OP sets up the straw man of "anybody against any inequality must be advocating perfect equality" - which is hogwash. By OP's logic, feudalism is perfectly fine because it accentuates the differences between serfs and kings. Or hell, even slavery is Ok. What reasonable people have to start to appreciate is that everything isn't black and white, there are shades of gray and we can have meaningful disagreements about where the lines are drawn.
So then define exactly what's good and bad, and let me know why.
I get that inequality has gotten worse, but has it put us in a unstable situation? Has society collapsed? Are the roads destroyed? Is average lifespan now 0?
We have more billionaires, but we also have 22 million more people with health care due to Obamacare now.
What metrics are you using, and why are those metrics more important than other metrics people might use.
Until you can clearly define that, we might as well say the anti-globalists are trying to turn everyone into ordinary chunks of common matter.
Well I guess that's my point, let's have a conversation about inequality and discuss how much is too much. It's a reasonable thing to debate. Your post seemed to imply that railing against the 1% was inappropriate in some way