What is tolerance?

[Immanuel Can]

I think tolerance is a virtue, however, what does one do with intolerance if one believes in tolerance? Does one tolerate intolerant people or does one not tolerate intolerant people?

"Tolerance" comes from "toleo," in Latin. And literally, it comes from a word that means, "to put up," or by extension, "to put up [with]."

A "tolerant" person is one who "puts up with" people who say and do things that he, himself does not agree with. That's very important. To be a "tolerant" person, one has to say, like Voltaire's biographer, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

One does not need any tolerance at all for things one likes. If somebody gives you an ice cream cone, it doesn't call for any tolerance on your part (unless you're lactose intolerant, and it's done to poison you, one might suppose ). Nice things are always accepted, and tax the recipient not at all. But the more you hate or dislike what it is that the other person is saying or doing, the greater tolerance is required in order to endure it.

If you are a "tolerant" person, then, you believe in a very widely-open market of ideas. You believe that everybody has a right to speak, even if you find their speech odious and reprehensible. But if you accept only what you find pleasant, then you're not a tolerant person. You don't need to be. There's nothing to tolerate.

Interestingly, today, it is the Left that is most obviously intolerant. The curtailing of free speech, the rise of political correctness, the de-voicing and de-platforming of the opposition, the suppression of criticisms of the establishment...all are hallmarks of an increasingly vicious intolerance, ironically offered in the name of "inclusion," or "hate-suppression," or "protecting from verbal violence," or some such other alleged virtue. But the willingness to put up with the declarations of "the other side" is the true mark of a tolerant society.

We are increasingly NOT one.

Do you tolerate the left, IC? Or are you intolerant of the left? That is the question I'm posing in essence.

Absolutely. I don't want to silence the Left. I want to show how dangerously stupid their ideas are. But I don't want violence against them personally, or even to deny them the right to air their foolishness. Why would I? In fact, the more they talk, the better it is for me; because their ideas are so dumb and dysfunctional, that eventually their folly becomes manifest to everybody.

For example, let's teach the real history of the USSR, of China, of Vietnam, Cambodia, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, Albania, Zimbabwe...let's teach every child in school exactly what Socialism has done, and how, and why, and how awful it's always been. Let's give them the statistics, the body counts, and teach them to recognize the nature of propaganda, and to see the economic consequences of policies built on faulty but "well-meaning" ideology. And let's teach them that impartially, because the facts really do speak for themselves, and most eloquently.

So letting them talk works for me. My only challenge is to keep them from suppressing the opposition, so that their ideas become the only ones on the market, and people start believing them uncritically. That's when we have a problem.

[Gary Childress]

"Tolerance" comes from "toleo," in Latin. And literally, it comes from a word that means, "to put up," or by extension, "to put up [with]."

A "tolerant" person is one who "puts up with" people who say and do things that he, himself does not agree with. That's very important. To be a "tolerant" person, one has to say, like Voltaire's biographer, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

One does not need any tolerance at all for things one likes. If somebody gives you an ice cream cone, it doesn't call for any tolerance on your part (unless you're lactose intolerant, and it's done to poison you, one might suppose ). Nice things are always accepted, and tax the recipient not at all. But the more you hate or dislike what it is that the other person is saying or doing, the greater tolerance is required in order to endure it.

If you are a "tolerant" person, then, you believe in a very widely-open market of ideas. You believe that everybody has a right to speak, even if you find their speech odious and reprehensible. But if you accept only what you find pleasant, then you're not a tolerant person. You don't need to be. There's nothing to tolerate.

Interestingly, today, it is the Left that is most obviously intolerant. The curtailing of free speech, the rise of political correctness, the de-voicing and de-platforming of the opposition, the suppression of criticisms of the establishment...all are hallmarks of an increasingly vicious intolerance, ironically offered in the name of "inclusion," or "hate-suppression," or "protecting from verbal violence," or some such other alleged virtue. But the willingness to put up with the declarations of "the other side" is the true mark of a tolerant society.

