Holistic medicine. Do you mean mixing nonsense with actual medicine. Every scientific endeavor of merit is composed entirely of discrete units designed to be testable so we can add one more block to the pile which is used to work our way to a slightly larger understanding of reality.

Prosecutorial discretion is a thing. This is why every time someone dies we don’t have a trial

There has never been an evenly distributed political population in the history of the US nor is there ever more than 2 major parties in any given contest. This isn’t just happenstance. By definition any third party that grows strong enough to count pulls votes from the party they are most alike ensuring the victory of the major party that is least like the small party.

For instance a normal race looks like 50 Republican 47 Democrat 3% split between 4 different parties. Say one party the libertarians which is aligned with Republicans in many respects gains in that singular race 6% to themselves next go round. This isn’t even enough for anyone to believe you could actually win just respectable enough for people to know you even EXIST. What happens is that you draw your votes mostly from would be Republican voters due the verisimilitude of your positions. You end up with something like

45% Republicans 46% Democrats 6% Libertarians 3% other

Congrats you both caused Republicans to lose ensuring the Democrat would torpedo the very positions you championed and ably demonstrated why no third party can ever get more than minor traction. This is a fundamental feature of the American political system.

THIS IS NOT AT ALL HOW THE US WORKS

Under FPTP, the Nazi would be the top candidate in every constituency, and so win 10 out of 10 seats and have total control of the legislature, even though 60% of people voted anti-Nazi. This is the system in the UK and US.

This description is outrageously wrong regarding the US. Each contest is FPTP but we have many contests centered on geographic regions. Because of this the the breakdown you listed above for the 4 parties ends up with drastically different results based on how these people are distributed geographically. You could see anything from them winning virtual no seats to the majority of seats. You could NEVER win all seat

Our senate is 2 seats per state with some states having as little as around a half a million people and some having tens of millions. Our house is nominally more democratic but its not truly exactly proportional and its subject to gerrymandering.

It’s certainly broken enough to potentially practically provide 51% of the power to a party supported by 45% of the people but its not so bad as to provide 100% of control to someone with 40%

One of the indications the signals we perceive automatically regarding whether an idea is “truthy” is that something is either prevalent, common, worthy of considerations (2 sides), laughable, stupid, immoral.

Balkanized feed driven experience can help expose people to erroneous signals eg seeing pro flat earth things constantly because it was selected to be like previously engaging content and confusing that with it being commonly believed.

Treating an idea seriously in other venues only makes this signal problem worse not better. If they were capable of reasoned argument they wouldn’t be flat earthers to start with the only thing between them metaphorically or perhaps literally shoving pancakes up their ass is the type of social signals they are getting. I believe that ridicule is a net positive in deterring stupid beliefs because it deters SOME folks from believing whereas respectful argument is virtually worthless again when dealing with such folks.

Consider the same flat earther is all over the net speaking the same nonsense hundreds of times per year. Nonsense and ridicule is seen by hundred or thousands of folks whereas everyone is still talking to the one asshole. It’s pretty easy to see why it ought to be a net positive.

Generally in most cases schizophrenia isn’t catching whereas poisonous stupidity spreads. It’s important to keep the disease from infecting too many new adherents. Think of humor as containment.

Have you considered that there is actually more virtue in containing stupid than trying to rescue it. The audience for such communication is rarely the person afflicted because its almost impossible to convince such folks its the folks at the margins who might be convinced either way.

Consider an imaginary belief say 0.5% of the population believes that flu can be treated by shoving pancakes up your ass. If ridicule keeps the percentage at 0.5% instead of growing to 1% its incredibly virtuous whereas more respectful treatment of the belief might help you convince 0.01% to stop shoving starch in their rectum while allowing the mental virus to spread to far more people.

This theory is applicable everywhere. Every time you engage with a crazy person or a nazi imagine your audience is the other folks reading the discussion not the person you are engaging.

Given the damage they have done to society is there a good reason the fines aren’t all your companies money and all of your executives money we seize and destroy and products farms and machinery that can’t be sold for non-tobacco use?

It’s entirely possible to enjoy alcohol responsibly and the vast majority of people do. Shall we can cars because some people can’t stop getting in them while inebriated and crashing them?

99.999% of smokers are doing substantial damage to themselves and others.