Something that I was thinking about seeing the reaction to the Dead Space remake (TDLR for my opinions on the game, looks alright but an inferior version of the original which you can buy cheaper).
I've seen more and more that media we term as 'woke' (which most of the time we are right about but a few false flags here and there) getting dismissed as us applying our political biases onto a product because of who made it, the characters being displayed etc than valid criticism of an inferior product usually belonging to a franchise that was usurped than built up.
We're risking the same issue the left did with Nazi and racist where it was overused to such a degree it became easy to dismiss. The best way to counter this really is just go tldr than just say 'It's woke'. Quick points to highlight issues (e.g. the writing is terrible, the sound design is poorly utilised) than writing a paragraph to explain your point. If people then respond you can go deeper if they're not being asinine (you only hate it because she no longer has big boobs etc)
So I'm not a hypocrite in this example, TDLR: We're overusing 'woke' that we risk being dismissed easily.
I still believe in debate as the 'slow knife that cuts deep in the armour' in real life interactions (it's how I changed many minds on the vaccine, online anonymity, the media etc).
Online I admit it's negated by the sea of replies but in this case I'm more worried about us than convincing others. I like to learn from my opposition as much as possible, and their tactic of shouting 'racist, sexist, nazi etc' at everything has dulled any critical thinking they had to begin with to be a mindless zombie/NPC spouting the latest talking point.
Being able to just quickly summarise and show our points against at least stops us falling for the same pitfalls.
That's exactly the point of democracy. It's certainly not to make everyone the leader (which doesn't make sense), it's to make decisions with as much input as possible without making everyone the leader.
As an example, say some countries national holiday is coming up and the leader decides to increase electricity production at the hydro-dams because he's anticipating the festivities to consume more power that usual.
Say one of the dams is damaged and could get much worse under serious strain.
Even though the leader is trained and educated, he's not down at the dam to see it. There needs to be a way to get him that information so he can change his decision, if necessary. If the workers don't have a way to influence his decision without making one themselves they'll freeze, as exemplified at Chernobyl.
That's what democracy is for.
I agree. Debate works more as a learning tool than as a means of persuasion, especially in the case of an intractable opposition. There is no longer any compromise possible between the left and everyone else.