On so many different news items, threads, etc. People are the first to claim pretty much anyone who has made a mistake, or does something they disagree with deserves to die.

Like, do some people not have the capability to empathise and realise they might have been in a similar place if they were born in a different environment…

I genuinely understand, you think a politician who has lead to countless deaths, a war criminal, or a mass rapists deserves to die.

But here people say it for stuff that falls way below the bar.

A contracted logger of a rainforest (who knows if they have the money / opportunity to support their family another way). Deserves to die.

A civilian of Nazi germany of whom we know nothing about their collaboration/agreement with the regime. Deserves to die.

Some person who was a drug dealer and then served their time. Deserves to die.

Like I don’t get it? Are people not able to imagine the kind of situations that create these people, and that it’s not impossible to imagine the large majority of people in these positions if born in a different environment?

  • stoly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is human nature. It’s the same reason you had 20 year olds sucker punching 70 year old asian women during lockdown. Cowardice and a need to lash out.

  • BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago
    1. People say whatever on the internet and anonymous areas. Often for shock or the extremist idealism as if something was dead things would be different

    2. Your examples. Both of these are extreme differences in people’s views and principles. The logger is killing and ruining someone’s country for profit. Yes the individual guy needs money but he put the principal of doing something wrong aside to make money. The logger could do something else or he doesn’t care. He has no empathy towards future generations or the health of species of animals. Why should someone have empathy for them.

    Nazi example is easy while I am sure some people were ignorant or born into being a child of a nazi one should be resisting the horridness if you reap the benefits of your nation’s success at the downfall of others of course they are going to wish you dead. To put you into a perspective of nazi haters why should they get to live a peaceful life or be forgiven or left alone even if they saw the error of their ways or to desperate to fight back when people lost their future and families because of their group.

    As for the drug dealer people see the worst that comes out in people as a druggie and blame the person who keeps enabling. If the druggie could be cut off then someone’s life wouldn’t be ruined.

    In every example you gave someone was ruining someone else’s life or future. Of course people personally affect by similar circumstances aren’t going to have as much empathy for these people it takes a lot of compassion, self reflection, love, and forgiveness to be able to be kind to someone who hurt you and your family. Not everyone is in that place.

    1. Every day or year we have unbalanced people entering huge amounts of hormones causing their feelings to be imbalanced and every a new person is getting hurt leading to a life where kindness is locked off for awhile maybe forever.

    2. Our culture is about retribution many people don’t see proper steps to make things right or see people continue to do bad things. The easy solution is having things not exist anymore so you don’t get hurt again. If you trust bad people they may hurt you. Every decision has a consequence and rarely is it fully made whole even in forgiveness. You can’t give someone back their family, you can’t give someone back an extinct species, you can’t give back the world a stable climate. Of course people will hold hatred

  • tiredofsametab@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    As someone older than the public internet, these people and positions always existed. The difference in my opinion is that the 24-hour news cycle and online echo chambers combined with less in-person meeting, particularly with others in the community different to oneself has just further isolated and polarized people. There’s also an argument that heavily-biased cable “news” (which is oftentimes more “opinions” and sometimes “outright lies”) going unchecked has further polarized and divided people.

  • Lemminary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’ve found that people on the internet generally have low empathy. If it’s not animal or child abuse, the responses are all over the place.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t know about others, but I don’t think anybody deserves to die necessarily. It is faaaaar too merciful a fate for horrible people. I believe the worst of humanity - rapists, murderers, child abusers, etc. - deserve to live long, painful, oh so horrible lives.

    My choice would be to put them inside of a 3 meter cube of steel, welded shut, with only a hamster bottle for water, a hole in the bottom for waste, and a nutrient paste dispensing chute. When the prisoner eventually dies, it is bury the whole thing out in the desert to be their unmarked tomb.

  • Mango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    We have an extreme aversion to people who use manipulation tactics and want to be rid of them in the world.

  • RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Hiding behind keyboard is easy.

    Why should people be nice online when there are no tangible consequences to them being evil?

    • mecfs@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Because it isn’t just “nice” not to kill people for these things. It’s what you’d expect that large majority of people to think.

      • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The majority of people probably do think that… but they don’t consider other internet denizens people.

