Regarding the "Hou Jiangge case," I would like to share some personal thoughts.

Hello!

I can tell you're a perceptive and thoughtful person with your own unique views on social phenomena. You're also sincere and kind, which I admire.

You made a great point about how people often don't care about the truth. They just believe what they want to believe! I couldn't agree with you more. That's why there are so many different opinions on a news event.

It's also possible that what we see is only one aspect of an event, which means there's an opportunity for us to discover the truth together! We're often influenced by the media, which means there's a chance we're seeing things from a limited perspective.

I have also discovered that this matter has attracted your attention for a good reason! From a certain perspective, it has activated your associations with your own traumatic events. You hate the herd mentality of people jumping on the bandwagon and the indifferent onlookers.

The online environment is just like the real one! It's up to us to keep it running smoothly and keep things rational and kind. But we all know there'll always be a few blind followers and dissenting voices, so the world is a complex and exciting place!

As ordinary people, we have the incredible opportunity to tap into our own power. When you think the world is beautiful, or you think the world is cruel, remember that it has nothing to do with the world itself. The world will always change and operate according to its own laws. It will never change because of your perceptions and emotions.

Absolutely! All we can do is take care of ourselves first. For example, try not to get too involved in such incidents and generate too many negative emotions. Deal with the trauma within ourselves, try to heal as much as possible, so that we have more mental energy. And then, just watch as our voices are heard by more people and we can influence more people!

Second, do what you can! For example, first of all, be clear-headed, rational, and kind.

I'm so happy we got to discuss this topic, Red Rain. Thanks for sharing!

There have been many tragic cases of violence in real life and online, which are very distressing and hard to forget. Whether it's Jiang Ge or Liu Xin, the truth is that only the facts themselves can tell us what happened. As bystanders, we have no power to make a difference.

If she is cyberbullied, then the people who carry out the cyberbullying are cruel people. There is no doubt about it. On the Internet, everyone may be a rabble, stomping on stilts and bombarding others indiscriminately, damaging their reputation and emotions.

Let's be real, public opinion can hurt a lot of people. It probably did when you were a victim of school violence. People will say all kinds of nonsense about you without knowing the truth. Even freedom of speech doesn't mean you can say whatever you like.

The silent "acquiescence" of passers-by may be their last word. Bystanders who do nothing are not in a position to do justice either. Such behavior is unacceptable. Inaction is sometimes very disgusting, even though they cannot be called accomplices.

If bystanders don't speak out for victims, you're letting the world down. You know online violence can harm you, and it can cause trauma. Get psychological counseling to move on from the pain. It'll take time to say goodbye to online violence. Not all platforms are objective or rational, so keep your own observations and guard against it. Come on.

What's the question?

Greetings, inquirer.

My name is Yi Ming, and I am a heart exploration coach.

I would be pleased to engage in discussion on this topic with you and with anyone else who may be interested.

1. It is the obligation and responsibility of all parties to maintain an online environment that is conducive to civil discourse and respectful interactions.

A substantial number of real-life incidents have demonstrated the significant adverse effects of cyberbullying.

This is a topic within the field of social psychology.

On numerous occasions, an individual's attitude does not serve as the root cause of their actions, but rather as a post facto rationale for them.

In one experiment, there was a pervasive anti-Chinese sentiment in the United States during the 1930s.

In 1933, psychologist Rapier inquired of the proprietors of 128 hotels and restaurants in the United States as to their willingness to accept Chinese individuals in their establishments. The response was that over 90% of them would not do so.

However, when a psychologist actually entered a store with a young Chinese couple, only one of the 128 stores refused them.

A substantial body of research has demonstrated that

The relationship between attitude and behavior is not straightforward and is subject to a number of external influences.

Additionally, many netizens utilize online violence as a means of expressing their attitudes.

In general, people tend to empathize with those who are disadvantaged.

Moreover, some reports adopt disparate foci and present wholly distinct facts.

This brings to mind the film Searching, which deals with a similar scenario.

In the context of the Internet, if one is not cautious, one may unwittingly become complicit in a given situation.

This is why there are frequently instances of events being reversed on the Internet.

I concur with your assertion that maintaining rationality is crucial.

Those engaged in online discussions pertaining to contentious issues should endeavour to maintain a stance of objective and rational discourse.

Although it may appear otherwise, this approach is beneficial for the individual and the broader online community.

Given that we are all participants in this phenomenon,

2. It is imperative to recognize instances of online violence.

Due to the anonymity and openness of the internet, it is a fast, widespread, and often uncontrollable phenomenon.

Such actions can cause significant harm to the individual in question.

In the case of Jiang Ge, no party emerged triumphant.

This is also applicable to instances of online violence.

The prevalence of online violence can influence the values of Internet users.

The maintenance of correct values is essential for the normal functioning of human social order and the creation of a beautiful and harmonious society.

It presents a significant social risk.

What motivates individuals to perpetrate online violence?

This phenomenon is closely related to psychology.

For example, individuals may be prone to exhibiting aggressive behavior, which they may choose to express online.

