Yes, I Want to Persuade People—And That's a Good Thing

Democracy depends on our ability to turn disagreement into influential dialogue.

Is all political persuasion just manipulation?

A reader of my recent article, Talking With Trump Voters Seems Pointless—But It’s Not, seemed to think so. He said:

“Your purpose is obviously not to communicate, but to trick someone… The whole piece is about how to manipulate public opinion from a specific side of the current polarization.”

I hear him and take his concern seriously. He’s voicing a fear many people share right now: that most political communication is really just manipulation in disguise.

It’s a legitimate fear. We’re increasingly aware of how propaganda, disinformation, cult tactics, and indoctrination shape our beliefs without our consent. But we’re not always clear on what counts as manipulation—or how to distinguish it from ethical persuasion.

That’s a big problem in a democracy.

In a healthy democracy, persuasion is the primary means by which citizens influence one another. If we can’t distinguish ethical persuasion from manipulation, we may reject all influence out of cynicism—or worse, fall prey to unethical manipulation that masquerades as honest dialogue. Neither outcome is good for our nation.

In this article, I’ll do two things: First, I’ll clarify the difference between persuasion and manipulation. Second, I’ll explain why ethical persuasion isn’t just defensible—it’s necessary for democratic survival.

Let’s begin by defining manipulation so you can recognize it when you see it.

---

---

What Is Manipulation?

Manipulation isn’t simply the act of influencing someone. It’s the act of doing so through pressure, deception, or psychological leverage that overrides their informed consent. At its core, manipulation seeks to control what others believe rather than empowering them to think for themselves.

This control can take many forms:

• Coercion: Using emotional blackmail, shame, or fear to extract agreement. For example, “If you don’t agree with me, you’re a bad person,” or “If you don’t change your mind, I refuse to have anything to do with you.”

• Deceit: Misleading someone by omitting key information, cherry-picking data, or lying. This might include sharing an out-of-context quote, a misleading statistic, or a doctored image.

• Milieu control: Controlling the flow of information, limiting exposure to alternative views, or socially isolating someone so that they can’t evaluate ideas freely.

• Power Imbalances: Leveraging authority or status to silence disagreement. A teacher mocking a student’s political view, or a manager pressuring employees to adopt a political stance, aren’t engaging—they’re enforcing.

Cults provide a stark example. They don’t persuade—they dominate. They demand loyalty, punish dissent, distort reality, and cut off access to outside perspectives. Over time, members internalize cults’ beliefs because their identity, safety, and moral worth depend on strict adherence to the group’s doctrine.

This is dangerous in any context—but especially in a democracy. And it’s not limited to cults. Manipulative tactics show up in everyday institutions: families, schools, churches, political movements. Sometimes they’re overt. Often, they’re subtle but still profoundly undermining.

Progressives are not exempt. In our desperation to reach others, we too sometimes resort to manipulation. We shame and ostracize dissenters. We cherry-pick data to fit our narrative. We cultivate groupthink by punishing deviation from orthodoxy. We exploit power dynamics under the guise of “accountability.”

But manipulation isn’t persuasion. It’s domination. And it doesn’t work without force.

If manipulation dominates, what’s the alternative? That’s where ethical persuasion comes in.

To persuade people without compromising their agency—or our integrity—we need a different approach. One grounded in values, not tactics. One that builds trust rather than eroding it.

---

---

What Is Ethical Persuasion?

Persuasion is the act of trying to influence someone’s beliefs, feelings, or actions. We do it all the time—when we recommend a book, share an opinion, or advocate for a cause. But not all persuasion is the same.

Ethical persuasion is persuasion grounded in integrity. It seeks to influence without infringing on another’s freedom. It treats others not as means to an end, but as ends in themselves—autonomous individuals deserving of respect. Unlike manipulation, which uses people, ethical persuasion honors their dignity.

It rests on five core moral commitments:

• Equality
  Ethical persuasion begins with the recognition that all people are moral equals. It’s not wrong to try to influence others, but it is wrong to treat them as less capable, less rational, or less worthy of self-determination than yourself. Ethical persuasion honors the agency of others—it engages them as peers in a shared search for truth or understanding, not as obstacles to be overcome or tools to be used.

• Honesty
  Ethical persuasion requires a commitment to truthfulness—not because it’s more persuasive, but because honesty is what we owe each other. When we speak sincerely, disclose our intentions, and share complete and accurate information, we treat others as moral agents capable of making informed choices. Deception, by contrast, violates their right to reason for themselves.

• Humility
  Humility in persuasion means acknowledging the limits of our own knowledge and perspective. It’s unethical to present our views as infallible or to dismiss alternative viewpoints out of hand. By recognizing that we might be wrong, we affirm the value of others’ experiences and open space for genuine dialogue and mutual growth.

• Respect for Autonomy
  Respect for autonomy is the moral heart of ethical persuasion. It forbids coercion, shame, and manipulation—not because they’re ineffective, but because they deny people the freedom to think and choose for themselves. Ethical persuasion supports others in reasoning independently, even if they ultimately disagree with us.

• Mutuality
  Ethical persuasion is a two-way street. If we expect others to be open to our ideas, we must be open to theirs. Dismissing others’ perspectives while demanding they consider ours creates an imbalance that undermines mutual respect. True dialogue means being as willing to learn as we are to teach.

This kind of persuasion isn’t about winning—it’s about doing right by others. And in a democratic society, where government depends on our ability to talk through our disagreements, it’s essential. Persuasion is how we bridge differences, refine our ideas, and arrive at decisions together. Without it, democracy has no engine. But to keep that engine running, persuasion must be practiced ethically—because when influence turns to coercion or deceit, democratic dialogue breaks down.

