Well your first response was to bait me by demanding a justification for something I didn't say. I feel disinclined to debate someone who instantly projects dishonesty like that.

In thousands of debates I've read and participated in someone will quip "who gets to decide!" and then primp and preen as if it's an incisive argument. It isn't. It's merely lazy, and lately fashionable given the blurring of fact and opinion. Compounded by the fashionable invocation of "subjectivity" as though it invalidates every clear reasoning.

Who gets to decide? Are we incapable of coming up with criteria? Let's go through a few examples.

Who gets to decide what a medical doctor is? Well there are certification boards. They have developed stringent criteria. Someone who hangs out his shingle as an MD without that certification will go to prison, even if he practices exemplary medicine. The same is true for many professions. Do you want to open this to argument? That would be irresponsible.

And then your Trumpian friend (that would be a friendship-breaker for me; I could have an uncomfortable relationship with a Bush supporter, but Trump? No) . Does your friend say Biden stole the election? Who gets to decide who the president is? Well, sorry, but it's objectively true that Biden won over seven million more votes and a decisive electoral college victory.

Who gets to decide if the earth is flat or round?

Now let me talk about a more current event; there are people spreading wantonly irresponsible misinformation about COVID, among them a once-respected epidemiologist. Social media have drawn lines in sand about this; they'll eject people like Dr. Malone for advocating ivermectin as a treatment.

Back to my original point: a society that reveres pluralism and a variety of viewpoints must take on the responsibility of rejecting and, yes, suppressing illegitimate ones. If I had my way Dr. Malone would be making license plates. The epistemological crisis we are living through right now is the result of a progression that began with a noble idea and has disintegrated into chaos. Postmodernism was like falling down stairs. Now we're going over a cliff. The most absurd ideas (a pizza parlor that doesn't have a basement is operating a child sex-traffic operation out of its basement; Trump won the election; a man in a dress is a woman). are set alongside legitimate viewpoints, and the best lack all conviction while the worst are full of passionate intensity.

If "who gets to decide" is all you have, bow out of the debate because you don't have an argument. And if you find yourself readily thinking in terms of perspective and subjectivity, you've lost your way.