Thanks, you summed it up nicely. I'm very committed, both personally and professionally, to the left in terms of social policy, but I recognize our tendency towards tribalism, doctrinaire language policing, and groupthink.
Also, you nailed it when you said that one of main differences between left and right is their degree of earnestness. Anyone who has watched the development of identity politics since the 1990s can recognize that the right is now just doing a bad imitation of the left's rhetorical tactics. That's why they seem disingenuous: because most of them are acting out their impression of the so-called "radical left", but from the other side.
Whether you agreed with them or not, the right used to pride themselves on being the sober, fiscally conservative, "responsible", establishment people, while the left were the loud, obnoxious ones screaming about identity and shaming normal people for their supposed "privilege".
The rise of the Tea Party marks the beginning of the right-wing adoption of these left-wing identity politics tactics. The right has now become a radical reactionary movement rather than the small-c fiscal conservatives of the past. Watching the nuttiness on the right makes me think that the transformation happened largely because many middle- and working-class whites now see themselves as victims of the same race-based persecution that the left correctly complained about for decades, so they've just leaned into it.
All of this reminds me of Foucault's assertion that ideologies are not about right and wrong, but rather about power. That's why we are in the middle of a culture war. Of course, we can't let the oligarchs, the fascists, or the Christian Nationalists win, but the left is not entirely innocent either in the sense that we have demonized and alienated a very large segment of Western society. I don't absolve myself, either. I have railed against the right, especially the religious right, in the past just as hard as anyone.