> You’ll notice when someone asks for a deeper explanation of ambiguous dehumanization they tend to not respond.

That sounds like a strange method of just confirming what you already believe.

it has nothing to do with me, it has to do with people saying what they mean so others can see it. Purposeful ambiguity is a constant effort by fascist groups to try and introduce ideas into discourse while simultaneously denying them trying to undermine critics.

c.f.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2017/08/14/clash-hig...

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/23/alt-right...

If they never respond why assume it is "purposeful ambiguity"?

Like I said, that's a recipe of just confirming your own suspicions all the time ...

I often don't respond to folks who greatly misunderstand or take my meaning to be something it is very much not.

I don't find that it is worth engaging with folks who assume the worst of people / are policing internet discussions for any distant hint of "fascist groups" or whatever they're looking for.

Also sometimes people ask a question, but its not really a question, its a veiled invite to spar verbally. Indulging those remarks are aiding in your own abuse.

Indeed.

Thus all the "no I'm saying X, not Y, I don't agree with Y" and the folks just want to go on about how I said Y.