Do you mean more cynical and nihilistic than the hackneyed centrist propaganda that I mean to be exposing with this criticism of Stoicism?

The alternative I offer is spelled out in hundreds of articles and thousands of pages, going back to the writings on my blog, beginning in 2011. Even if we just focus on the Medium presentations of my philosophy, written over the last couple of years, my "position" is still far larger than this one article on Stoicism.

So your comment doesn't make much sense. But I understand that the goring of sacred cows can offend those who have been caught up in the hype.

For the record, while much of my philosophy is indeed cynical in some respects, it's not nihilistic. That is, if by "cynical," you mean that I'm pessimistic about most people's intentions, values, and prospects, I'd be as cynical as Platonists, Buddhists, Jainists, Christians, Muslims, and most other subversive idealists. I think everyone has the potential to live more authentically in existential terms, but like all idealists who contrast the ideal with the darker reality, I can't help but recognize the array of obstacles.

Christians call this the "fallenness" of nature. Buddhists call it the "illusion of egoism." I often write about how capitalism infantilizes consumers so that trash ends up becoming more popular than high-quality art. Is it an accident that monstrous demagogues like Trump can act as parasites on democracy? Free societies have these weaknesses that can be exploited, and if it's cynical to understand the downside of this type of society, you can fairly call me a cynical philosopher. I offer no apology.