I tried it recently. It worked. Problem, contrarian in the back row? :troll:
Isn’t the whole “paradox of tolerance” thing just an even mix of fash trolling and terminal libshit in the first place? Like the only reason someone would ever try to argue from it is if they’re a civility fetishist liberal making excuses for why they have to aid and abet bigotry, or a fascist troll trying to demand you aid and abet their bigotry by imagining that to do anything else would be to commit the cardinal sin of hypocrisy.
Like the correct response to someone appealing to the paradox of tolerance is just :pit: :yes-comm:
You’re right, but this is a palatable and easy to remember/articulate thing for libs to say. It’s useful and opens the conversation up to concepts like social contracts.
😠
Yeah well have you heard of the logical fallacy of “I am rubber and you are glue” ?
NO U :stalin-point:
UR MOM
U MAD :wojak-nooo:
im confused about this post, maybe im not familiar enough with online debate-bros but i though the ‘paradox of tolerance’ was just about not tolerating people who aren’t tolerant?
how does a fascist or liberal use the concept of ‘fascists cannot be allowed in a tolerant society’ to their ideological ends? why did this concept need fixing?
It’s a (supposed) paradox in the following sense:
- All viewpoints should be tolerated in society
- Intolerant views should be tolerated in society.
- If you tolerate intolerant views, sometimes society will collapse into intolerance as those views become prevalent.
- Therefore, tolerance is self-undermining.
This is dumb because (1) is just false. You don’t have to give a fancy theoretical reason distinguishing between moral and social facts: just reject the premise.
but 3 & 4 already problematize absolute tolerance? how does one read through those points and come away with the idea society should be tolerant of nazis? :jesse-wtf:
:freeze-peach:
I’m so confused because I knew all of this but still don’t understand how that can be used to further anyone’s ideology but ours.
The whole reason you bring up the paradox of tolerance is to tell liberals “No, we can’t allow the fascists to speak, we need to beat the shit out of them because if you don’t they’ll break everything”
How do you read this and come away with the conclusion “we must have absolute tolerance”?
:cure-for-fascism:
Watch SOVIETS and TANKS literally CRUSH fascism! :no-fash: :tank-deluxe:
