Affirming the horseshoe to meet the other extreme out of esoteric edgylording is pretty dumb. It's like realizing whig history and the idea of all progress being good and absolute so we can ignore the past is fallacious, and then deciding to just do the opposite of venerating the past in an irrational way and all progress being bad because it did render some old way of doing things outmoded. Honestly, in both cases the blue pilled perspective is more likely to be correct for all its flaws, and will definitely win

Actually prove you can shut down a liberal in some kind of debate setting because for my money it relies on a specific definition of liberal which is itself poorly defined and no liberal will share if pressed, and a chain of events and presuppositions which will fine I guess is time consuming, contrived, esoteric as hell, and subject to the liberal simply saying it was a perversion of liberalism and you're back to square one