This is such a wonderfully ironic statement. It is through toleration that they are painted in a poor light.
Comment on Substack says it will not remove or demonetize Nazi content
RealFknNito@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Do not tolerate the intolerant.
Dra@lemmy.zip 10 months ago
ABC123itsEASY@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Tolerance is a social contract not a right. If you are tolerant, you earn tolerance for yourself. If you are intolerant, you don’t deserve tolerance yourself. It’s really not that complicated imo. I don’t feel the need to be tolerant of racist, bigoted people.
Zengen@lemmy.world 10 months ago
You dont. You just have to be tolerant of their existence because theirr existance is protected by right and law. If you punch a Nazi your still getting charged with assault and battery. If you kill a racist your still going to jail. We dont illegalize views and ideas in america.
Strykker@programming.dev 10 months ago
No you don’t have to tolerate their existence.
We fought a war against Nazis for a fucking reason.
Their ideals are shut and anyone who pushes them is worth less than the air they breath and the dirt they shit in.
Dra@lemmy.zip 10 months ago
This is ideal, but falls on a simple premise - everyone believes the other party is intolerant and that they are proudly righeous in behaving like a judge, jury and executioner.
Open and free critique means manipulation and grooming happens far less effectively, which neuters anything from its core. Society is the judge, but it must also be the metric it is measured against.
Tangent5280@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I feel like you’re just being contrarian for its own sake.
The first paragraph is just plain false. Everyone believes others to be intolerant? No, the parent comment just said you be intolerant to the people who prove themselves to be intolerant? “Judge, Jury, Executioner”? Word salad. And people should judge others - we already do that, thats how we know if we can trust someone and expend the energy spend guarding against them in more useful tasks. The second paragraph is just a whole lot of words that say nothing.
Also, I’m just following your advice:
Open and free critique means manipulation and grooming happens far less effectively, which neuters anything from its core.
Be better.
Baines@lemmy.world 10 months ago
paradox of tolerance
CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 10 months ago
paradox of tolerance
From the article…
“I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise.”
Baines@lemmy.world 10 months ago
there is nothing worthwhile lost silencing nazi bullshit from social media
linearchaos@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Toleration is a social contract. Those that break the contract should not be allowed to seek protection under it.