Sunzi said: The art of war is of vital importance to the State. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected.
The art of war, then, is governed by five constant factors, to be taken into account in one's deliberations, when seeking to determine the conditions obtaining in the field. These are: (1) The Moral Law; (2) Heaven; (3) Earth; (4) The Commander; (5) Method and discipline.
The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger.

The very first factor in the very first chapter of The Art of War is about the importance of synchronous goals between agents and represented. It is instrumental in preserving the state. It is also instrumental in preserving the state (sic).

Even so,

Sun Tzu replied: "Having once received His Majesty's commission to be the general of his forces, there are certain commands of His Majesty which, acting in that capacity, I am unable to accept."
Accordingly, he had the two leaders beheaded, and straightway installed the pair next in order as leaders in their place.

A metaphor.

ridiculously strong aversion

The iron is hot, some feel fear.

just suggesting an improvement

You aren't though.

You're expressing belief in a possible downside of current practice. We can say, unconditionally and flatly, that it is a downside, if real, without it being right to minimize that downside. To your credit, you also argue that effects on the average influenced person are less valuable than is generally thought, which if true would be a step towards indicating a change in policy would be good.

But beyond that, you don't articulate what would be a superior policy, and you have a lot of intermediary conclusions to establish to make a robust criticism.