We are increasingly NOT one.

Do you tolerate the left, IC? Or are you intolerant of the left? That is the question I'm posing in essence.

Absolutely. I don't want to silence the Left. I want to show how dangerously stupid their ideas are. But I don't want violence against them personally, or even to deny them the right to air their foolishness. Why would I? In fact, the more they talk, the better it is for me; because their ideas are so dumb and dysfunctional, that eventually their folly becomes manifest to everybody.

For example, let's teach the real history of the USSR, of China, of Vietnam, Cambodia, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, Albania, Zimbabwe...let's teach every child in school exactly what Socialism has done, and how, and why, and how awful it's always been. Let's give them the statistics, the body counts, and teach them to recognize the nature of propaganda, and to see the economic consequences of policies built on faulty but "well-meaning" ideology. And let's teach them that impartially, because the facts really do speak for themselves, and most eloquently.

So letting them talk works for me. My only challenge is to keep them from suppressing the opposition, so that their ideas become the only ones on the market, and people start believing them uncritically. That's when we have a problem.

Well, back in the days before this there were McCarthyism and red scares and a lot of reasonable people were branded as "commies" by the same people who branded the New Deal as "communist". There's a point where the right can become scary as well.

[mickthinks]

Pornstar Mia Khalifa, star performer at pornhub.com, giving a lecture at Oxford University:

She explained how she successfully uses her mouth to make more money.

Where did you get your information from, god? Because it’s wrong. Do you think you might be overly tolerant of inferior and malign news-sources?

Please share a link to one or two of the web-pages you’ve used, so we can judge for ourselves.

[Immanuel Can]

Do you tolerate the left, IC? Or are you intolerant of the left? That is the question I'm posing in essence.

Absolutely. I don't want to silence the Left. I want to show how dangerously stupid their ideas are. But I don't want violence against them personally, or even to deny them the right to air their foolishness. Why would I? In fact, the more they talk, the better it is for me; because their ideas are so dumb and dysfunctional, that eventually their folly becomes manifest to everybody.

For example, let's teach the real history of the USSR, of China, of Vietnam, Cambodia, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, Albania, Zimbabwe...let's teach every child in school exactly what Socialism has done, and how, and why, and how awful it's always been. Let's give them the statistics, the body counts, and teach them to recognize the nature of propaganda, and to see the economic consequences of policies built on faulty but "well-meaning" ideology. And let's teach them that impartially, because the facts really do speak for themselves, and most eloquently.

So letting them talk works for me. My only challenge is to keep them from suppressing the opposition, so that their ideas become the only ones on the market, and people start believing them uncritically. That's when we have a problem.

Well, back in the days before this there were McCarthyism and red scares and a lot of reasonable people were branded as "commies" by the same people who branded the New Deal as "communist". There's a point where the right can become scary as well.

We don't need to imagine any; the real "Commies" are scary enough. They've killed more people than anything in history, and by orders of magnitude...140 million in the last century alone, and I'm certain many more to come. But I'd even want "Commies" to be allowed to speak, so long as they're not advocating actual violence. I'm not for banning anybody, unless they are doing that. Then, it becomes a public safety issue. Short of that, let them all speak, and let the listener beware.

[Alexiev]

"Tolerance" comes from "toleo," in Latin. And literally, it comes from a word that means, "to put up," or by extension, "to put up [with]."

A "tolerant" person is one who "puts up with" people who say and do things that he, himself does not agree with. That's very important. To be a "tolerant" person, one has to say, like Voltaire's biographer, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

One does not need any tolerance at all for things one likes. If somebody gives you an ice cream cone, it doesn't call for any tolerance on your part (unless you're lactose intolerant, and it's done to poison you, one might suppose ). Nice things are always accepted, and tax the recipient not at all. But the more you hate or dislike what it is that the other person is saying or doing, the greater tolerance is required in order to endure it.

