The problem with this sentiment is that you misrepresent the points of contention. This is not a disagreement over people’s preferred pizza toppings, where parties can safely “agree to disagree.” We are talking about positions that pose a clear, real, immediate existential threat to entire groups of people, simply because they exist. Do you really think this hasn't been discussed? Do you genuinely think this hasn’t been talked about, debated, argued, demonstrated, illustrated, and experienced ad infinitum for literal decades?

The reason you are being downvoted (and justly so) is that your argument in this case is literally a form of victim-blaming. People being actively harmed, abused, and oppressed are under no obligated whatsoever to try and meet their aggressors in the middle or to concede any part of their existence to them. This disease was festering long before the internet existed. “Echo chambers” have nothing to do with it. It a matter of good versus evil, right versus wrong, liberty versus death. Neither the oppressed mor their defenders will lie down and die because you are inconvenienced by conflict they never wanted.

Right, but for some of us, our upbringings and experiences include, "Reading actual works of political theory" while for others it involves, "Watching cable TV." An ignorant viewpoint is not on an equal level as an informed one.

Of course, uniting the working class is important, but that doesn't mean falling into "Tailism," that is, adopting reactionary views to ingratiate ourselves to a reactionary population. The goal is to spread education and knowledge to make the population less reactionary. It is necessary, to a degree, to meet people where they're at and to accommodate their concerns, but there is a line to be drawn. Engaging in Tailism fractures the left, alienates comrades who will object for legitimate reasons, legitimizes reactionary views, and makes a movement far more susceptible to opportunists, who are only concerned with their own advancement and willing to sell out members of the working class, since, you know, that's what Tailism is.

If you want to actually build a working class coalition, the most important thing is to practice solidarity. Everyone is part of a minority, in a sense. For instance, whatever job you have, most people aren't involved in that field. Being a minority in a democracy is inherently precarious, because the majority could take your rights away. Solidarity means an alliance between disparate groups to stand together for mutual defense. But that alliance is broken when you sell out a group for political gain. Not only do you lose that group, but every group in the coalition starts wondering if they'll be next, and starts worrying about themselves than coming to the defense of others who might be more in the crosshairs. If solidarity breaks down, then how can the working class be united?

Care to cite an example of an opinion that was rejected? And make sure it’s not something pro-Zionist, pro-ICE, anti-trans, anti-Medicare, or pro-any person who holds those viewpoints. Those stances reject sanctity of human life.

Glen Greenward is extremely pro-Russia and continues to repeat debunked lies about Ukrainian biolabs.

What is interesting is your complete lack of proof.

I don't click on spam.

Anyone can just look at any of the cums you moderate or comments you make and make up their own mind.