It’s true that the centre-right (the dems in the US, the labor party in Australia, etc) do use that tactic as a way of shutting down criticism.

Candidate: If elected, I will fully fund children’s cancer research, and also promote puppy-stomping as a national sport.

Progressives: We’re not voting for puppy-stomping, you sick bastard.

Centrists: Oh, so you want children to die of cancer, we see how it is; all this virtue-signalling about puppies is just a smokescreen so you can get your jollies over tiny child coffins.

But while that’s absolutely something that needs to be addressed - I’ve been around forums since the freaking 90s, and callout threads have never, ever ended well, either for themselves or for the place they’re posted in. They never have the effect you want, and borrowing far-right terms like ‘derangement syndrome’ doesn’t help either.

If you come out swinging with a subject like ‘c/politics is a lost cause’ and a buch of hyperbolic-sounding statements - then whether or not they’re true or justified, the whole thing ends up with big handwritten-sign energy, the province of karen neighbours and paranoid nutjobs.

And a community that rewards that kind of thing with attention rapidly turns into a toxic shithole of interpersonal drama and weird little cliques forming with their own little catch-phrases, and six months down the line it may as well be r/the_donald.

Perhaps it shouldn’t happen, but I guarantee it always will.

If you want to talk about shitty wedge politics, your best hope is a top-down approach: start with broad principles, and let the discussion filter down to specifics naturally.