I don't fully understand why architecture is so bitterly divided between its factions. I am the son of an architect (loyal to his faction) and I like a lot of t

I don't fully understand why architecture is so bitterly divided between its factions. I am the son of an architect (loyal to his faction) and I like a lot of that stuff and a lot of other styles, including much made of concrete. It seems like something built into the culture at an early stage. Some of the Bauhaus practitioners saw their work as an expression of a Socialist agenda and Classicists are taught that only the traditional styles of design and building are acceptable. There is (or ought to be) a common enemy to all factions, which is cheap disposable architecture. Long-term structure that are also climate change adaptable seems a decent common purpose, for example. Somehow, however, the capital A Architect class seems to exist above the buildings designed for and by people who do not care about aesthetics, so the cheap and disposable seem to slip under the radar. Perhaps because Lennar Builders and their ilk don't care what academics think of them?