These straw man arguments always annoy the hell out of me. Please give me some textual evidence that postmodernists and co are anti-rationalists! How does Deleu

These straw man arguments always annoy the hell out of me. Please give me some textual evidence that postmodernists and co are anti-rationalists! How does Deleuze, the postmodernist philosopher par excellence, undermine rationality? He wrote two worshipful books on Leibniz and Spinoza, who were both rationalists. These "takedowns" always read like someone who has never attempted to grasp postmodernism either philosophically or sociologically, and someone who certainly has never attempted to grasp Leibniz! People seem to talk around the simplest postmodernist theses, usually by knowing nothing about postmodernism. In my mind, there are two: 1) Doubting the truth of all knowledge, and 2) an incredulity towards all metanarratives. Now, please, please recognize, that disbelieving the truth of knowledge is not the same as disbelieving truth! The Popperian concept of verisimilitude could easily be construed as an extremely rational form of this doubt. Is any scientific theory, strictly speaking, true? Or are they all models that approximate a reality we can never ultimately reach? If you think I'm being too kind towards the postmodernists with this interpretation, then you don't understand postmodernism. With respect to 2), incredulity towards metanarratives was not an assertion in Lyotard's essay, but an observation about the state of our society. And is this not, obvjectively, what we observe? Don't kill the messenger! Certainly not when the messenger is Lyotard, a man who was extremely politically engaged in the Algerian revolution and whose disillusionment ultimately led him to question all grand ideologies. tldr; these essays are strongman arguments that show they don't understand postmodernism or even their own terms.