I've had actual dialogue. For real. Many times, over many years, with many of them.

After you've had enough conversations with them, you start to realize that they're not interested in good-faith discussion. If they were, they wouldn't be part of the cult. Or in other words, anyone who was interested in good-faith discussion has already left.

I'm not using hyperbole or exaggerating. Any person still wearing the red hat is not interested in anything you have to say. If you want proof, ask anyone from MAGA: "What would it take to change your mind?" I've asked this question dozens of times, and I've only gotten two answers: "nothing", and nothing.

It's good to have the general approach of wanting to hear the opinions of others. But like anything, too much of a good thing can become a bad thing. In this case, the MAGA folks will take advantage of your willingness to platform them, and trample all over you for it. In this case, "hearing both sides" isn't helping them or you. They've made their positions very clear, and they won't be swayed. There's realistically nothing they could tell me to sway my position either, because there's nothing that could override the evidence from the man himself. It's a useless standoff.

I get wanting to offer the olive branch and resolve things through civil discussion, but realistically there are some cases where that approach hurts more than it helps.

It doesn't mean we have to resort to violent rhetoric or immaturity (though I understand where those people are coming from too), it means we need to approach MAGA for what it is: a cult. Trying to help someone leave a cult is very different from having a discussion about politics. There are some effective ways to help someone leave a cult, but online cross-community friction isn't that--it's only going to get people more divided.

Ironically, sometimes it's less divisive to simply defederate.