Abstract. Behind the tokens of aggression and intolerance is the will of communicators and «their» understanding of moral values and principles, as well as the concept of freedom of communication and justice. The level of consciousness of the recipient, the speaker – is different: it regulates the maximization or minimization of the choice of communication tools. The maximum level of incorrectness of statements on social networks sometimes reaches administrative offenses – Article 173 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. The technology of influencing the mass consciousness of specially formed agents – bot farms, which produce in each discussed topic aggressive reactions of resistance to certain proposals of the positive in public life. The main purpose of such an information product is to manipulate the subject's consciousness, reorient it to the rejection of any state ideas, try to persuade the population to distrust the state, destroy the phenomenon of correctness in the interaction «population – power», sow dissatisfaction, develop insecurity. Destructive conflict and open confrontation are especially aggressively verbally realized in the military conflict – the Russian war in Ukraine, as well as in the raised issues of historical issues – Ukraine's territories (Crimea, Donbass), its cultural and historical artifacts, language and its national features of millennial origin. The «imperative of tolerance» in the theoretical sphere, educational and enlightening is actualized. It is important to normalize the consideration of cases involving insults.
1. Smaznova I. S. Violence and tolerance: a philosophical and legal study. Odessa, 2021. 40 p. 2. Ushno I. Spiritual and practical nature of business communication: author's ref. dis. for science. degree of Cand. philosopher. Science: special. 09.00.03 – «Social philosophy and philosophy of history». Kharkiv, 2006. 18 p. 3. Pliny the Younger. Selected letters / trans. Andrew Sodomora. Lviv: Аpriori, 2018. 184 p. 4. Rechytsky V. The imperative of tolerance – the origins and formation. Philosophy of law and general theory of law. 2016. № 1–2. Pp. 44–50. 5. Razmetaeva Y. S. Tolerance and «hate speech» in the information age. Philosophy of law and general theory of law. 2016. P. 101–106. 6. Eingorn N. The norm and pathology of tolerance in ethical and legal discourse. Philosophy of law and general theory of law. 2016. № 1–2. P. 61–66. 7. Tokarska A. S., Stepanyuk N. M. Analysis of logical contradictions in the interrogation protocol. Independence of Ukraine: human rights and national security: coll. mater. The first international. scientific-practical conference (Lviv, May 21, 2021) / National University «Lviv Polytechnic»; upor. L. V. Yarmol. Lviv: Halytska vydavnycha spilka, 2021. P 122–125. 8. Tokarska A. S, Ivasechko N. Yu. Problems of politeness in the discourse of a lawyer: a critical analysis. Independence of Ukraine: human rights and national security: coll. mater. The first international. scientific-practical conference (Lviv, May 21, 2021) / National University «Lviv Polytechnic»; upor. L. V. Yarmol. Lviv: Halytska vydavnycha spilka, 2021. P. 119–122. 9. Tokarska A. Modern trend communication: the realities of truth and post-truth. Philosophical, methodological and psychological problems of law. Proceedings of the VIII All-Ukrainian scientific-theoretical conference (Kyiv, November 26, 2020) / editor. V. V. Cherney, M. V. Kostytsky, S. D. Gusarev and others. Kyiv: Nation. Academy of Internal Affairs, 2020. 322 p.