4 ms·
Interesting. I would expect it to also foster radicalism. By creating an environment where only the most-vocal, least-risk-averse adherents to a particular wa
by im_down_w_otp 11y ago
Interesting. I would expect it to also foster radicalism. By creating an environment where only the most-vocal, least-risk-averse adherents to a particular way of thinking are willing to risk making their ideas known.
If you make an environment where only those who are willing to face death, imprisonment, or harassment for their ideas are the ones doing the talking, then you make the only voice being heard be one of extreme conviction and cause.
- 13thLetter 11y agoYep, you can see that happening right now in various tech fields. The scope of opinions that one can publicly hold without risking doxxing and mob harassment has been narrowed tremendously, with the result that while many have been bullied into resentful silence the ones still willing to talk have been thoroughly radicalized.
- tomjen3 11y agoAnd when only the radicals talk, those who have been forced into silence (or feel they are forced into silence) ends up being radicalized too. I think a lot of Trumps support comes from that fact (along with the genuine frustrations of blue collar workers) and also because he can be counted on not to apologize.
- fucking_tragedy 11y agoRadicals don't gain majority support, can be demonized, scapegoated and persecuted into being impotent. It is very easy to rally people with moderate or disparate ideas together against a common enemy. See: witches, anarchists, terrorists, etc
- bediger4000 11y agoYou missed "communists", "homosexuals", "union agitators" and "jews".