Every Conversation is a Battle for Dominance

Best Mental Model to Resolve Conflicts and Live Peacefully

Language isn’t just a communication tool. It’s how we assert influence.

"Every Conversation is a Battle for Dominance" gets at this idea. In many conversations, people compete to shape reality in their favor—often without realizing it. This piece lays out a mental model that helps reframe conflict, making it easier to stay grounded, aim for resolution, and create peace in both personal and public spheres.

If you understand how language is used to steer narratives, especially labeling, you can spot power moves early—and keep conversations productive instead of confrontational.

When we clash over meaning, things get messy. From geopolitical standoffs to arguments at home, subjective framing escalates tension. But a more objective lens can bring people back into alignment. Let’s look at how word play unfolds on the world stage—and what it can teach us about daily life.

Word Play in International Diplomacy

Countries use labels to claim moral ground, justify actions, and rally support. The same event often gets packaged in totally different language depending on who’s doing the talking.

Take Tiananmen Square in 1989. Western media calls it the "Tiananmen Square Massacre"—highlighting the crackdown on pro-democracy protests. Chinese authorities call it the "June Fourth Incident"—a sanitized label that downplays the violence and reframes it as a stability measure. That framing gap keeps tensions alive, fueling censorship at home and criticism abroad.

The War of 1812 is another case. In the U.S., it's remembered as the "Second War of Independence," with a heroic tone. In Canada and Britain, it's seen as an "American Invasion"—a skirmish in the bigger Napoleonic conflict. Same war, totally different storylines.

The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? The U.S. often describes them as necessary strikes to end WWII. In Japan, they’re called "nuclear atrocities," pointing to the immense civilian toll. These labels still shape debates on nuclear policy and historical accountability.

During the 1982 Falklands War, Britain spoke of the "Falklands Conflict," framing it as a defense of sovereignty. Argentina called it the "Malvinas War," casting it as anti-colonial resistance. Even naming the territory becomes part of the conflict.

The Korean War shows the same dynamic. Western and South Korean sources use "Korean War" to describe North Korea’s aggression. North Korea calls it the "Fatherland Liberation War," claiming they were pushing out imperial forces.

More recently, the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war was labeled a "Russian Invasion" in most global media, while Russia called it a "Special Military Operation." Euphemistic language helped manage domestic opinion, even as it clashed with international outrage.

These examples aren't just about politics. They highlight how language shapes perception and power. And the same thing happens in our everyday lives.

Word Play in Everyday Life

At the personal level, people use labels as emotional shortcuts—to win arguments, avoid blame, or stay in control.

Call someone a "narcissist" in a fight, and you’ve just invalidated their viewpoint. That word shuts the door on real discussion. It says, "You're flawed, so I don’t have to listen."

Labeling someone "defensive" is another tactic. Instead of engaging with their concern, the label flips the script—turning their reaction into the problem. It’s a way of dismissing emotions without dealing with the issue.

In family settings, calling someone "stubborn" often means you don’t want to compromise. In work settings, labeling a colleague as "lazy" might ignore deeper issues like burnout or unclear expectations.

And terms like "gaslighting" or "toxic" get thrown around so casually that they can derail conversations completely. Instead of solving anything, they often serve as justification to shut down, walk away, or avoid accountability altogether.

Viewing Conversations as Battles for Dominance

When you start seeing conversations as power plays, a lot of patterns snap into place.

This mental model sees language as a tool for control. The moment someone labels, they’re trying to define the reality you’re both in. Whoever controls the frame often controls the outcome.

That doesn’t mean every conversation has to turn into a standoff. But it helps to recognize what’s going on beneath the surface. Is that label accurate—or just a tactic?

This kind of awareness lets you respond—not react. You stop taking the bait.

Resolving Conflicts Peacefully

If you want to step out of dominance games, change how you speak.

Skip the labels. Say what you feel. Instead of "You're arrogant," try "Your words made me feel dismissed." That difference opens the door to real discussion.

Keep things focused. If someone throws a label at you, redirect: “Let’s stick to what actually happened.”

You can also ask: “What do we both want out of this?” It moves the conversation from blame to shared goals.

Use “I” statements. Ask open questions. Listen for the story behind the reaction. And when in doubt, talk about behavior—not identity.

Over time, this approach builds trust. It defuses power struggles. And it turns hard conversations into something productive.

Every conversation won’t be easy. But they can be more honest. And that’s the path to real peace—at any scale.