Comments posted on social media platforms in reaction to three recent stories in Malta have been deeply disturbing.
The first story involved a Brazilian man who claimed that police prevented him from kissing another man while celebrating carnival. The second concerned war-torn Ukraine.
The third involved a Chinese-born millionaire who bought Maltese citizenship and who is set to live his dream and travel to space.
The vitriol directed at people who are essentially the victims depicted in these stories was incredible.
Many universally branded the LGBT community as “filth”, while the Ukrainians were smeared as “Nazis” and “scroungers” who should stop bothering us about their war. Meanwhile, the racist abuse hurled at the man daring to dream of going to space became so vile that we had no choice but to take down our Facebook post.
They were stark reminders of how stereotyping, victim-shaming, and outright hate have become normalised in today’s hyper-socialised world with no shades of grey.
The racist abuse hurled at the man daring to dream of going to space became so vile that we had no choice but to take down our Facebook post
While critical thinking and constructive discussion have long been in short supply, the level of hate speech and blatant misinformation has increased dramatically in recent months.
Unsurprisingly, the proliferation of online hate and disinformation coincides with the election of Donald Trump in the US.
His flippant, xenophobic, anti-LGBTQ+, and anti-media rhetoric has fuelled extremists across the world and effectively gave carte blanche to conspiracy theorists, hatemongers and anybody who might have previously hesitated to voice their prejudices.
The proliferation of online and public hate against minorities – from migrants to the LGBT community – is becoming alarming.
But it is not just the Trump factor that is causing the problem. Social media algorithms are feeding off factors such as economic uncertainty and social divisions to amplify the potential danger.
The American organisation Stop AAPI Hate reported an alarming rise in racism and violence against people of Asian descent, with violent threats online spiking nearly 60 per cent between November and December.
A 2018 academic study found that while rhetoric does not necessarily change attitudes, it emboldens individuals to express and act on views they had once hidden.
When Trump engaged in anti-Muslim discourse in 2016, there was a direct correlation between increased anti-Muslim hate speech online and a 32 per cent rise in hate crimes against Muslims.
Fast forward a few years and Meta has now changed its policy to allow more hateful speech against specific groups, with a noticeable and particular focus on enabling more speech challenging LGBTQ+ rights.
A University of London study, covering nine countries, found that in just two years, X has become the hub of political abuse and misuse, where adversaries, dissenters and moderates are increasingly treated as “enemies”.
The repercussions of this toxic rhetoric extend beyond the US.
Around the world, some leaders have started adopting Trump’s language and feel emboldened to push similar narratives. It is a global shift that could have dire consequences everywhere, threatening to undo years of progress, including Malta, which has made significant strides in social liberties in recent years.
Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of democracy, but it ceases to be a right when it is weaponised to incite hatred and violence.
Many have become immune to hate speech. Others want to engage but feel they cannot compete with the deluge of conspiracy theories and hate speech.
Defeatist attitudes will only mean the echo chambers of hate and misinformation will grow even louder.
People must stand and speak out more forcefully in favour of inclusive societies, resisting the hate-mongering that is occupying a lot of the social media space. It is equally essential for the political class to call out hate and fight against its proliferation before they become its biggest victim.
Some critics will dismiss these concerns as a fightback against ‘woke-ism’, but this is not about ideological labels. It is about common respect and basic decency, even towards those we strongly disagree with.