There's a certain breed of progressives that want to push widely-held positions out of the Overton window. While I feel a few shitloads more comfortable around such people than around people who are sympathetic to said positions, this worries me.

• Shutting up debate (in every place Proper Decent People talk, not just specialised places where people want to move past the basic questions) is always somewhat dangerous, though admittedly that applies to every position. This can be circumvented by yelling at people who imply or baldly state these ideas are true, but not at those who argue them with enough formality and apologetic dances.

• Condemning popular positions is going to make you yell at half the people you meet and isolate you from the mainstream. Inconvenient.

• If we make it unpalatable to argue for one side but not the other, the goalposts shift to Crazytown quickly. Cull the least feminist person at every turn and soon enough Twisty Faster is sounding reasonable.

• Relatedly, not having 101 debates over and over allows for semantic shift. It's all very well and good to point at horrific things and call them "ableism", but when the same word is then used to yell at me for saying "Crazytown" there is a leap in logic few think to plug.

• Generic dangers of thinking people who disagree with you are evil rather than mistaken about what policies are helpful, and that there's no value in understanding their model of the world. (Even though you have a whole body of work about how these mistakes are made and you are ignoring it in favour of calling them mean names, rarrr.)