The paradox of tolerance is a philosophical concept suggesting that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance; thereby undermining the very principle of tolerance.
How do you determine the threshold for when it can no longer be tolerated? How do you put this into use without being the very thing you are trying to eliminate?
The paradox of tolerance is a philosophical concept suggesting that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance; thereby undermining the very principle of tolerance.
How do you determine the threshold for when it can no longer be tolerated? How do you put this into use without being the very thing you are trying to eliminate?
Probably when they weaponize tolerance of their intolerance to further their intolerance and cause objective harm.
Popper says it’s when they resort to “fist or pistol” to advance their agenda. That’s how you know, when they actually resort to violence.
By then it’s too late and that’s just a revolution.
Well what it means is that if you resort to fist or pistol first, then you are the bad guy, and should not be tolerated.
Maybe it’s difficult to establish a precise threshold, but Nazis in general and MAGA in particular are way beyond any reasonable one.
How do you identify Nazis or MAGA, and what level of violence is appropriate to stop them?
I’ve just found one: you
If so, what level of violence are you threatening me with?
Just blocking you, piece of Nazi shit.
Great conversation, have a nice day.
Its pretty easy to spot
The Moment someone tells me what to do, without telling me in what way my actions are actually hurting someone else, I tell them to fuck off
![(https://lemmy.ca/pictrs/image/6058c6dc-0505-42ce-a732-f89b9f19e5ac.jpeg)]