You know, theirs no point in convincing another of your view.
In my view the act of debate is nothing more then a game with no victor, neither party walks away thinking they lost the debate.
All that occurs is an argument whose result is either the illusion of winning or the boredom of leaving. Being unable to answer a question has never been a loss.
The act is like magic, those who change their mind do so not because your popularily used arguments were satisfying but because they got bored.
The whole point of debate was to convince the other, but it failed when everyone tried to convince the other without ever planning on eing convinced.
Thus the people cannot be changed from who they are, the left will be who it is and so will the right, they'll never magically become the only victor of a society, you can't change a being whose functions of mind include the rejection of what they aren't like, its unfair certainly, but perhaps their is a solution for those who see past the idea that you have done anything.
Sure, you can commit the act repeated in history, the act everyone claims to want to stop, the one that puts a bad mark on you in history. But thats not the root to anything but itself. The act is slaughter and all it brings is slaughter.
Rather, perhaps we could simply find whats common and set up locations for the differences, instead of expect the entire thing to fit the needs of the currently elected. Who come and go based solely on random intervals of unpredictable nature.
The idea that a society is meant not to change and not to become something it wasn't is futile and the nature of life seems too, like the nature of nature change.
If the world accepted a shift in ideas and permitted differences instead of attempting to make people stand where they cannot stand, perhaps life would be of more comfort, with less of a presence of the thing you don't like.
but in irony, only some will accept such a view, one of difference, instead of identical.