Aug 24 2006
The Meaning of Tolerance
Published by Ivan Groznii at 9:06 pm under Reflections |
It’s been brought to my attention that not surprisingly, Microsoft advocates don’t like me or my blog very much. I’ve read some of their comments and interestingly, most of them don’t actually attack the substance of what I say, but rather make comments about me personally.
I don’t mind, really. It’s a free country (well at least it is here) and part of freedom is being able to spout off all you like, even if you’re not intelligent enough to use a proper operating system. I am able to fire back, and even if no knowledge is increased by the exchange, and I am specifically referring to our friends in the thrall of Redmond, at least there is sufficient tolerance that we can despise each other without it having any implications other than some words on a screen.
Tolerance is a vital, but confusing virtue. As this example shows, tolerance does not necessarily mean I have to like the Microsoft advocates. I’ll be blunt, I don’t. I think they’re snake oil salesmen peddling a shoddy piece of goods. They don’t necessarily have to like me; I regard it as a badge of honour if I’m on their bad list. It does mean, however, that we are both free to go our own way, and neither of us can inhibit each other from doing so. It also means that we accept that as the natural order of things; this is the basis of a free society.
Tolerance has suffered a good number of distortions in recent years. This is how political correctness got started; tolerance in the eyes of some got to mean that one could not offend anyone else, ever. To some, tolerance meant an endorsement of virtually anything (witness Jerry Springer guests) except intolerance, however that was defined. However true tolerance requires having the freedom to offend and the willingness to stand being offended.
This is a tough pill for some to swallow; for example, it means that the “artist” who feels free to put a crucifix in a jar of urine should realise that those who object to his pap are free to tell him he’s a no talent shock artist who really should learn to use a urinal like a grown up boy.
Tolerance also has limits; it is supposed to be a two way street. We in the West are often blindsided when we find that it isn’t. It completely breaks down when the a party that you’re tolerating wants you dead. A dramatic example was during the recent Islamist demonstrations in London; those who said things like “Behead those who insult Islam” are clearly not playing by the same rules as those who tolerated their right to be offensive, namely, the rest of the British public.
Truly, there needs to be a reiteration from the leaders of the West of what tolerance is really supposed to mean. It doesn’t help that they apparently walk on eggshells when trying to talk about the issue. They need to stand up and say plainly, those who can’t accept the principles of tolerance should not be tolerated; it’s sheer stupidity to extend a courtesy to someone who isn’t courteous in return. It should also be said, those whose egos are so fragile that they can’t accept criticism without calling for someone’s head are hypersensitive dolts; there are plenty of things in the world that are offensive, grow up, get used to it or get out.
I doubt that will happen, however. Fortunately, there is a safety mechanism in place; when the limits of tolerance are breached, people stand up and fight. It hasn’t reached quite that point yet, but just because we have not arrived at that particular destination, does not mean we won’t.
2 Responses to “The Meaning of Tolerance”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hear hear!
(Though I must disagree with you on the topic of politicians urging people to be more tolerant. It’s a sad reflection on both politicians and society that the general public would be much more inclined (and likely) to hear that message if it were spoken by Elton John, Paris Hilton or Bob the Builder.)
I like you, and your blog.