Does Early Buddhism affirm mainstream orthodox ideologies?

I read the following on the internet by an independent (Australian) bhikkhu: > [Oppositional framing is cringe](https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/oppositional-framing-is-cringe/31334) > > You know it when you see it. “Everyone else says that … but I say this”. > > Which is invariably meant to be expanded to, “All those mindless sheep incanting **orthodoxy** say that … but I—a courageous and innovative truth-teller—say this.” > > It’s the fundamental framing of every **conspiracy theory**, endlessly, tediously invoked every time someone says “**do the research**”. But it’s > also one of the most annoying cliches of academic writing, where for > purely rhetorical reasons pretty much every scholar feels the need to > define themselves by what they are against rather than by what they > are for. > > And you also see it all the **little Buddhist** **cult**ettes, which establish > an in-group defined by the rejection of “**the mainstream**”. By > definition, if you don’t agree with their stunning new breakthroughs > in understanding you’re just a sheep trapped in tradition. Dear god in > heaven, it’s so very cringe. It’s the rhetorical maturity of someone > forever trapped in a fifteens year-old’s bedroom, **Metallica** posters > duly blu-tacked to the walls. > > A man of wit and wisdom—namely **Twitter**’s **Sonny Bunch**—once said 5 that > it’s better to like something everyone hates than it is to hate > something everyone likes. He’s right. Why not try liking things? It’s > fun! Are there Pali Suttas that affirm or oppose the above viewpoint? If so, which ones?