This one paradox is relevant to sooooo many discussions I see happening recently. Thought I’d just throw it out there in case anyone else finds it handy. Keep well.
Originally Posted By u/JayWelsh At 2025-09-30 04:42:52 PM | Source
It becomes a lot less complicated when you consider tolerance a social contract: I tolerate you, as long as you tolerate me.
When someone supports policy that does not meet these criteria they no longer adhere to the social contract, and are thus also no longer protected by it.
Yes but the argument from the right has always been “look at you saying that your value is tolerance, but you’re being intolerant of me. Thus, you’re hypocritical and thus your perspective is moot and does need to be followed or understood”
Tolerance is not a meaningful value. Too vague.
I see the humanity in all which is exactly why I can’t tolerate inhumanity.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure that’s a strawman argument. The right labels the left as tolerant, and then attempts to point out the hypocrasy.
You’re very much correct 👍
It’s a social contract of tolerance, and if the nazis break it, they’re out.
Like back in the the old days, outlaws were people who failed to live lawfully. They proved they were unwilling to adhere to laws, and therefore were no longer protected by laws.
Same thing here, but with tolerance. People are unwilling to be tolerant of others, and are no longer under the tolerance umbrella.
You can’t keep your pretty cake, and eat it as well. You can’t be intolerant and expect to be tolerated.
