zlacker

[return to "Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah"]
1. mmastr+3p[view] [source] 2025-09-10 21:08:47
>>david9+(OP)
Things are not healthy in the USA, and have not been for a long time. It's all about scoring points now, owning the other side, getting soundbites, etc. It's sad that it's progressed to this.

From an outsider, it really feels like there's no middle ground in American politics. You either commit yourself to the full slate of beliefs for one side, or you're the "enemy".

I hope that Americans on both side start to see that either they need to tone down the rhetoric, work together and reach across the aisle, or just take the tough step of a national divorce due to irreconcilable differences.

Part of that is to stop giving a voice to the insane rhetoric, and stop electing *waving vaguely*.

◧◩
2. Tinker+qy[view] [source] 2025-09-10 21:45:37
>>mmastr+3p
I don't think most people are on either extreme, but the media does make it seem that way, along with reddit/twitter/bluesky etc.
◧◩◪
3. logica+CQ[view] [source] 2025-09-10 23:17:40
>>Tinker+qy
I think the main problem of social media in general is that it allows for people to find things to instigate them. In essence, a single person's opinion can be amplified. This leads to at least two outcomes. One being that people "on the side" of that opinion will unite into an echo chamber of people with that opinion. Two being that people "on the other side" of that opinion will use it to justify the need for their unification and propagate it through their echo chamber.

Prior to social media, or the internet in general, it was quite difficult to amass large numbers of people in your echo chamber without becoming a person of power (like a president or equivalent). But today, it isn't uncommon for someone with views towards conspiracies or extreme viewpoints to become a "popular" voice in social media. In fact, one might argue that it is easier to become popular by being divisive. Even though most people aren't on either side. The ability to grow a "large enough" side is enough to become an existential threat to the other side. And they end up justifying their own existence.

I don't know what the solution to this is. I don't even know how to reduce it at this point.

◧◩◪◨
4. Tinker+7f1[view] [source] 2025-09-11 02:22:36
>>logica+CQ
Yes the two extremes feed off each other, and make everything worse for the rest of us.

Personally I think there needs be laws regarding social media, perhaps limiting the number of followers/viewers for anyone engaged in social or political commentary, and/or making promotion of political content illegal if it is false or misleading. Something akin to the fairness doctrine that used to exist for television prior to 1987.

[go to top]