These are the rules for attacking an opponent ideologically.

from Ecce Homo by Friedrich Nietzsche page 15 nonfiction ~2 min read

Another thing is war. I am naturally warlike. Attacking is one of my instincts. Being able to be an enemy, being an enemy —these require a strong nature, perhaps; in any case every strong nature presupposes them. It needs resistances, so it seeks resistance: aggressive pathos is just as integrally necessary to strength as the feeling of revenge and reaction is to weakness. Woman, for instance, is vengeful: that is a condition of her weakness, as is her sensitivity to other people's afflictions. —The strength of an attacker can in a way be gauged by the opposition he requires; all growth makes itself manifest by searching out a more powerful opponent —or problem: for a philosopher who is warlike challenges problems to duels, too. The task is not to master all remittances, but only those against which one has to pit one's entire strength, suppleness, and master-at-arms —opponents who are equal…. Equality before the enemy —first precondition for an honest duel. If you despise, you cannot wage war; if you command, if you look down on something, you do not need to wage war. —My practice of war can be summed up in four propositions. First: I attack only causes that are victorious —on occasion, I wait till they are victorious. Second: I attack causes only when there are no allies to be found, when I am standing alone —when I am compromising myself alone… I have never made a move in public that was not compromising: this is my criterion for right action. Third: I never attack people —I make use of a person only as a kind of strong magnifying glass with which one can make visible some general but insidious and quite intangible exigency. This is how I attacked David Strauss, or more precisely the success of a decrepit book among the 'educated' in Germany —I caught this education red-handed… This is how I attacked Wagner, or more precisely the falsity, the instinctual indistinction of our 'culture', which mistakes the sophisticated for the rich, the late for the great. Fourth: I attack things only when all personal disagreement is ruled out, when there is no background of bad experiences. On the contrary, attacking is for me a proof of benevolence, even of gratitude. By linking my name with that of a cause or a person —whether for or against is indifferent to me —I honor them, I set them apart. When I wage war on Christianity, I am entitled to do so because I have not experienced any fatalities or hindrance from that quarter —the most earnest Christians have always been favorably disposed towards me. I myself, an opponent of Christianity de rigueur, have no intention of holding against an individual what has been the disaster of millennia. —

—Friedrich Nietzsche, Ecce Homo, p. 15