        • mecfs@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Hard for me not to. I’m disabled to the point I’m unable to communicate in real life (lost ability to speak or hear), and am bedridden. So communicating via texting/phone is my only way.

      • other_cat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m with you on the confusion because it’s like… I don’t feel the need to act this way, why do other people? What drives them that, in a void, they resort to these thoughts and behaviors? Is this who they really are, or is it an act, like doing an evil playthrough in a game. “I want to because I can here, and I can’t anywhere else?”

  • Count Regal Inkwell@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’ve once read somewhere that the human brain is only REALLY able to include about 100 people at any time in the list of “people one truly cares about”, that we are neurologically unprepared for the level of exposure to other people and their problems that we get nowadays.

    But I never bothered checking the veracity of that statement. It might be complete bullshit. A lot of stuff online is. Either way it’s irrelevant because if it IS indeed a problem, then “overexposure to someone else’s problems” is a concept at least as old as the printing press. What the internet adds to the mix is… Well…

    … It’s far easier to act like a psychotic jerk to someone that exists as a few paragraphs of glowy text on a slab of silicon and glass. You aren’t forced to look another human being in the eye while you talk about all the horrid shit you wish upon them.

    • I'm back on my BS 🤪@lemmy.autism.place
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Remembering from my social psychology classes in undergrad, I believe number is 150. But yes, that’s a good point. It’s one of the reasons people in major urban areas like NYC are capable of moving on with their lives when terrible things happen to those around them. We biologically can’t care about people once we reach our 150 limit. Btw, I think the authors of that theory argued that that number is one of the major differences between us and other social species.

  • crawancon@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    have you been to the mid east? don’t… if you’re gay or not a muslim. they don’t give two shits about human life. almost anywhere you go you can see it.

  • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Most people are led by emotions rather than cold and analytical reasoning. I believe everyone has the capability to think objectively but that capability gets clouded when ever they’re taken capture by strong emotions. That’s why they can reasonably consider an abstract but difficult trolley problem but then lose their minds when Elon says something stupid on Twitter.

    I want to believe that the majority of people around me would infact not want to cast death sentences haphazardly like that but rather they’re just expressing how they feel. It’s a way to signal to the group. “Elon is a nazi and deserves to die” roughly tanslates to “boo Elon”

    He who is without sin can cast the first stone.

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Life is cheap on the internet, because people feel far removed (and/or “above it”). Social media “engagement” algorithms divide and isolate people from each other.

    (I think as far as Lemmy is concerned, it’s just spillover / remnant behaviors from that stuff. There’s no engagement algorithm here other than what we bring in ourselves.)

    Here are a some studies on it from people a lot smarter than me. (Note these are more about general toxicity and hate speech and not zeroed in on your exact question, but they may be helpful).

    https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.744614/full

    https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/11547/10076

    https://scholars.org/contribution/countering-online-toxicity-and-hate-speech

    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10734-021-00787-4

    This one looks at the “why” question from a political POV:

    https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/2/11/pgad382/7405434?login=false

  • GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    They are children, or act like them.

    Jumping to absolutes is generally the wrong move.

  • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I tend to block those users very, very quickly. At best, they’re “knee-jerk” types that react violently without thinking. At worst, they’re sociopaths. There’s a lot in between those, but either way, with them blocked, this place is way more chill.

    • metaStatic@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      that’s a good way to construct an echo chamber and not notice that you’re no longer the majority and now society has lowered the bar for murder to include you.

        • metaStatic@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          They look around and only see support so they must be right .

          Because ignoring problems has worked so well in the past …

          • BowtiesAreCool@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            And allowing all of these people unchecked in your discourse allows them to keep going and gain steam. If more people blocked psychos maybe they’d shut up when they realise no one is listening

          • Random123@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            While i agree with your sentiment it really depends on the user. While you may be open to calling out bullshit violent users, perhaps this user has no intention to do the same and would prefer a more chill virtual environment

            • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Yep. Plus, people spewing violent bullshit aren’t going to be deterred by a counter keyboard warrior. So I just let them shout their shit into the void (as far as I’m aware of it, anyway).

              I’ve got enough stress IRL I don’t need that shit here.