Political hate speech can have real-world fallout. After the alleged attack on Helen Haines, our leaders must act | Paul Daley

If the increasingly vituperative tenor of our public discourse, online and verbal, has fully trailed America’s into the murky dungeon of political violence with the appalling alleged attack on Helen Haines, Australia’s political class has only itself to blame.

Amid outpourings of concern from across the political spectrum (including from people who have fostered considerable vicious personal animus online and in the parliament) for the gravely injured and much-respected member for Indi, it is blindingly evident that the political square has long been utterly incapable of self-regulation.

There are no consequences for the abuse hurled across the chambers by Australia’s elected representatives beyond brief parliamentary suspension amid the invariably blokey guffaws. There are no consequences for political operatives here – students of the US experts of weaponising political hatred – who pursue their opponents and critics online with the most vicious, cruel and offensive personal attacks, sometimes under the purported guise of humour.

The ongoing traditional political race-call, for all of its marketability of conflict, meanwhile, reports both the anguish of the attack targets and the dismissive calls for them to effectively harden TF up. It’s just a bit of a joke, don’t you know, snowflakes? All’s fair in the tinderbox of politics. It’s not for the faint-hearted, after all.

Do the worst public excesses of personal invective by elected representatives seep into the broader community and license them to do the same? Undoubtedly. But do they transmogrify into actual political violence?

What has happened to Haines is still being investigated but has of course given elected representatives pause to stop and think. The question is, how will they act to change things?

The last fortnight or so in Australian politics is a particular a case in point – a burning example of the need to “turn the temperature down” in line with the prime minister’s repeated entreaties to parliamentary colleagues.

There have been verbal evocations of violence (of public execution) in the House of Representatives (defended by senior mainstream politicians) and (of a murder fantasy) at a major conference of purportedly “conservative’’ leading thinkers.

Social media echo and amplify the worst excesses of what passes for public/political discourse. It also too often contorts it into ideations and outright threats of violence against politicians and sometimes their staff, too often gendered and sexual. Security authorities have been consistently warning about the increasing threats to MPs, especially women.

Meanwhile media – old and new – have their own onerous responsibilities in this increasingly polarised space. Too many outlets are far from immune to picking sides and fomenting polarisation, given the marketability of political hate and division that drives the internet in times of news media convergence.

The federal government has shown a world-leading willingness to take on the major tech companies (albeit with limited efficacy, perhaps) to protect children from the worst excesses of social media. But is there a willingness to take on the same powerful forces to curb the no-less-insidious pervasion of political hate speech, whether from the elected or the hordes of nameless trolls and bot-factories swamping the online world?

The extremities of left and right will converge where there is any real – or perceived – threat to what passes as political speech freedom but too often lands into the purview of hate and violent threat.

Regardless of whether the hate speech which evokes or potentially spurs violence emanates from the extreme left or right – it is virulently pervasive in both – now is not the time for inertia.

Actions speak louder than words. And in coming weeks and days there will be a lot of words spoken by politicians about the tragic violence inflicted on perhaps federal parliament’s most respected and loved lower house member.

In times of crisis our federal and some state parliaments do national introspection well. But too often nothing comes of it. Now, amid all the calls for determined countermeasures to the hate and evocations of violence that have inveigled almost every medium of our body politic, it is time for leaders to act.

It’s impossible to legislate tolerance and kindness – although that is what’s needed most right now as more and more heat, more opinions and more anger flood the national discourse in the wake of this national tragedy.

If Haines’ terrible experience represents the moment of “national reckoning’’ that our political class and media insist it is, then it’s truly time for the paradigm shift to redemptive action.