I was confused about your post, too. What did you mean?
Its helpful to those that understood it and in giving the necessary words people need for a time when they will need them. Those that have the faculties to understand it, did.
If you are unable to see anything wrong with where that behavior leads inevitably, you deserve the outcomes that are coming.
Make no mistake death is not uncommon when these types of systems fail towards their logical conclusion, if left to propagate forward unabated, the outcome is inevitable because its part of a cycle that's happened many times in the past with the same outcome.
This has happened before many times in history, and it will happen again. It will be much worse this time because so much of our population is wholly dependent on technological systems that will fail to deliver enough food when those societal failures occur.
If you can't see where this path of coercion, compulsion, and other intolerable acts have led us in the past, no amount of words will change that.
You would have to learn by experience and the downsides firsthand, and by then it would be too late to do or be anything other than a victim.
What odds do you give yourself or your children of survival when those failures occur and suddenly 8-12 billion have to subsist on practices that can only at their theoretical maxima serve 2 billion.
I already gave you one example: reactionaries appropriated those criticizing Trump's policies as "fascist" to call those that disagree with public health lockdowns as the same.
Likewise, your original terms of "flawed and self-defeating beliefs" and "mentally ill" are currently being weaponized by the same people to brandish transgender people as harmful ideologues.
Just thought you should know, in the slim hope that you don't. Because if you do, you either don't care or are doing it on purpose. Both of which are harmful.
Ultimately, you sound like AI-generated. You say a lot of words that individually have meaning without saying anything at all.
Its not a statement, its a set of statements that compose a characterization, which is something commonly done by scientists, engineers, and rational people to communicate specific descriptions so they can be recognized again by others, this is primarily done when common words are not available to match specific common meanings in communications.
> can fill in with the ideology that they choose to categorize in this way
You'll have to further clarify what you mean, there are two potential meanings embedded with that single statement, and you've failed to communicate which one that is, it looks to me like you've misunderstood this as some ideology akin to philosophy such as consequentialism when its a description of behavior.
A characterization is just a description of the distinctive nature, elements, features, or composition of someone or something specific, in this case behavior. Behavior that leaves at least one party with a negative outcome while also negatively impacting all or most future outcomes related to that party.
Its important to understand and convey the correct and rational meaning of words, as you said many groups seek to corrupt language to prevent communication, to distract, disorient, and create disunity using a whole host of sordid and malign influence tactics to cause distorted reflected appraisal.
> Both people... and those that disagree with them.
We will not be going off into the weeds, talking about potentially irrational beliefs of others, or getting bogged down in unrelated controversial narratives as those only serve disunity and chaos.
You may also want to review the actual definition and elements of fascism. Regardless, what you mention here has no relevance to the current discussion.