“Not much is known about the tolerance paradox. Unlimited tolerance will surely lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance to the intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the threat of intolerance, the tolerant will be destroyed and their tolerance will be destroyed with them. — In this formulation, I am not implying, for example, that we should always suppress statements that come from intolerant ideas. As long as we can counter them with reasoned arguments, and as long as they can be checked by public opinion, it would certainly be unwise to suppress them. But we should demand, if necessary, the right to restrain the intolerant, even by force. We should not be afraid of them, for it will be easy to see that they are not willing to engage in rational debate on the same footing as we are, and will start by denouncing all debate. They may forbid their own supporters from listening to rational arguments as “deceptive,” or they may teach them to answer arguments with an iron fist or a gun. Hence we must insist. The right to be intolerant of intolerance in the name of tolerance.
- Philosopher Karl Popper., An open society and its enemies, vol. 1 (ch. 7), 1945.
- Paradox of tolerance - Wikipedia
relevance - Even with regard to diversity, some people will say, “Allow opinions that don’t recognize diversity.”
orthographical variants
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/不寛容な人々を抑制する権利 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.