If you are a "tolerant" person, then, you believe in a very widely-open market of ideas. You believe that everybody has a right to speak, even if you find their speech odious and reprehensible. But if you accept only what you find pleasant, then you're not a tolerant person. You don't need to be. There's nothing to tolerate.

Interestingly, today, it is the Left that is most obviously intolerant. The curtailing of free speech, the rise of political correctness, the de-voicing and de-platforming of the opposition, the suppression of criticisms of the establishment...all are hallmarks of an increasingly vicious intolerance, ironically offered in the name of "inclusion," or "hate-suppression," or "protecting from verbal violence," or some such other alleged virtue. But the willingness to put up with the declarations of "the other side" is the true mark of a tolerant society.

We are increasingly NOT one.

This is nonsense. The left is not banning books from school libraries; the right is. Florida has passed laws -- signed by DeSantis -- removing more than 300 books from school libraries. https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/rou ... t/3113184/

The left is "intolerant" (in the sense of unsympathetic toward) hate speech, the "N: word, and verbal bullying of minorities. It is the right wing, though, that is intolerant in the sense of "not putting up with" students checking books out of school libraries of which they disapprove. Perhaps, given your opinions about lying, you should avoid it yourself.

I'll grant that the left is less tolerant of armed mobs trying to subvert American Democracy than the right wing. Some things shouldn't be tolerated.

[Immanuel Can]

The left is not banning books from school libraries; the right is.

Who put the perverted books in children's libraries? The Left. And the right isn't "banning" any of them. Those books aren't banned from being sold or consumed by adult perverts anywhere. They're simply not allowing the Leftist groomers to have unfettered access to vulnerable children, in a public institution funded by their taxes.

Seems right to me. Have you ever heard the phrase "age appropriate"?

[Sculptor]

1. : capacity to endure pain or hardship : endurance, fortitude, stamina. 2. a. : sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own.

Tolerance was one of the virtues of the European Enlightenment (albeit religious tolerance in most specific cases). After the Enlightenment toleration has been more broadly applied to various non-religious lifestyles and behaviors that are different from one's own. But is tolerance a virtue?

What about intolerant people who are bigoted and prejudiced and perhaps dangerous toward others around them. Are such people as that to be tolerated? And if not, then what? What if they refuse to change their minds and remain intolerant? Should that be tolerated?

Is toleration the same as acceptance? Is toleration itself practiced through enduring hardship from others who are intolerant? How does one practice tolerance toward intolerance?

And perhaps more importantly, is tolerance viable? Or does the first one to eradicate all those s/he does not tolerate become the 'winner take all' in life?

Yes Tolerance was the watch word for Europe to escape and move on from the conflicts of the so-called Reflormation and Counter Reformation which left millions dead from religious bigotry.
However for some people Toerance was not acceptible and many found the Americas (most North as the South was Catholic land) a place wherein they could persue their religious bigotry.
The Pilgrim Fathers and other religious cults sucn as fakers, quakers, and shakers, unitarians, baptists and so on aninfinitem feld Europe to continue their bigotry.
Soon after the war of Independace the American government had to respond to religious violence by adding to the constitution the separation of church and state and to bar religion from government office.

[godelian]

Pornstar Mia Khalifa, star performer at pornhub.com, giving a lecture at Oxford University:

She explained how she successfully uses her mouth to make more money.

Where did you get your information from, god? Because it’s wrong. Do you think you might be overly tolerant of inferior and malign news-sources?

Please share a link to one or two of the web-pages you’ve used, so we can judge for ourselves.

Google search for "mia khalifa oxford university"

Some search results:

https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/cele ... b457a.html

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest ... y-29887186

[godelian]

Pornstar Mia Khalifa, star performer at pornhub.com, giving a lecture at Oxford University:

She explained how she successfully uses her mouth to make more money.

Where did you get your information from, god? Because it’s wrong. Do you think you might be overly tolerant of inferior and malign news-sources?

Please share a link to one or two of the web-pages you’ve used, so we can judge for ourselves.

