the problem with this view of "ideological diversity" (apart from the morality) is you actually get much more interesting debates arising from people with broadly similar ideologies than from people with wildly different ideologies https://twitter.com/shadihamid/status/1277966905391759367

an argument between, say, a person who believes in climate change and one who doesn't never gets past the same baby-level arguments you've heard a thousand times before - "but it was cold this year", "but cow farts" et fucking cetera, an argument from which you will learn nothing

whereas an argument between two people who accept climate change is happening, but differ on e.g. whether nuclear is a clean option, whether international law is a useful tool, whether an anarchist approach can solve the problem in time etc. is actually useful and interesting