Your comment wasn't primarily factual and wasn't the way people write when the truth is their main concern. It was aggressive polemic. We don't want that here, because it destroys thoughtful conversation and community. That's true regardless of ideology; we don't care what color gasoline is being poured onto a fire.

Is it censorship to ban accounts that post that way? Sure, if you like. But it's censorship of aggressive polemic, a.k.a. flamewar—not of ideologies or views.

I'm not sure that you'll believe this, but we don't care what your ideology is or your views are, or even read the comments closely enough to know what they are. We have to look at tens of thousands of comments. No human can read this kind of thing closely all day.

If you're genuinely asking about a way to discuss these topics that wouldn't be considered ideological battle, here's what I suggest. First, review the site guidelines, take them to heart, and rigorously edit out of your comments anything that is not in their spirit. Especially: "Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive." Second, give up the idea of winning arguments or defeating enemies, and instead cultivate an attitude of good conversation between equals who respect each other, none of whom knows the whole truth. Third, be more respectful the more strongly you disagree. You can do that by editing out pejoratives and provocations, finding things you do agree on, and remaining neutral inside yourself while writing.

If you do even half of that, you'll find that moderators on HN don't show up to scold you, even though you're expressing substantively the same views as above. But don't underestimate the work it will take to get there. The enemy-smiting style is addictive and takes practice to abandon. I know because I had to do it myself.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html