I'm not sure what else someone would expect from modern social media. People keep thinking that the problem with the internet is that people are falling into the "wrong" crowd, or getting the "wrong" ideas. This is very old fashioned thinking and relies on real-world intuition. (imagine a good kid who fell into a bad group of friends and fell to a life of crime. This is effectively what a lot of people seem to think happens with online extremism.) The problem with extremism online is the methods of communication themselves.
Modern social media works by grouping and virally spreading ideas. This is similar in some ways to how communication has historically worked, except the pace and the reach does weird things to people. I'd argue that when you can share and like and there's an algorithmic feed, you're _always_ going to see moves towards extremism, group think, virality, outrage, etc. It's inherent to how these technologies work. In real-world communities, these effects are at play, but they are tempered by other factors. For example, just try going on a political rant against the person at who's home you're eating dinner. You wouldn't do it, you wouldn't want to be rude, to be a bad guest. But blurting out something outrageous or extreme online carries no such feedback. Combine that with a format that puts a LOT of people in contact with each other and then surfaces anything that is "engaging" and you're going to get the same sort of thing you have on Twitter / X.
The saddest part of the Twitter exodus post-Musk is that a lot of people seem to think that Twitter was a great place until Musk ruined it. It had a lot of the same sort of problems and evils, but perhaps for different targets and topics.