Apparently, Mia Khalifa is really good at what she does. Her videos consistently top the porn charts. She clearly has fantastic skills in the field. The bigger the sexual organ she gets to play with, the more visibly excited she is to show off her magical abilities! Of course, some people will claim that "she was forced" to perform so well. Nowadays, she even denies any responsibility. She did not do it for the money! She is not just a cheap bitch! No, no, "they" made her do it! She is a "victim"!

[Gary Childress]

Pornstar Mia Khalifa, star performer at pornhub.com, giving a lecture at Oxford University:

She explained how she successfully uses her mouth to make more money.

Where did you get your information from, god? Because it’s wrong. Do you think you might be overly tolerant of inferior and malign news-sources?

Please share a link to one or two of the web-pages you’ve used, so we can judge for ourselves.

Apparently, Mia Khalifa is really good at what she does. Her videos consistently top the porn charts. She clearly has fantastic skills in the field. The bigger the sexual organ she gets to play with, the more visibly excited she is to show off her magical abilities! Of course, some people will claim that "she was forced" to perform so well. Nowadays, she even denies any responsibility. She did not do it for the money! She is not just a cheap bitch! No, no, "they" made her do it! She is a "victim"!

How do you know all this about her? I mean, porn can be addictive, but to blame the actresses for an addiction probably isn't a wise discernment (if that's the case). Or do you just hate women in general? Like I've said before, I can understand an intense reaction against getting screwed over in life, it happens but as a person living in the West, wanting to destroy us over whatever happened to you in court (or whatever) probably isn't a rational reaction.

[godelian]

How do you know all this about her? I mean, porn can be addictive, but to blame the actresses for an addiction probably isn't a wise discernment (if that's the case).

Porn addicts are themselves responsible for what they do. They cannot blame the porn actresses, and they never do. Have you ever heard a man blame a porn actress for his porn addiction?

Or do you just hate women in general?

Ha ha ah! If you hold any woman accountable for anything at all, then you hate her, because women can do no wrong! That is simply another ridiculously misguided western view.

You see, I have no problem with Mia Khalifa choosing or wanting to be a porn actress. It is her life, isn't it?

However, when she regrets it, she cannot just turn around, deny any accountability for her own choices and other mistakes, and then claim that it was someone else's fault. Should these porn companies now get prosecuted for "human trafficking" because Mia Khalifa regrets her own damn choice?

Like I've said before, I can understand an intense reaction against getting screwed over in life, it happens but as a person living in the West, wanting to destroy us over whatever happened to you in court (or whatever) probably isn't a rational reaction.

I regret what I have done to myself and now let's shift the blame onto someone else!

Outside the West, they resolutely reject that strategy. If you regret what you chose to do, then fine, but it is still your own problem. You can't simply blame other people or demand reparations from them.

The West must not be allowed to impose its misguided views onto other countries. There needs to be very serious push back. I live in SE Asia now. Imagine that SE Asia also succumbs to the western bullshit, where am I going to go next? At some point, we simply must make a stand.

For example, Dubai has recently caved in to the EU blackmailing policy of demanding a "minimum global corporate income tax" and has introduced a 9% corporate income tax. Otherwise, the EU would expel them from the SWIFT interbanking messaging system (as they did with the Russian Federation). So far so good for sovereign countries deciding about their own laws! Why should people in other countries be taxed just because it suits the EU? As I see it, Dubai must now help the Russia-China-led axis of resistance to decisively bankrupt the European banking system. In my opinion, they must do this at any cost: the Euro must be destroyed. Seriously, there should be no such thing as a free lunch.

[Gary Childress]

How do you know all this about her? I mean, porn can be addictive, but to blame the actresses for an addiction probably isn't a wise discernment (if that's the case).

Porn addicts are themselves responsible for what they do. They cannot blame the porn actresses, and they never do. Have you ever heard a man blame a porn actress for his porn addiction?

Or do you just hate women in general?

Ha ha ah! If you hold any woman accountable for anything at all, then you hate her, because women can do no wrong! That is simply another ridiculously misguided western view.

