One thing I've noticed recently, especially talking with libs, is the title basically.
For domestic affairs, even though the overton window is severely limited there is still leeway to say things like "I think we should tax the rich more". (keep in mind I am in 
and we still have some semblance of social democratic ideas in the mainstream here). Or " I think we need more social housing". Now, these are not policies that are actually going to happen, mind you, but you can at least talk about them out in the open and not get spit on.
Foreign policy and international affairs appears to be an entirely different story. Don't you dare suggest any of the following:
-
Ukraine is fully of Nazis
-
Russia has legitimate security concerns on its border
-
We helped overthrow the democratically elected government in Ukraine in 2014
-
Maduro is the rightful, democratically elected (several times) president of Venezuela
-
China actually does a lot of good in the world
-
NATO is an evil terrorist organisation
-
We butchered Libya and turned it into a modern day slave state and we did it on purpose
-
Up until VERY recently, that Israel is doing a Holocaust in Gaza
-
On the global stage, WE are the bad guys. WE are against democracy and human flourishing
These positions are simply not allowed to be had, and certainly not stated in the mainstream. If you dare state any of these things you get dog-piled, swarmed, yelled at, hated. Maybe there are some fringes on either side of the political spectrum that can mutter these things to ourselves, but god help you if you say any of these things to normies.
There is some leeway with shifting global events (for example, since Trump threatened us with annexation it has of course become much more acceptable to criticise and even openly despise the Burger Reich) but for the most part, public opinion is in solid lock step with the interests of the federal government, and more broadly the interests of the international ruling class.
Maybe neither here nor there, but just something that I've noticed recently.
Yeah, you get completely stonewalled on these topics. They can't even handle any debate on it or whatever, they immediately jump to labelling you as some internet-invented identity/insult like saying you're a communist-putinist-fascist that wants to holocaust Ukrainians or something for being skeptical of NATO. I guess this is what the internet-based PSYOPs are being used for because every other topic you might be able to get some leeway, even awful shit like paedophilia or something. But touch foreign policy, etc. and they respond by mental reflex to shut down the conversation as quickly as possible, which is how the right mostly operates about everything, but it's slowly working its way through left-libs on more and more topics.
Only thing close to experiencing this kind of discussion is debating animal rights/veganism with non-vegans in how quick they are to hallucinate arguments I didn't make and how emotional they get doing it. Antinatalism arguments I see are similar to this too, but I don't think that's a PSYOP, I think that's a human need for a specific narrative concerning human life to feel comfortable existing in this universe.
Yeah this is exactly what I am talking about. "WHATABOUTISM! RUSSIAN TALKING POINTS!"