In the next section, we’ll explore why ethical persuasion isn’t just compatible with democracy—it’s what makes democracy possible.

---

---

Ethical Persuasion as a Democratic Practice

These days, we tend to equate democracy with voting—as if it’s just a matter of choosing sides and tallying up who wins. But at its core, democracy is not about defeating opponents. It’s about dialogue. Dialogue between citizens. Dialogue between citizens and their representatives. Dialogue between representatives themselves.

Voting is important, but much less so than dialogue. The substance of democracy—what makes it work—is the exchange of ideas that happens in between elections. That exchange is how we clarify our disagreements, shape our collective will, and make decisions we can live with, even when we don’t all get our way.

And that process depends on persuasion.

Persuasion is how we communicate our views in the hope of influencing others. It’s how we test our own ideas, challenge assumptions, and seek common ground. Done ethically, it’s not an act of domination—it’s a gesture of respect. It says: I trust you enough to share what I believe, and I respect you enough to care what you think.

Some critics worry that persuasion is inherently coercive—that any attempt to influence someone’s beliefs infringes on their autonomy. But this view misunderstands the nature of dialogue. Every conversation starts with a perspective. That doesn’t make it manipulative. It makes it meaningful.

Philosopher G.W.F. Hegel offered one way to think about this process. He described how ideas evolve through a dialectic: thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. One view provokes its opposite, and through engagement, a new understanding emerges. This isn’t about forcing agreement. It’s about navigating difference in ways that expand what’s possible.

But here’s the catch: the dialectic alone doesn’t guarantee progress. When two opposing theses clash without trust or emotional grounding, the result is often polarization, not synthesis. That’s why ancient rhetoricians taught that persuasion requires more than logic (logos). It also depends on ethos—the speaker’s credibility—and pathos—the emotional resonance of the message. Pathos isn’t about empathy per se; it’s about engaging the listener’s feelings in a way that opens them to the conversation. Without trust or emotional engagement, even the most rational argument is likely to be dismissed or ignored.

At Smart Politics, we take this to heart. We teach persuasion not as a contest, but as a practice of connection. Before we share our views, we work to create emotional safety and mutual respect. When people feel seen, heard, and valued, they’re more willing to think with us rather than defend against us. That’s when reasoned dialogue becomes possible—and meaningful change can occur.

This is not a side note to democracy. It is democracy. A system built on equal voice requires more than votes. It requires conversation. Ethical persuasion is how we make that conversation honest, respectful, and productive.

It’s not just that persuasion is compatible with democracy. It’s that democracy can’t function without it.

That’s why ethical persuasion isn’t just a philosophical ideal—it’s a practical necessity. And it’s exactly what we teach at Smart Politics.

---

---

Smart Politics Is Ethical Persuasion

Smart Politics is a method of political engagement grounded in the five moral principles that define ethical persuasion. We don’t just teach persuasion—we teach people how to do it without compromising their values or violating others’ dignity.

Here’s how Smart Politics lives up to those principles in practice:

• Equality
  We approach every political conversation as a dialogue between moral equals. We don’t treat people as targets or obstacles, but as peers in a shared search for understanding. Even when we disagree, we assume the other person is as capable of reasoning and as deserving of agency as we are.

• Honesty
  We are transparent about our intentions. We don’t pretend to be neutral or hide what we believe. But we also don’t exaggerate, cherry-pick, or manipulate facts to get our way. Our goal is to tell the truth as we see it and give others the information they need to think for themselves.

• Humility
  We never assume we have all the answers. In Smart Politics, we acknowledge that our perspective is limited, our information may be incomplete, and we could be wrong. That humility keeps us open—not just to persuading others, but to learning from them.

• Respect for Autonomy
  In Smart Politics, people are always free to reject our perspective—and we make that freedom clear. We don’t pressure, guilt, or coerce others into agreement, even implicitly. Instead, we share our views only when someone seems open to hearing them, and we present those views as an offering, not a demand. This approach ensures that persuasion respects the other person’s right to think, feel, and choose for themselves.

• Mutuality
  We don’t just try to persuade others—we invite them to persuade us. Smart Politics is rooted in reciprocal influence. We seek dialogue, not dominance. That means listening deeply, engaging sincerely, and being willing to grow through the conversation.

These commitments are not just ethical—they’re strategic. When people feel respected, safe, and heard, they’re far more open to reflection and change. That’s why Smart Politics works. But more importantly, it’s why it’s right.

We believe that if everyone practiced persuasion this way, political conversations would be more productive, more humane, and more democratic. And democracy itself would be stronger for it.

---

Persuasion Isn’t Inherently Manipulative

Like language itself, persuasion can be used to deceive or to enlighten, to control or to connect. What matters is how we use it—and why.

Smart Politics is based on the belief that ethical persuasion isn’t just possible—it’s essential. In a democracy, the only legitimate way to change minds is through respectful, voluntary dialogue. We don’t try to control people. Instead, we try to understand them—and, in turn, to be understood.

That requires discipline, humility, and a real respect for the people we’re talking with. But it also makes persuasion more powerful. When people feel safe enough to reflect on their beliefs, change becomes possible—genuine, lasting change.

That’s what ethical persuasion does. And that’s what Smart Politics is all about.

We invite you to practice it—not just to strengthen your arguments, but to strengthen our democracy.

---

This article is part of The Smart Politics Way, a progressive newsletter about defending democracy through persuasive engagement. Dr. Karin Tamerius is a political psychiatrist and the founder of Smart Politics.

---

If you found this piece valuable, please help us spread the word by sharing it with your progressive network.

---

Subscribe for FREE and get a bonus gift!

---