You see, I have no problem with Mia Khalifa choosing or wanting to be a porn actress. It is her life, isn't it?

However, when she regrets it, she cannot just turn around, deny any accountability for her own choices and other mistakes, and then claim that it was someone else's fault. Should these porn companies now get prosecuted for "human trafficking" because Mia Khalifa regrets her own damn choice?

Like I've said before, I can understand an intense reaction against getting screwed over in life, it happens but as a person living in the West, wanting to destroy us over whatever happened to you in court (or whatever) probably isn't a rational reaction.

I regret what I have done to myself and now let's shift the blame onto someone else!

Outside the West, they resolutely reject that strategy. If you regret what you chose to do, then fine, but it is still your own problem. You can't simply blame other people or demand reparations from them.

The West must not be allowed to impose its misguided views onto other countries. There needs to be very serious push back. I live in SE Asia now. Imagine that SE Asia also succumbs to the western bullshit, where am I going to go next? At some point, we simply must make a stand.

For example, Dubai has recently caved in to the EU blackmailing policy of demanding a "minimum global corporate income tax" and has introduced a 9% corporate income tax. Otherwise, the EU would expel them from the SWIFT interbanking messaging system (as they did with the Russian Federation). So far so good for sovereign countries deciding about their own laws! Why should people in other countries be taxed just because it suits the EU? As I see it, Dubai must now help the Russia-China-led axis of resistance to decisively bankrupt the European banking system. In my opinion, they must do this at any cost: the Euro must be destroyed. Seriously, there should be no such thing as a free lunch.

You're bonkers. You sound like an audio tape.

EDIT: Or I guess "8 track tapes" were the ones that played the same thing over when they got to the end.

[godelian]

How do you know all this about her? I mean, porn can be addictive, but to blame the actresses for an addiction probably isn't a wise discernment (if that's the case).

Porn addicts are themselves responsible for what they do. They cannot blame the porn actresses, and they never do. Have you ever heard a man blame a porn actress for his porn addiction?

Or do you just hate women in general?

Ha ha ah! If you hold any woman accountable for anything at all, then you hate her, because women can do no wrong! That is simply another ridiculously misguided western view.

You see, I have no problem with Mia Khalifa choosing or wanting to be a porn actress. It is her life, isn't it?

However, when she regrets it, she cannot just turn around, deny any accountability for her own choices and other mistakes, and then claim that it was someone else's fault. Should these porn companies now get prosecuted for "human trafficking" because Mia Khalifa regrets her own damn choice?

Like I've said before, I can understand an intense reaction against getting screwed over in life, it happens but as a person living in the West, wanting to destroy us over whatever happened to you in court (or whatever) probably isn't a rational reaction.

I regret what I have done to myself and now let's shift the blame onto someone else!

Outside the West, they resolutely reject that strategy. If you regret what you chose to do, then fine, but it is still your own problem. You can't simply blame other people or demand reparations from them.

The West must not be allowed to impose its misguided views onto other countries. There needs to be very serious push back. I live in SE Asia now. Imagine that SE Asia also succumbs to the western bullshit, where am I going to go next? At some point, we simply must make a stand.

For example, Dubai has recently caved in to the EU blackmailing policy of demanding a "minimum global corporate income tax" and has introduced a 9% corporate income tax. Otherwise, the EU would expel them from the SWIFT interbanking messaging system (as they did with the Russian Federation). So far so good for sovereign countries deciding about their own laws! Why should people in other countries be taxed just because it suits the EU? As I see it, Dubai must now help the Russia-China-led axis of resistance to decisively bankrupt the European banking system. In my opinion, they must do this at any cost: the Euro must be destroyed. Seriously, there should be no such thing as a free lunch.

You're bonkers. You sound like an audio tape.

EDIT: Or I guess "8 track tapes" were the ones that played the same thing over when they got to the end.

Look, all respect is ultimately based on the fear for reprisals. That is why I insist that these countries must make a stand. They cannot keep retreating. I demand reprisals!

