zlacker

I like this articulation. I might modify it slightly because you have, in turn, implied that posters are gaslighting the reader. When, in fact, they are merely exposing a defense mechanism. They say that every pessimist is a dissappointed optimist, and something similar has happened here. It is pitiful cowardice, and an unwitting collaboration with the corrupt, rather than an intentional one.

In the end, they need a scolding that will perhaps shame them into remembering they have a backbone. But I suggest that imprecision with the scold will reduce the efficacy of this bitter medicine, and the poster will focus on the minor inaccuracy of your analysis compare it with their own pure intent, dismissing the scold as bad faith. If instead you note that it is cowardice, and add a spoonful of pity to the scold, and remove the minor inaccuracy, it may have a greater effect.

>>javajo+(OP)
I suspect you and @matheusmoreira are making the same point. It's not a thought I've articulated before... Perhaps, as I've said in the sibling-post, saying they're "complicit in the corruption" is better...