Mediatization, polarization, and intolerance (between environments, media, and circulation)

Polarization as a structure of intolerance (a communicational issue) 293 ized situations and their history of origin as an important mark of asymmetry. Even more relevant is the fact that both sides of such a structure are unlikely to be balanced in terms of powers (politi- cal, physical, material, economic) and other conditions of action. It means that, despite a possible symmetry in the reducing code, polarization situations can be strongly asymmetric in social re- ality - placing one pole in the position of oppressor and the other in the position of oppressed. It is where the issue of intolerance appears with the most serious results. Inequality of forces leads to restraint, coercion without arguments, and the impediment of self-defense. With these characteristics, another difference will cor- respond to the internal articulation of each of both fields, with their participants and supporters. As diversity remains prob- ably more noticeable in the oppressed pole, there are reasons for articulation - but it can suffer, on the contrary, from internal lines of conflict and rupture. In the field of polarizing intolerance, the frame is dif- ferent. Undoubtedly, there is a factual diversity of group in- terests, categories, and social status, corporations, and lines of preferential action. How to explain the unique thought that seems to erase the plurality of perspectives from different cir- cuits? How do they forget their differences (particularly when removed from the nuclei of power) and face a joint oppressive front? Umberto Eco (1995) shows the aggregator potential, in certain political-economic-social situations, of frustrations and resentments in parts of society that consider themselves not met (or not recognized) in their expectations. Despite the vari- ety of problems and difficulties, if the different circuits are led to attribute the blame for the situation to a more/less identifiable part of society, a polarization dynamic can be there generated, which starts to feed itself. The “guilty” sector is constituted, in a generic and comprehensive reference, as responsible for all the problems of society: Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustra - tion. That is why one of the most typical features of