What.

You replied to me literally stating that my opinions were flawed from the get go based on very big assumptions. Not only my opinions but everyone calling themselves moderate or centrist, we're talking millions of people you just said hold an inherently compromised position. That's some seriously dumb shit. That doesn't make you dumb, just that opinion and I clearly stated that paragraph was what I called out. I then addressed your other concerns and statements.

It's you shutting down any debate here. Not me. And yeah "enlightened centrist" is for sure a problem, people that think their position is inherently better because it doesn't adhere to an extreme. But I do not subscribe at all to that line of thinking and hold extreme opinions that I stand by.

And "civil" discussions are impossible over text, It's literally impossible to read and respond correctly to feelings in text and human beings aren't, by and large, capable of disconnecting their emotions from discussions, even less when it's political. And I argue we really shouldn't either. If we can't respond to strong emotions then we're not fit for debate either. Just look at literally any political debate anywhere in a democratic nation, it tends to get pretty heated. I argue more heated than necessary/reasonable right now but that circles back to my point about politics being too tied to morals and identity. But still, emotion is an inevitable and reasonable part of political debate.

That said my intention was never to hurt your feelings, my intent was to strongly reject what you stated, and "I strongly disagree" does not capture even close to how strongly I feel about that statement.

As such I'm sorry and I understand if you have no wish to engage in any debate. I really don't even see anything to really debate here either. Unless you want to defend your first paragraph I guess.