This was like the archetype of a partisan argument.
You two managed to go through why the sides don't like each other's worldview or the way it's expressed, and then stopped the second it came to discussing any real world issues. And I mean both of you as well, you could've given examples and data about why your system might be in anyone's interest but you didn't and it would've been the perfect time for him to reply with examples and data in favour of his, and neither of you even tried, it just stopped.
I’m not trying to convince anybody of that world view. My point is more modest: people can reasonably disagree about what is in the “best interest” of various groups, and therefore there is a difference between “convincing people to vote against their best interest” and “convincing people that a particular world view is in their best interest.”
It's fucking amazing.