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

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

      • egrets@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 months 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
            ·
            3 months 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
              ·
              3 months 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
                ·
                3 months ago

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