyone, I judge no one” act.

It doesn’t.

The key distinction here is between your audience and your opponents.

When it comes to the audience you’re trying to persuade, yes, be open, connect, don’t alienate.

But a core part of persuasion is to frame your position as morally good—and to frame your opponents’ position and even your opponents themselves as morally evil.

Alex Epstein calls this arguing to 100 and arguing your opponents down to -100. https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2016/04/06/how-to-make-energy-a-winning-issue-for-republicans-in-2016/#e324ae81bcc3

Both sides are important.

Most debates are framed by your opponents’ ideal.

In energy, policies that make us more green move us to the highest good, and policies that impact the planet move us to the lowest evil.

In race, policies that equalize racial outcomes are good, policies that lead to unequal outcomes are evil.

To reframe a debate, you start by reframing the ideal:

From “green” to “human flourishing

From “equal outcomes” to “judging people by their actions and character, not the color of their skin”

Then you argue that your policies will move us to the new ideal…AND your opponents’ policies move us to the lowest evil.

And more than that.

In many cases, you’ll argue that your opponents—at least the leadership—are doing this consciously and deliberately, out of hatred, resentment, envy, power-lust, the desire for unearned wealth and status.

Why is that important? It’s important first of all because it’s true.

Rhetorically it’s important because you need to own the moral high ground, and that means erasing any lingering doubts that the high ground belongs to those who oppose liberty.

Of course, there are many ways to do this wrong.

Hurling insults at your opposition or using morally loaded language that you haven’t established in the mind of your audience will alienate your audience.

But once you’ve made it objective to your audience that your opponents are actively working against the ideal, and once you’ve made it objective they are doing this self-consciously, on principle—then failing to name that fact isn’t taking the high road.

It’s helping your opponents engage in the pretense that they are on the high road.