Political Disagreement: The Old Way and the New

In the old days, political disagreement went roughly like this:

Republicans: "Democrats are full of shit about x"

Democrats: "Republicans are full of shit about x"

Now it goes like this:

Republicans: "Democrats are full of shit about x"

Democrats:  Create university x-studies departments, staffed entirely by leftists, implementing and advocating the view that Republican are full of shit about x; create committees, government departments, NGOs and think tanks to transmit the idea that Republicans are full of shit about x; infuse public schools and universities with the view that Republicans are full of shit about x, representing this as incontrovertible expert opinion; announce "whole-of-government" / "whole-of-society" efforts to establish the view that Republicans are full of shit about x as "settled science"; media immediately treats "Republicans are full of shit about x" as the common sense of educated people, ergo the only acceptable view of x; media "fact-"checkers uniformly rate the Republican position on x as "full of shit," one notch below "pants on fire"; Wikipedia entry on Republican views of x begins "The full-of-shit view that..."; government mis-/dis-/mal-/non-/quasi-information offices write white papers on the topic of the full-of-shit-ness of the Republican view of x...