this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
158 points (100.0% liked)

196

16509 readers
2871 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
158
paruledox (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by emstuff@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ssfckdt@mastodon.cloud 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And that "paradox" boils down to the intolerant saw of "you're not tolerant if you're not tolerant of intolerance"

It's a paradox b/c it's not really a paradox, but it seems like one, when couched disingenuously.

But it's like freedom. Can you really believe in freedom if you believe in law and punishment?* But can you truly be free with criminals running amok? So to have freedom, you must restrict freedom of those who would take away your freedom.

* I'm well aware lots of ppl say "no" here

[–] ItsEveNow@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A paradox is a seemingly contradictory statement which is actually not a contradiction if you look closely. That's why it's named like this. Being intolerant towards fascists and other intolerant groups is actually a way to promote tolerance, it's a tolerant act.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

It's not a tolerant act, but the result is that the base level of tolerance is higher, so it's an acceptable compromise.