goatee

°17.08.15.Tue | The paradox and pragmatics of intolerance

In What White Supremacists Don’t Want You to Know, Valerie Aurora highlights Karl Popper’s Paradox of Tolerance and argues it is relevant to our response to neo-Nazis of today.

For his part, Popper was writing during the end World War II and was likely thinking about the tepid response to the original Nazis. Although they forced him to flee his home in Vienna, the Nazis are not mentioned in Open Society. Nonetheless, in a very long footnote, Popper consider the various “paradoxes” associated with open societies, including the paradox of tolerance.

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal. [@Popper1966, fn. 4, p.581]

Aurora applies this to the white-supremacy of today:

a tolerant society should tolerate protest marches in general, but it shouldn’t tolerate a white supremacist march advocating for the oppression and killing of people of color – like the march in Charlottesville, Virginia in August 2017 that ended with white supremacists beating and killing people who were opposed to their message of intolerance.

I think I first came across this notion by way of Aurora some time ago and I’ve been thinking about it ever since. I had hoped it would help me resolve my dueling values of being tolerant but also defending tolerance. Unfortunately, when I think about particular cases, I fear its resolution is dependent on who gets to define what is intolerant. I can imagine both sides of a debate making claims of intolerance about the other side. For example, those wanting to suppress Muslim immigration can claim Islam is a religion of intolerance and should not be welcomed/tolerated. Those in support of immigration will claim that this position is intolerant itself.

This then sent me in search of a rubric for judging intolerant defenses of tolerance. For example, how should we judge the punching of a neo-Nazi? My thinking has been aided by Yonatan Zunger’s “Tolerance is not a moral precept”; he characterizes tolerance as a type of peace contract with worthwhile ends, not a moral precept.

Tolerance is not a moral absolute; it is a peace treaty. Tolerance is a social norm because it allows different people to live side-by-side without being at each other’s throats. It means that we accept that people may be different from us, in their customs, in their behavior, in their dress, in their sex lives, and that if this doesn’t directly affect our lives, it is none of our business. But the model of a peace treaty differs from the model of a moral precept in one simple way: the protection of a peace treaty only extends to those willing to abide by its terms. It is an agreement to live in peace, not an agreement to be peaceful no matter the conduct of others. A peace treaty is not a suicide pact.

Even so, Zunger acknowledges that conflicts might be unresolvable.

If everything you have ever learned tells you that this is a real and present danger, and that certain members of the community — members of another religion, perhaps, or people of the wrong sexual orientation — are jeopardizing everyone’s safety, then a fundamental, existential conflict is inevitable. In a situation like this, there can be no peace treaty; only war or separation.

This is a useful framework, but I’m still in search of a rubric.

Perhaps the following questions about the initial act of intolerance and subsequent defense could serve as a start.

The initial intolerance (i.e., some exclusionary/hateful behavior)

• Is it born of a deep or long-lasting culture? Germans feel differently about neo-Nazis than Americans, for obvious reasons.
• Is it a significant or growing threat? A lone kook is less of a concern than an organized militia.
• What is the balance of genuine vs possible harm? Advocating for white culture is less of a concern (even if a “dog whistle”) than calls for genocide and violence.

The intolerant defense of tolerance (i.e., suppression of above)

• Is the response proportional?
• Is it likely to be effective?
• Is it applied fairly/equitably?
• Is it narrow in scope?
• Will it set precedent?
• What other values (e.g., speech and religion) are implicated?

°17.08.11.Fri | Colorful carousel

°17.08.11.Fri | Monday morning Casper

°17.07.31.Mon | Mount William Pond, Weare NH

°17.03.10.Fri | The Magnetic Fields

Merritt and The Magnetic Fields have a new album out.

Coincidentally, Nora and I met thanks to DJ Chris Ewen, longtime Merritt collaborator. We even have “Manray” engraved inside our wedding rings – and plan to go dancing at Xmortis tonight.

My favorite song off the album so far is “Be True to Your Bar.” Though, I don’t drink and the only bars I’ve frequented were those that Nora was tending. She’d put my “three fingers of cranberry” in a tumbler, and people would ask about the exotic red liquor I was drinking.

°17.02.20.Mon | Remains

Acorn caps on snow
Remains of a squirrel’s
recent dinner

°16.08.23.Tue | Late summer sleep

Autumn approaches
The dog returns to his crate
For his evening bed

°16.05.25.Wed | Dubrovnik Croatia

°15.11.23.Mon | Valley of fire

°15.10.05.Mon | Snoring

A dog’s snoring is like birdsong in a forest: a sign that all is well.