Causes and consequences.
It seems as if one of the logically induced consequences of an overblown populism, often used as a tool of power control, is violence. Both latent, platonic, verbal, hinted at, and direct, complete, aggressive, physical and armed. What are the causes?
Current society, in which applied populism is an organic modem of both vivendi and operandi, chooses as its most effective informational value the shortcut of appealing, word-poor messages that invariably link an out-of-context fact to a seemingly flash, simple solution. This form works partly because it tends to be easy to understand - unlike this text - but also because it is easier to disseminate. Examples of such simplifications are the proclamations about the possible significantly lower prices for electricity produced 'at home' than is available on the European Energy Exchange in Leipzig, or the proposals to end Russian aggression against Ukraine by ending support for the defenders of their homeland, i.e. de facto in exchange for Ukrainian sovereignty. Both with the illusory and argumentatively unsubstantiated effect of economic advantage for Czech citizens. This is an even bolder and more sophisticated way of presenting personal or partisan views. Sometimes a simple rejection of obvious facts without an accompanying proposal for a realistic solution is enough. Regarding the introduction or non-implementation of the euro currency, the implementation or rejection of a new long-term stable pension system, the view on the effectiveness of the Czech National Bank's taming of inflation, etc., it is not necessary to go to the trouble of proposing a therapy. It is enough to refuse and simply plead the interests of the citizens, responsible implementation of one's own electoral programme, or popular common sense. Subsequently, the information torso will grow new limbs of its own and will begin to fulfil its original task. So where does the violent breeding ground ferment? In what vat is it expanding? In the absence, or at least inadequate, public debate, with the absence of an intersection between the general interest of our country and that of the surrounding area, which must include the whole of Europe and, in a way, other areas. Behind the populist messages, generally presented without any relevant evidence, usually come claims that 'this is just the way it is', 'it is an indisputable fact', 'surveys prove that', 'experts on the subject agree'. The relativisation of competing views on the subject by these processes is common and more or less automatic. Once the initial capital has been exhausted, there is a difficult moment for followers, adherents and supporters of simple solutions when there is no way to proceed. This is where verbal violence, aggressive formulations, formulation junk are born. The only solution is the cultivation of the public communication space by all its direct participants. Argumentation, sourcing, moderation, compromise and responsibility. Opposing violence in any form. And even in the most basic, i.e. verbal, form.