Irrationalism and the New Society

One wonders constantly how to respond to the seemingly ever-growing din of irrationality being propagated through our culture. It is as if the very ability to engage in civil discourse is decaying, collapsing under the weight of the fetid paranoia infecting it. Of course, there have always been strong currents of irrationality through our cultural history, but generally they have been held in check by being denied the legitimacy of a voice in the media or mainstream thought. It has always been a fringe phenomena- up until now. What we are witnessing on a grand scale is an intolerance for the very discursive mechanism which under-girds any productive civilization, that is, the open exchange of ideas, rather than the mere propagation and defense of ideologies.
Part of the reason this has become so entrenched is due to the sickness of epistemological relativism. When reality becomes nothing more substantial than opinion, then there is no longer any method of determining the truth of one position in relation to another other than by shouting match. But reality is beyond any opinion, consisting of a tangible, and consequential ontology. The search for truth is complex, and may in fact be fruitless, but this doesn't mean that the effort is without value, or that the truth is itself non-existent. When we approach questions of what is real based on a methodology of personal whim, either due to laziness or vulgar egotism, then we court a grave danger, preparing a fertile soil of credulity to receive the seeds of extremism which will eventually and inevitably bear a bitter crop of sorrows.
For no opinion can be more precious than one's own, and in the absence of the restraint provided by the self-awareness and humility born from encountering a greater reality, the certainty of one's convictions become an end in themselves, to be defended at all costs, and with whatever violence deemed necessary.
So what then is the antidote to this poisoned spasm of irrationalism? There are several recourses, the first of which is creating a bulwark of progressive social rationalism. Second, refuse to engage in 'debate' with irrationals based on 'facts'. Facts have no value or weight for epistemological solipsists because they are imaginary quantities- a set of real facts cannot refute artificial facts when there is no substantial foundation of reality to appeal to. Irrationalists lack the capacity to either discern, or submit their ideation to, a larger field of actuality. Instead, we must constantly work to uncover and erode the edifice of their delusion through intensive and constant questioning- getting them to define and explain every word, term, and 'fact', asking for verification of every claim, demanding rational justifications for their assertions, and refusing to accept their nonsense at face value. Debate merely serves to legitimize a position which is fundamentally illegitimate, and so serves no constructive purpose.
Thirdly, the tactics of marginalization must be employed, by recreating a free, open, and inclusive society. Irrationalists are by their very nature self-excluding, deriving validation through perceived victimization. They have no interest in being part of a functional society, only in creating schisms. They are destructive in their tendencies, never creative, defining their identity through constant opposition and their persecution complexes.
A rational society is best counter to irrationalism- like a noxious weed, it must be starved until it goes extinct.