“If we can be elitist, why can’t they?
I don’t care if they use it pejoratively. I don’t care if I am the boogie man of their stories. You will hear the same pejoratives in all my misnagdish familiy homes, just in the reverse.”
“We” shouldn’t be allowed to either. If your only objection towards Chabad is an irrational hatred of Chassidim then I have more common ground with the Lubavitchers than I do with you. And, for the benefit of any ignorant onlookers: it is not normal for people to sit around bashing on Chassidim. Mentsh1’s situation is not common.
“This seems to be a daas yachid, as other misnagdim and chasidim welcomed liberation from the Russian empire.”
This is untrue, but I’ve heard many in Chabad circles who also have this misconception. The Chasam Sofer was also anti-Napoleon (as it pertained to Austria-Hungary) as were many what we would now call “chareidi” rabbis. The neologues and reform Jews were the ones who more gleefully supported Napoleon. There might be exceptions, but he definitely was not a “daas yochid.”
“On comparing “kiruv” with “bikur cholim” as just a group’s mitzva.”
You didn’t understand the analogy, and you are downplaying the mitzva of bikur cholim even given your attempt to word it as though you aren’t. In any case, the point was not that they are of equal value. The point was that different groups have different shticks.
“Also, “kiruv” is not a Chabad term”
Kiruv is the term for outreach. I couldn’t care less if Chabad doesn’t like it.