> I think you can find plenty of that kind of discussion the academic/professional sphere, though it's small in proportion to the greatly increased radicalized chatter.
Agree. You can find "plenty", of a certain quality (but how high?) Compare this to the activity and quality of discussion in the history of philosophy though, an academic undertaking that seems to have taken a seat at the kids table in modern times.
> That's part of the point of radicalization and propaganda - to politicize everything, to the point where there is no truth, just partisan claims and suspicion.
I firmly believe that much of what you are referring to is to a large degree consciously ~engineered. But also at the same time, I think we should be extremely mindful of emergence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
> They are doing an effective job, but we don't have to go along with it - I simply refuse to read the partisan stuff; there is plenty to read, especially from the entirety of human history before the last several years.
I prefer reading some of it on an ongoing basis and studying its nature, the ~techniques, the effects, how it alters the perception of the public, etc. Study it as a system, understand how it works, why things are the way they are, how it can be influenced, etc.
> Polarization and, IIRC, radicalization, have increased dramatically recently.
Very true. The internet and mass media is powerful, much of it is controlled by a relatively small number of people, and is increasingly censored and propagandized. And yet, things are still quite open, many opportunities, channels, and attack vectors are available, for now.