[luxeo223]

Yes to the former: in my impression, the far right discourse and memes, in the broad sense of the word, tend to be more threatening and violent on average when the posts are directory towards the opposing political group or marginalised communities (e.g. racial or sexual). This happens both towards the group broadly or when targeting particular individuals, such as jail Hillary, hang Pelosi, or shoot the gays, or that women are not worth anyone's time (Andrew Tate example).

You can have a less polarised left- or right-wing discussion, and that results in less moderation for both sides. For example in the UK, you may not have liked Jeremy Corbyn or Boris Johnson, but you'd hardly have anyone calling for them to be jailed or murdered.

[qabqabaca]

This is a good observation. It's also probably not coincidence that any "free speech" (i.e. zero content moderation) platforms inevitably end up full of racists/homophobes/xenophobes etc

[mjevans]

I agree, but it's also a natural consequence of excluding that speech from other venues. Of course it will all concentrate in what few places still allow it.

However is that desirable?

It might be healthier for society if the speech is in less concentrated quantity, and seen for the bile it is so that it can inoculate those exposed in such low quantities.

We should also look at the motivating factors, not necessarily the stated reasons, but the source of the logical and emotional driving factors that lead to that hateful rhetoric. Society and social contracts have serious systemic issues that are complex, interwoven issues. It's not just one thing, or one problem, but a big picture with a lot of things that all must get solved in the same broad effort.

[kajecounterhack]

> I agree, but it's also a natural consequence of excluding that speech from other venues. Of course it will all concentrate in what few places still allow it. However is that desirable?

It's desirable in that your kids, who mostly frequent mainstream social media with their friends, aren't exposed to the scary bad content as easily. Also it's better for the mental health of everyone who isn't bigoted or vitriolic to see less of that stuff on the regular.

[mcphage]

> However is that desirable?

It means (and this has been repeatedly demonstrated) that there is less of it overall. So: yes.

[rhdunn]

You still see polarization, though. People calling Lib Dem supporters "yellow tories", people who like Blair and/or his vision of a center left Labour party "red tories", calling people "gammon", etc.

These things help push people to the extremes and drown out the middle ground. That only helps push people further to extremes, which ultimately leads to conflicts as the two sides disagree with each other.

And while there may not have been calls for Corbyn to be jailed or murdered (I can't remember for sure), there has been a strong anti-semitism push against him (rightly or wrongly) with calls for him to step down as an MP.

The UK is growing more polarised, we just haven't had an inciting incident like George Floyd or Jan 6th yet. It has come close with things like Brexit.

[encryptluks2]

Just go to r/PublicFreakout on reddit which frequently reaches top page and you'll find plenty of posts validating and encouraging people to punch and knock out individuals for merely words or vaccination status. People fail to even recognize that violence such as punching someone in the face can often result in murder. So I don't believe the propaganda machine is exclusive to one side or the other, but I don't see much being done to question whether violence is merely a corporation at this point to meet quotas for the privatized prison labor system and finding ways to spread it on social media directly benefits those that profits from those incarcerates that become radicalized by such media.

[locutous]

> in my impression, the far right discourse and memes, in the broad sense of the word, tend to be more threatening and violent on average when the posts are directory towards the opposing political group or marginalised communities

I'm unfamiliar with right wing communities. I've been involved in a fair number of left wing ones and the level of wishing-death-upon-opponents is scary, and it has grown much worse and bare knuckled over the years.

Which makes me think we are in the early stages of an undeclared civil war.

[tibbydudeza]

Right and you got downvoted - what a surprise.

[Khaine]

It wasn’t right wing activists who burnt down whole blocks in Kenosha, or in Portland where they repeatedly attacked a federal court. These people were coordinating and asking for donations and weren’t shut down.

You see people on the left constantly denigrating white men, and calling for attacks against them, the latest I saw being https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11140197/Librarian-...

So yes, to people on the right it very much feels skewed. The worst excesses on the right are blown up, and minimised or ignored on the left

[kajecounterhack]

> You see people on the left constantly denigrating white men, and calling for attacks against them

Do you really face daily denigration from non-{white male} folks around you? Have you considered the possibility that you have to look for such occurences to confirm your own biases?

[Khaine]

I don’t, but I see lots of roles advertised as female only. I see extra levels of approval required by diversity councils to promote males.

These are a direct extension of this attitude, that’s okay to treat men like shit because of history

[batmanturkey]

The right wing is exclusive in its call for armed violence.

The right wing encourages the notion that the second amendment means military grade arms for every yahoo, and that this is to be used in the coming civil war to take “back” America.

Lyndsey Graham warned us of riots if Trump is indicted, and we should prevent the FBI from doing their job to reduce the risk of right wing violence.

The right wing is the exclusive purveyor of political violence, seeing as how there’s no actual radical left wing in American politics in any power holding capacity.

Calling Joe Biden “far left” as the baseline means that no one who can see the actual political spectrum takes you seriously, but it’s sufficiently compelling for Fox hosts to repeat ad nauseum

[arnath]

Oh ffs, in what universe is “Burn {idea} to the ground” a threat of violence?

[Khaine]

Male librarians isn’t an idea. It’s a group of people. It is literally a call for violence