Quora Answer: What is the Best Way to Convince Someone of Your Point of View in Political Discussions?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “What is the best way to convince someone of your point of view, particularly in political discussions?” 

There is no best way to convince anyone of anything in any discussion.  There are methods that may work, depending on the circumstances, the person involved, and the issue itself.  And there are positions that are so fundamental to the sense of self that the person will not budge from that position.  That being said, there are a few techniques that may be applied, often used in negotiations, to gain a favourable response.  There is no value in applying them in any casual discussion.  This is used to extract formal concessions and agreements. 

In any discussion, where there is a need to persuade the other party that we share common ground, the first hurdle is to move them psychologically from their side of the table to ours.  This is subtle, and constant work.  The first is to find common ground.  We find this by the use of allusions to find points of agreement in popular culture, music, hobbies.  This inclines the other side towards us.  Another method is to get the other side to do a small favour, such as paying for the coffee, lighting a cigarette or even borrowing coins for the vending machine.  When an opponent does you a small favour, it creates a cognitive, and they convince themselves that they are actually inclined towards you.  All this is before the discussion. 

In the course of the actual discussion, the most common rhetorical trap is to repeat and reframe.  We repeat their contention, and then reframe it slightly when you do so, such that it seems their position is closer to ours than we realise.  If the negotiation team is experienced, this is not easily done.  That is why we play the long game, and fill the agenda with softballs they can easily give in, or we can easily agree to.  When their attention span is diminished due to tiredness, then we start to do this, insisting on going over the clauses over and over again, feigning lack of understanding, and then reframing it. 

Finally, the point of any discussion, this negotiation, is to get something from the other side.  An experienced team will be quite aware of how this is done, and they will be playing the same game.  People do not like to be told what to believe; they need to be convinced this is their idea.  They can be moved emotionally through inclination or disinclination.  It is a lot of work to get people to like us, especially when they have nothing in common with us.  It is a lot easier to work with it when they fear us, or even hate us.  Emotional people are not logical people, and are the easiest to manipulate.  This is done by a bait and switch.  We give them a position, and let them work towards it by seeming intransigent and unyielding.  Finally, we agree to it for a “small concession”, which is what we originally wanted. 

I am not in the business of getting people to agree with me.  In am in the business of winning.  Discussions for the sake of getting an agreement on matters of opinions are about the ego.  There is no gain in feeding our own egos.  Any discussions is to extract something that advances our own agenda.