This got me thinking. Is it ultimately better for people to be battling it out online, on social media, rather than actually fighting in the streets? Everyone w

This got me thinking. Is it ultimately better for people to be battling it out online, on social media, rather than actually fighting in the streets? Everyone will get to have their fair share of outrage and stress release(after amassing it online in the first place), but no one get's hurt. On the other hand, like you suggest, none of their struggles will produce anything real. Which got me thinking, was it better back then, when people actually had to fight it out in real life? Then there would be some kind of result, and people would be able to make changes to the society that they see fit. It was often bloody though, and one side losing meant actual death(s). But from that, there was progress - good and bad. The way things are now, reminds me of all the bureaucracies in the world that prevent things from getting done - good and bad. Maybe people are drawn to fighting it out online, because they subconsciously know there's nothing they can do in real life anymore. They are well aware of how little influence they actually have on the real world and the only outlet for fighting for their ideals is online, which mostly result in nothing but mental stress and pain. Another thing, I have this idea that after two sides fight in real life, sometimes they can gain an understanding or appreciation of each other. They see each other face to face, as real people, and both understand that they are fighting for what they believe in. Whereas online, there's none of that. You could be fighting against a bot, or someone across the seas who was paid to just start shit. And online, if you lose, you just move on to a new thread or a different forum. You never have to live with the consequences of losing.