The reason I think it might be different here is the lack of group identity among the minority. It isn't the country vs. the city, or black vs. white, or Hutu vs. Tutsi. When the only rallying cry that the minority has is "society fucked me over" and not "Xi Jinping fucked me over" it's a lot harder to summon the pitchforks and tar. This works to at least a certain extent (to everyone's benefit) today. One theory for the drop in violence in Western society in recent decades is the extent to which being violent, even once, truly and completely ruins your life. If I punched a coworker in the face 65 years ago, I might have trouble finding a job in the same town again. If I were to punch one of my coworkers in the face tomorrow, I would never find another desk job anywhere ever again.
The problem is that violent me and all my ostracized violent friends, even if we all hang out together, don't even have a tangible cause to rebel against. An attack would be futile against either the employers who wouldn't hire me, or the search engine/social network who tells those employers not to hire me, or the government who encourages such behavior. Other than nuking the whole place to the ground, the only option is trying to earn the sympathy of people trained to believe you are monsters.
The dystopia we're imagining is the extension of this somewhat reasonable power structure (violent people and felons don't get comfy desk jobs) to every other socially undesirable behavior. So long as there isn't a greedy evil dictator who tries to accelerate the program, the gradual march of progress will be sufficient to moderate everyone's behavior. Our suppression of violent behavior didn't result in an underclass of very violent people who overthrew the government, and a large group of mildly inconvenienced moderately violent people, it just resulted in less violent people, and drove anyone on the fence far away from the prospect of violence.