@RadagastI've been accused of writing a few political screeds, but in each case, they reflected the views of the characters. Since they were concerned with helping others, they criticized actions which inflicted harm. I don't see that as politics, any more than a business owner character complaining about how business regulations are overwhelming—they're perspectives, not opinions. In one, they're interested in protecting people hurting, in the other, he's dealing with issues which affect his business.
Unfortunately, few things see items like that as character traits, instead they assume (as readers often do) of attributing the character's attitude to the author, as if authors are incapable of writing about anything besides their own viewpoint.
When someone complains, I always review the passage, keeping an open mind, but in almost every case, when I made tweaks to ease potential issues, the readers instead dug in their heels, insisting that I change the story to support Their political views, going so far as threatening me with massive boycotts (which have never happened).
And of course, faced with unrelenting demands and a refusal to even discuss the matter, I double down, not only restoring the original version, but continuing the conflict by arranging for additional conflicts between the same characters.
For the most part, readers appreciate the strength of the character development, rather than insisting on 'correct viewpoints'. But when someone takes issue, there's really little you can do to appease them over then rolling over and surrendering your soul to their beliefs. It just ain't worth talking at that point.
That said, I agree with karactr's point. Fleshing out different aspects of a character strengthens the story—even if it entails their personal perspective, but its best to avoid politics.
The best stories never attack issues like politics directly. Instead, they address it in a way which catches readers by surprise, like Mark Twain's Tom Sawyer or Harriet Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin. By crafting things in terms of fantasy, or as a children's story, readers will enter the story without carrying their previous political positions with them.
That way, when you reveal the central injustices, readers focus on how it impacts the characters, rather than how it impacts their personal political positions.
Case in point, I addressed several difficult issues with homelessness and metal illness in my Demonic Issues series. Rather than bore readers with depressing descriptions of human suffering, the story instead is written as a man battling invisible fantasy creatures from another dimensions who cause people's mental illnesses.
That approach allows me to address the story's central issues from the side, rather than a direct broadside against readers' established positions.
That said, I'll likely never avoid story side plots just to avoid people's political screeds. If you dislike the characters I create, then please, only read about characters who repeat what you already believe.
I prefer stories that challenge, not only me, but my positions. It's only by questioning one's assumptions that anyone changes their beliefs. Threatening people never changes anyone's opinion, it only provokes increased conflicts.
