The acute problem I see is heavily armed aggro people driving around in heavily-flagged technicals. (albeit Dearborn, not the more commonly found Aichi, technicals)

When the soviets decided that whatever their System was doing, it was not doing what they had been brought up to believe in, they changed it. In russia specifically, wikipedia says 3 people were killed during that change. (Romania was the most violent by far of the Warsaw Pact, with O(1000)) The US has not only stayed in afghanistan for far longer than the USSR, it's clearly had more than 3 people killed in political violence so far, and I am not optimistic enough to think they will get to a system "with liberty and justice for all" without adding any more...

But I am a cynic, so my fingers are crossed that I am wrong.

Edit: the "3 people" are from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Soviet_coup_d%27état_atte... ; please let me know if I am missing any more violent episodes.

> The US has not only stayed in afghanistan for far longer than the USSR

Don't forget about the US "sojourns" into LatAm! There's lots more where that came from.

Yes. Historically, new forms of mass communication have been always been used to stir up insanity and violence, dating back to the invention of the printing press. Wide distribution of Martin Luther's antisemitic screeds led to pogroms across Europe, the Nazis picked up where he left off using the new inventions of film and radio broadcasts, and now violent, racist ideologies are once again gaining mainstream purchase thanks to platforms like YouTube.

Ok, so what are the indications that violent, racist ideologies are spreading faster or to a greater degree today than at other times?

Furthermore, if that is indeed the case, what makes you think that publishing platforms are the cause?

I'm skeptical of the first, and I am doubly skeptical of the latter.

>Ok, so what are the indications that violent, racist ideologies are spreading faster or to a greater degree today than at other times?

Read the news? There’s been a huge upswing in far right politics dominating democracies worldwide, post-2008. The world’s largest democracy, India, is currently controlled by an explicitly enthnonationalist party whose leader has praised Hitler. The US, Australia, Hungary, Austria, Brazil, Japan, and many others have lurched further rightward.

> Furthermore, if that is indeed the case, what makes you think that publishing platforms are the cause?

In historical terms, there is not ever a single cause, but multiple forces coalescing to push things in one direction or another. Obviously, the 2008 financial crisis and it’s impact on the world economy created a ground that was fertile for all kinds of populism. Because of their long standing alliance with Capital owners, however, the right was better positioned to make use of these technologies as they emerged. You can also read any number of stories about the role that Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube etc served in successful right wing political campaigns across the world. Google “”WhatsApp Brazil Bolsonaro” or “Trump 2016 Facebook” of you need further insight. It’s pretty much common knowledge at this point.

I do not think that reading the news will tell me if these sorts of ideologies are more prevalent or are spreading faster than before, simply that they exist. I already knew that.

Why do you believe that there is some recent new acute problem?

I don't mean to restate the point, but how else do you arrive at these shifts in world democracies without these ideologies spreading faster or becoming more prevalent? The former happening is contingent on the latter...