They don't claim that "us vs them" is left vs right. What social environment do you think humans and our primate ancestors evolved in? Even if you believe in B

They don't claim that "us vs them" is left vs right. What social environment do you think humans and our primate ancestors evolved in? Even if you believe in Blank Slates and attribute it to culture, would you disagree that most people operate in group/tribe-oriented thinking? It's not ad hominem to point out that your opponent is not actually arguing against your points. It's pointing out specific, salient parts of the current conversation. Proper rhetoric should be able to stand alone. You're... arguing against being able to respond to criticism? Or saying that all forms of criticism are equally valid? Surely an argument against facts or logic is more persuasive than one that only engages emotionally. It's nice that you're happy that the loss of reasoned debate and rationality is bending the public dialog in your direction, or the parts of the public conversation your curated bubble is exposed to, but that's not a good thing. People don't have time to spend on reasoning, but emotions can be effortlessly broadcast and repeated with the press of a button. This is a bad thing for humanity's future, if science and reason are needed to guide us.