As elections draw closer and ballots begin arriving in our mailboxes, political discussions and social media posts often reach a fever pitch. Too often, I have watched mutually respected friends blanch at, grouse about or become genuinely distressed by one another’s political choices or how they are expressed. Impassioned political perspectives, when combined with the loss of civil conversation, can tear at the bonds that hold our communities together.
Yet political disagreement itself is not the problem. A healthy democracy depends upon people bringing different experiences, values, priorities and ideas into the public conversation. The challenge is learning how to disagree without diminishing one another. We need ways to remain curious about people whose conclusions differ from our own, while still speaking honestly about what we believe.
The Braver Angels LAPP approach — Listen, Acknowledge, Pivot and Perspective — offers a useful framework for doing exactly that.
The first step is to Listen. Genuine listening means trying to understand rather than preparing a rebuttal while the other person is speaking. Braver Angels encourages people to listen for the experiences, values, fears and hopes that may lie beneath someone’s political opinions. Asking sincere questions such as “What led you to feel that way?” can turn an argument into a conversation. The goal is not necessarily to agree, but to understand the person’s reasoning well enough that they feel accurately heard.
The next step is to Acknowledge what the other person has said. This can include paraphrasing their position, recognizing the values behind it or identifying an area of agreement. Acknowledgment does not mean surrendering your own beliefs. It simply communicates respect: “I understand why that concern is important to you,” or “I think we agree that the problem needs to be addressed, even though we may disagree about the solution.” Finding genuine common ground can reduce defensiveness and make disagreement easier to discuss.
The third step is to Pivot. Instead of immediately countering the other person’s argument, the speaker makes a respectful transition to another viewpoint. This might be as simple as asking, “Could I share how I see it?” That small act changes the tone of the conversation. Rather than forcing an opposing opinion into the discussion, it invites an exchange of perspectives and gives the other person the same respect that we hope they will give us.
Finally, we offer our Perspective. The emphasis is on explaining our own thinking rather than declaring the other person wrong. Using phrases such as “I believe,” “My concern is,” or “The way I see this” makes room for disagreement without turning the conversation into a contest over who possesses the truth. Personal experiences and stories can also help explain why an issue matters to us in ways that political slogans and competing statistics often cannot. Braver Angels specifically recommends using this kind of “I” language rather than making sweeping claims about either the issue or the opposing side.
The purpose of constructive political discussion is not necessarily to change someone’s mind. It is to create enough trust and mutual respect that people can disagree without treating one another as enemies. LAPP changes the central question from “How do I win this argument?” to “How can we understand one another while honestly discussing where we disagree?” When we listen carefully, acknowledge sincerely, pivot respectfully and share our perspective without attacking someone else’s, political conversation can become an opportunity for understanding rather than division.
Do you want to learn more about Braver Angels? Visit https://braverangels.org.
