It would have been good if you went into more details about the issues you raised. What was the nature of the conversation where you were called a racist or a fascist. Also, it would have been good to define what these things are and give concrete examples and measure them against what you said when you were accused of being a racist/fascist and see how accurate these accusations were. I am not saying find a rubric, but it would be good to get more specifics.
The details of the discussion are irrelevant to the article, I was never accused of racism but was called a fascist which based on the meaning of the word is categorically wrong and therefore inaccurate at all levels of the meaning.
Why is it irrelevant?
The topic of discussion and the context of its location have no bearing on the labelling that was delivered. It doesn't matter what the topic is, the words used are inappropriate for the situation and in such a setting are severely misused which is what the article is about. If I wanted to write an article about the topic discussed itself, I would have.
I think it is quite plain to see that the usage of such terms which if socially acceptable to be used in such places in today's world, have fundamentally changed their meaning. Just asking me to justify my actions to see the 'accuracy' of their usage is testament to the fact that most no longer understand what actions have led to the labels carrying such weight in the past. This is the dilution.