There's sort of a parallel question which is: for all the hate directed towards various public figures, why hasn't anyone taken them out, or even suggested it in a less than joking way?

Yes, that too. But I think that intention to save somebody still have higher moral position, than doing harm due to hate.

I could understand why physical implementation of hate (even in form of throwing rotten tomatoes) could be condemned in society, so at least people will hide such thoughts.

But with saving somebody from evil, I can't find any reason why it could be absent in social media.

One s that people are victims of learned helplessness and too pussified to actually take any action.

Yes, this is important factor.

The other is that we're seeing real human nature, and properly functioning humans find violence abhorrent.

But saving one of your own is an instinct, and it is in the core than human nature. That's what make me puzzled.

relying--rightly or wrongly--on all the various social institutions we have created over the centuries to peacefully resolve disputes.

I think this could be the main reason. And it explain differences between West and Russia. We don't rely on social institutions as much as West, for the good or bad, so forcefully saving brother-in-arms from corrupted social institution is just one of the options. But that changes here too, into that full reliance.

Not shure that tendency for relying on social institutions is a good thing. It is like a damaged immune system, when some disease could attack you and you have no any backup plan.

Interesting, that eliminating corruption create more trust in social institutions, so people rely on them more and more, and then lose that ability to fight back against them. And when corruption back again, there nothing people could do.

Indeed, the path to hell is paved with good intentions.

There's sort of a parallel question which is: for all the hate directed towards various public figures, why hasn't anyone taken them out, or even suggested it in a less than joking way?

Yes, that too. But I think that intention to save somebody still have higher moral position, than doing harm due to hate.

I could understand why physical implementation of hate (even in form of throwing rotten tomatoes) could be condemned in society, so at least people will hide such thoughts.

But with saving somebody from evil, I can't find any reason why it could be absent in social media.

One s that people are victims of learned helplessness and too pussified to actually take any action.

Yes, this is important factor.

The other is that we're seeing real human nature, and properly functioning humans find violence abhorrent.

But saving one of your own is an instinct, and it is in the core than human nature. That's what make me puzzled.

relying--rightly or wrongly--on all the various social institutions we have created over the centuries to peacefully resolve disputes.

I think this could be the main reason. And it explain differences between West and Russia. We don't rely on social institutions as much as West, for the good or bad, so forcefully saving brother-in-arms from corrupted social institution is just one of the options. But that changes here too, into that full reliance.

Not shure that tendency for relying on social institutions is a good thing. It is like a damaged immune system, when some disease could attack you and you have no any backup plan.

Interesting, that eliminating corruption create more trust in social institutions, so people rely on them more and more, and then lose that ability to fight back. And when corruption back again, there nothing people could do.

Indeed, the path to hell is paved with good intentions.