Alternatively, it may serve as a conduit for expressing an entirely disparate aspect of one's identity.

It is therefore imperative to disseminate psychological knowledge, reinforce the legislative framework governing the internet, and facilitate access to more efficacious outlets for the alleviation of psychological distress, rather than perpetuating online violence.

This may necessitate the input of multiple parties within society.

As the classic work The Crowd from many years ago indicated, when an individual is isolated, they possess distinctive individual characteristics. However, when this person becomes part of a group, their individuality is subsumed by the group, and their thoughts are replaced by the collective mindset.

Furthermore, when a group is formed, it exhibits emotional, subjective, and low-IQ characteristics.

It is possible to gain clarity on this matter.

There are numerous aspects of this topic that warrant further examination.

As a minimum, it is possible to begin with oneself and endeavour to sustain a positive online environment.

Hello, I'm Strawberry.

I have heard about the Jiang Ge incident and I know that everyone is different. We all have different personalities and experiences, so we deal with things in different ways.

Jiang Ge was a good kid, enthusiastic, and optimistic. These are her strengths, but they can also become her weaknesses. For example, Liu Xin's boyfriend broke up with her after they had relationship problems and had emotional problems. Jiang Ge, as Liu Xin's best friend, felt that she had the ability and obligation to help her. However, she saw the world too simply and never imagined that her enthusiasm would cost her her life.

When you encounter a troll, arguing with them only provokes more antisocial behavior. Know your limits and don't engage with people who are out to cause trouble.

Jiang Ge's mother loved her child with all her heart. Every parent who has lost a child knows the pain. Jiang Ge's mother wanted nothing more than fairness and justice for her daughter. If Liu Xin's family had treated Jiang Ge with respect, Jiang Ge's mother would not have acted the way she did. She would not have been trapped in this hurt forever.

The famous American psychologist Albert Ellis (A. Ellis) provides us with a clear and straightforward "golden rule": treat others as you would like them to treat you.

In real life, many people have unreasonable and absolute expectations. They believe that they should be treated a certain way or that others must like and accept them. However, they themselves cannot "like others." When these absolute expectations are difficult to achieve, they often feel anger and hostility towards others. This constitutes the "anti-golden rule."

Jiang Ge was a warm-hearted, optimistic, helpful girl. Not everyone was like her, and that was a fact. Therefore, the behavior of Liu Xin towards Jiang Ge, whom she had helped, was also one of the factors that Jiang Ge's mother could not accept. She felt that if her daughter treated others this way, then she should be treated the same way.

I firmly believe that facing online violence will cause us to suffer greatly. This leads me to my question: how can we deal with online violence?

One way to deal with this is to adopt an attitude of indifference.

A small comment can also set off a big storm. I don't pay attention to celebrity affairs, but I can tell from the internet that the attacks between fans and haters hurt the celebrity the most.

If your comments or posts are attracting attacks, don't worry. You're not in the wrong. Some people are just antisocial or looking for an excuse to vent. Delete the posts and comments, stop responding to the attacks, and ignore them. In time, they'll fade into oblivion.

2. Release yourself.

If you are right, accept that some people will have different ideas and opinions because of their different education. In addition to ignoring the other person's attacks, you also need to relieve yourself. The other person is a stranger. For people you don't care about, there is no need to take what they say to heart.

Think carefully about whether what you express is likely to be misunderstood by others. If so, admit your mistake and explain it. It's not your job to worry about whether others accept it or not. Just do your best.

3. Talk to someone.

Different opinions can lead to doubt. You may even think that what you're doing is wrong. Talk to someone you trust or like. Ask questions. Confide in a platform like this one. Get things off your chest. Hear what others think. See how your views differ. You'll understand the differences and the problems you haven't seen. You'll get different solutions from other people's perspectives and mindsets.

I am confident that my answer will be helpful to the original poster. Best wishes.

I am so inspired and encouraged by the fact that people are willing to write books about this kind of thing! It just goes to show that there are others out there who feel the same way and want to make a difference. I am really grateful for that. I am not a radical, and I don't like to be in the limelight, but in this matter, I have already taken a stand!

I can also feel that this is a mess, but I'm excited to see what impact this incident will have on the public. Online violence is the selling of hatred, and I'm ready to stand up against it. I can focus on what I like, but I'm also ready to stand up for myself. If Liu Xin had not lied from the beginning, who would vindicate her after five years of online violence?

Maybe everyone is being misled by public opinion. This reminds me of the time I was subjected to violence on campus. One person took the lead, a group of people jeered, and there were also some indifferent passers-by. In this matter, does the "tacit approval" of passers-by count as an accomplice?

I don't know, but at least I won't allow myself to be such a bystander. More than ten years ago, I was disappointed in the world, and now I'm excited to be part of the change! I oppose online violence and support the truth!

In observing this incident, I feel that many people don't care about the truth. They just believe what they want to believe. It is only by listening to both sides that we can know the truth. I feel that everyone on this platform is reasonable and friendly. If my position is wrong, I will apologize with practical actions. I'm excited to hear your thoughts!