The narcissistic egomaniac is an opinion too and in the debate nothing was said that was personal. That was in the written piece afterward.
But what could he have said in your opinion, in place of narcissistic egomaniac that could not be perceived as an insult in other words how do you say narcissistic egomaniac in political correct language?
If he would have said such a thing about trump, clinton, or sanders would you have felt the same way?

I think Adam's intentions are pure/just and his method may or may not be the best way forward but IMO it's got a better shot than trying to educate the willfully ignorant just enough to actually do something on their own (aka doing nothing).

I don't get that impression. But he must do what he wants to do just as Larken has to do what he wants to do. Mingling the two approaches might be more pleasant, but it would be one big mess of unprincipled nice doing. Some people have to be an sort of anker. That is highly needed. It doesn't matter if it's Larken or someone else.

As a side note I think Larken is not as much in the education but more in the deprogramming of cult members. If that is not the end point then you can try to abolish or abolish the government many times but it will just return. Because the cult member will build a new church with new priests etc.

But it all does not matter. The one is nice talking but not addressing points brought up by the other and the other is bringing the same points up every time with every politician but doesn't talk politically correct so a lot of people feel this or that way.

I feel we all can want people playing nice really bad. But that doesn't mean our wishes get fulfilled. It is what it is.

Hey thank you for the reply :)