[Gary Childress]

Porn addicts are themselves responsible for what they do. They cannot blame the porn actresses, and they never do. Have you ever heard a man blame a porn actress for his porn addiction?


Ha ha ah! If you hold any woman accountable for anything at all, then you hate her, because women can do no wrong! That is simply another ridiculously misguided western view.

You see, I have no problem with Mia Khalifa choosing or wanting to be a porn actress. It is her life, isn't it?

However, when she regrets it, she cannot just turn around, deny any accountability for her own choices and other mistakes, and then claim that it was someone else's fault. Should these porn companies now get prosecuted for "human trafficking" because Mia Khalifa regrets her own damn choice?


I regret what I have done to myself and now let's shift the blame onto someone else!

Outside the West, they resolutely reject that strategy. If you regret what you chose to do, then fine, but it is still your own problem. You can't simply blame other people or demand reparations from them.

The West must not be allowed to impose its misguided views onto other countries. There needs to be very serious push back. I live in SE Asia now. Imagine that SE Asia also succumbs to the western bullshit, where am I going to go next? At some point, we simply must make a stand.

For example, Dubai has recently caved in to the EU blackmailing policy of demanding a "minimum global corporate income tax" and has introduced a 9% corporate income tax. Otherwise, the EU would expel them from the SWIFT interbanking messaging system (as they did with the Russian Federation). So far so good for sovereign countries deciding about their own laws! Why should people in other countries be taxed just because it suits the EU? As I see it, Dubai must now help the Russia-China-led axis of resistance to decisively bankrupt the European banking system. In my opinion, they must do this at any cost: the Euro must be destroyed. Seriously, there should be no such thing as a free lunch.

You're bonkers. You sound like an audio tape.

EDIT: Or I guess "8 track tapes" were the ones that played the same thing over when they got to the end.

Look, all respect is ultimately based on the fear for reprisals. That is why I insist that these countries must make a stand. They cannot keep retreating. I demand reprisals!

OK. I can see sense to that. What specifically has the west done to deserve reprisals. I don't buy the, "because the Western governments are feminist" motive. There are much more legitimate reasons than that to oppose another country. And besides, if you don't like the way the west has influenced your country, then work on changing your country back to what you want instead of destroying the alleged 'evil demon' that is causing the disturbance. That seems enormously counter productive and outright dangerous in this day and age.

[godelian]

OK. I can see sense to that. What specifically has the west done to deserve reprisals.

The West must unlearn to impose its misguided views onto everyone else. They won't unlearn unless it is painful not to.

I don't buy the, "because the Western governments are feminist" motive.

The Russian Federation is sick and tired of western LGBTQ propaganda. I personally do not care particularly much, because it does not affect me personally.

But then again, we can still firmly join interests with the Russian Federation, because in the end, it is the same principle.

I am more concerned with other issues. For example, the relationship/marriage is over. It is of no use to me any longer, but I would still have to pay; by means of division of my assets, alimony or child support -- which is obviously the same thing but under another pretext. I do not want SE Asian countries to enforce that kind of bullshit under western pressure. So, I demand a decisive push back to any western-imposed laws, no matter under what guise they try to push it.

I like things the way they are now in SE Asia.

Over the last few years, they tried to push the "domestic violence" bullshit over here, but it did not really work particularly well. You know how it goes. In the West, a woman can always ask the police to remove a man even from his own house, because he "emotionally abuses her". Of course, that is ultimately counterproductive, because the end result will be that no man will want to live together with a woman any more, because of the risk involved. In a sense, that is not even that bad, because it removes the pressure to cohabitate. What is the benefit for a man anyway? My building has a team of cleaners that you can book for service; which is even cheaper and better. You can cheaply outsource all of these things, especially here in SE Asia. So, it is actually poor people who suffer the most from the western bullshit.

That seems enormously counter productive and outright dangerous in this day and age.

If it is dangerous, then the West should simply stop to try to impose its misguided views onto other countries, no?