Then perhaps your characterization of me as a lazy and ineffective thinker are misplaced, as you may have been missing the most important short-term outcomes in favor of something more concretely measurable.
No, if there's something I can make claim to it's effectively solving problems. For example, mental degenerate sorts are something of a thorn to anyone serious about thinking, and that problem is effectively solved by hanging the trashiest ones like svnla/roflmouth as an albatross around their ideological peers. They'll always prioritize acting like trash, and their peers won't sell out the conservative ideal of collective tard strength, so it becomes a problem that solves itself.
Integral to problem solving is understanding the underlying mechanism to every system, and an easy way to understand people is by assessing their stack rank of priorities. For example, the aforementioned interests of svnla to quote MLK and lying about his previous frequent habit of dropping racial slurs, since honesty is a lower priority value to him than the self-interest to lessen the stigma of racism. As another example, woolfe's moderate priority of objective honesty as a liberal is superseded by that of decorum, which is why it's easily in the self-interests of crashtech types (hardly masterminds) to manipulate him by pretending to be respectable "non-partisans". Also worth nothing that crashtech himself is on self-interested best behavior like svnla after realizing there's a price to be paid for degeneracy. And as a final example your own priorities where objective honesty is superseded by empathy towards degens, which is why you choose to carry water for them while pretending I'm somehow amoral for revealing what they do; it's not the first time those motives reveal themselves.
As a psychologist you should be able to appreciate how well this works. This and the observation that everyone involved is very much aware of the objective moral ethnics, in contrast to your insinuation that they're somehow relative to winners vs losers. Seems everyone more or less knows what the facts are, and thus how lying about them is wrong, even habitual liars who'll do anything (eg the sanctimony you've spoken of) to insist they're anything but. That's not really the problem; the problem as implied is rather it's common for objectivity or moral ethnics to be overridden by marginal self-interest with many, and most of the churn associated with politics stems from ignoring that dynamic. There's no coincidence for example why fields like the sciences where objectivity really matters are so incredibly skewed away from conservatives.