*picks a name that is literally the description of underhanded and conniving political tendencies*
*attempts to conflate a chosen name with marginalized characteristics while also making a pass at being on the moral high ground*
The difference between me pointing out your chosen name having a meaning that implies no good faith in political discussion and you assuming I would attack you based on a marginalized characteristic is that my point had a factual basis in reality while yours is just desperately reaching for a solid argument to stand on. And the persecution of marginalized communities isn't your cudgel to wield in debate whenever it is convenient, but I wouldn't really expect much less than a person who think "Machiavellian" is a suitable name to go under for political discussion.
There really isn't a difference. I mean you can make all the excuses you want and call it a difference but that is pretty much what it is. You chose something that has no meaning in a discussion and then tried to use it as some lofty reason to dismiss an opinion. You have no clue about the username but you made an assumption on just that. Now you are trying to parade that opinion as if it's based on anything but the bias you wanted to use in the first place. Since the username is what I use for all forums I am registered to, why would you believe I made this username for political post. I have had this username probably longer then you have been on this earth but it is fun to see you try to defend this bias nature of yours.