There are two groups in these matters. One is those who think Aikido should be for fighting. The other thinks it should be for spiritual practice. Each group is respectively at the end of the spectrum where in the middle most of us are.
That's not how I read it. If anything, I think the "two groups" (and there may be more) agree that there's a spiritual component (for lack of a better term) to aikido.
However, one groups says that the spiritual stuff is the main point and that "effectiveness" is, literally, beside the point. That is, effectiveness is perhaps important, but not the reason for the training.
The other group says that the art must be "effective" for any of the the spiritual stuff to have meaning. In other words, if you can't actually respond to a hostile attack and control the attacker in a way that minimizes harm, then the spiritual metaphor doesn't work.
It is not fair to characterize the first group as a bunch of folks who cooperatively tank for one another when taking ukemi. Nor is it fair to characterize the second group as a bunch of budo bullies breaking wrists with nikyo all the time.
The dichotomies we have are good enough without adding false ones to the mix.