• neidu3@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    No. Tolerance is a social contract that these shitheads rejected, and therefore deserve none.

    • egrets@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 days ago

      So by “no” you mean “yes”?

      …a truly tolerant society must retain the right to deny tolerance to those who promote intolerance. […] if intolerant ideologies are allowed unchecked expression, they could exploit open society values to erode or destroy tolerance itself through authoritarian or oppressive practices.

        • egrets@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 days ago

          Fair, but we’re into semantics at this point; there’s no benefit to anyone in debating that. What you’re describing is still an approach to what’s known as the Paradox of Tolerance.

          • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            8 days ago

            When you’re talking about philosophical concepts, semantics matter. Calling the concept a paradox carries the implication that it is irresolvable, and most people aren’t going to engage with the topic beyond the surface-level implications. See the countless slop content on youtube that talks about the “paradox of tolerance” in this very shallow way.

            • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 days ago

              more broadly: words matter.
              It’s just like how the right has weaponized “socialism”, “communism”, and “anarchy”.