Not sure what we're differing about - can you explain?
The point, surely, is that we can be rude (depending on point of view - your 'rude' might be my 'very true') ABOUT people OUT THERE (the kids on my bus today were total morons) without being rude TO people IN HERE. You seem determined to defend people who aren't actually being attacked, just moaned about in a semi-private forum. Libel requires naming and accusing. The implication that some councillors are corrupt seems to touch your nerves unduly - I should think most aren't, I know some are - but if you think someone writing about it is daft, why not ignore them? You're not defending a particular individual's honour, so your identification with whoever you think is being attacked seems unnecessary, making a fight out of almost nothing. It's unlikely that anyone here thinks all politicians, local or national, are corrupt - or that they're all paragons.
Likewise, saying someone's a "mincing twat" might be unpleasant but it could be playful, using current idioms. Even the subject of the comment might not think it cruel. I wonder why you want to prove cruelty? Why are you stepping in to identify with the target? If you don't like how people express themselves, why not ignore them rather than challenge them? Why do you seem to feel you have to prove people wrong?
I've never met anyone who likes unfairness. I don't like attacks on groups of abstract people. But equally I don't like seeing actual people attacked, including in forums where one's guard might be down. Attacks coming at you from the screen in the safety of your own home can feel incredibly painful, which is why we need to take great care about what we say to each other. Identifying with abstract others out in the world to generate argument in here doesn't make sense unless you just want a fight, or like feeling hurt.
I read those threads - that's not what I understood anyone to be saying, but because you accuse people of it they feel they have to defend themselves - like the loaded question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" If anyone actually does think that anyone giving directions is trying to rip you off, they need help!
I don't think you are (or me, or anyone else). You're free to think whatever you like, and you might be right. You're free to say that you don't agree and that making those kind of assumptions is unreasonable. But unless you just want a fight, saying they're "hateful" is aggravation. And again, saying they're "unfair" looks like you're identifying too much with the target, trying to take things personally or are looking for a reason to fight, and means that debate can't happen because it hurts you, feels like a direct attack on you, when it isn't. Debate is easier without attacking each other - there are lots of online forums full of people personally defending and attacking everything... this one doesn't seem to be the right place for that.
Perhaps a rule of thumb should be - if you feel hurt by someone's post, leave your computer, go and do something else, then ignore that thread in future. It's pretty much how moderation works - suspending someone's right to immediate posting so they have time to cool off and think about something else.
Again, sorry folks for longwindedness and for any offence that might be caused - none intended. I have tried to edit this to fillet out anything tricky but I may have failed. I'm very interested in how groups solve communication problems, hence my involvement. If it's over the top, tell me and I'll stop.