Sunday, July 17, 2022

The reality about "tolerance"

 So...this is another one aimed at the super SJW types. The left loves to preach on and on and on about tolerance, so much...they want to ban anyone from forums with a different opinion than them. They believe that in order to ensure that tolerance exists, that you cannot tolerate the intolerant. This leads them to have illiberal, often down right authoritarian opinions on free speech. 

But...the thing is, I feel like these extremist lefties miss the point of tolerance. Tolerance comes from the word "tolerate". And what does the word tolerate mean? According to google:

allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one does not necessarily like or agree with) without interference.

 You don't have to like something. You don't have to affirm of something. You don't have to partake in something. You have to TOLERATE something. You have to put up with it and let it go, without interfering with it. 

Ultimately, tolerance is a libertarian concept. The idea of letting people do what they want, without interference. And I would say, I am like that, for both the right and the left.

On the left, I'm socially libertarian. I believe that people should be free to do what they want without interference. On speech issues, I'm also libertarian, believing that people should be free to express views i find distasteful without interference.

There is a difference for me between speech and action. You can say whatever you want, minus a few things not covered by the first amendment like say incitement to negative action, harassment, shouting fire in a crowded theater, etc. But on political views, go nuts. And this is extended, in my view, to so called hate speech.

If you are INCITING direct action against someone or something, yes that is dangerous and that isn't free speech, but if you just don't like something, or find a practice disagreeable, or you simply say you're against a concept, that's fine. 

In my opinion, I agree with the left in terms of the content of issues. I support pro choice views, pro gay marriage views, pro trans views, and I'm largely against racism in terms of how people are treated. But while I will support someone's rights on the left...I will also support peoples' rights on the right, including their approach to free speech.

I've been getting a lot of criticism lately on reddit and elsewhere for being a so called "fascist enabler" simply for being for free speech. For saying "hey, right wingers should be able to express their views". Yes, of course their views are disagreeable. BUT, they should have a right to say them. Because that's what tolerance is about. Yes, I do believe in tolerating the intolerant. Because the intolerant have their rights too. And they cant just be suspended because you dont like their views. Only if their views are a very clear and present direct danger should they be considered as running afoul of the concept of freedom of speech. And by that, you would need to demonstrate it to a very high degree. You would have to literally INCITE something in a legal sense in order for it to run afoul of this definition for me. ANd show obvious harm done. Vague or theoretical discussions do not count in this. You need to show how that action directly caused a certain event to happen. 

 Just for reference, here is google's definition of "incitement":

  the action of provoking unlawful behavior or urging someone to behave unlawfully.

 Yeah, so...pretty high bar.

Honestly, I fear for the future of freedom of speech. We don't get along any more on the internet. The internet used to be this wild west place of people saying whatever and not getting in trouble for it. But now you got these authoritarian do gooders just wanting to ban people for having conservative opinions. And that is dangerous.

No comments:

Post a Comment