And I'm pointing out how in my capacity I am doing everything I can to fight it. Part of that is convincing your (or more likely others reading this), that your position is wrong.
Sure, if we think such organizations and politicians actually exist. (I'm skeptical that they actually do, but I'm willing to assume they do for the sake of this discussion.) But to me, that doesn't count as "drop everything you're doing and fight", which is what you said earlier that everyone should be doing. If what you meant by "drop everything you're doing and fight" is just "support organizations and leaders that you think will improve the situation", then I don't disagree with your suggestion as a general thing (though I might disagree with your specific selection of which organizations and politicians to support), but I think your choice of words was a very poor one. To most people, "drop everything you're doing and fight" means "completely rearrange your life so you are spending all of your time and effort fighting this problem".
I will agree that "poor wording" was just my opinion and you are free to simply ignore it.
And I do ignore it. Not it of spite, but because it fails to hold up to intense rigor and scrutiny.
I disagree. And I see no point in continuing to argue about it. We simply do not agree on how "most people define free will".
> it fails to hold up to intense rigor and scrutiny.
You are apparently ignorant of the extensive literature on free will and cognitive science in which the view I am defending does hold up to intense rigor and scrutiny.
Anything that can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.