A favorite pseudo-dialectical tactic of the Left when it comes to defending cancel culture is the paradox of tolerance. As explained by philosopher Karl Popper, the argument goes that a total commitment to tolerance would end up destroying tolerance since intolerant people would eventually take over through coercion or threats. It’s a version of the libertarian Day Two Problem.
The fault in Popper’s reasoning is his assumption that tolerance has absolute value which reasoned thought will inevitably discern. Therein lies the real paradox. If tolerance were an absolute good, justifying the suppression of intolerance wouldn’t require appeals to greater goods. Yet Popper does just that:
Less well known [than other paradoxes Popper discusses] is 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 most 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.
Note that Popper’s argument hinges on a fear of the intolerant resorting to violence. Asserting the right to suppress the intolerant “in the name of tolerance” is a fig leaf. His real justification rests on an appeal to public safety and order.
Just as making an idol of freedom is the fatal flaw of Liberalism, trying to absolutize tolerance is the error at the heart of Popper’s argument. Both freedom and tolerance are conditional goods. They are worth no more or less than the inherent value of the goods they grant access to. One can always ask, “Freedom to do what? Tolerance of what?”
Of course, it’s the Death Cultists who are destroying public order in the name of tolerance. This should surprise no one, since another way to think of absolutizing conditional goods is removing their limiting principles. Popper’s philosophy has led us to a place where failing to celebrate even the most dyscivic forms of personal expression is seen as tyrannical intolerance.
Just as worshiping the market has concentrated unimaginable wealth in a few hands, making idols of freedom and tolerance has vested the power to dictate which behavior should be celebrated and which suppressed in the Death Cult’s high priests. They wield this power through a list of public rituals.
One of the Cult’s favorite rites is ginning up hate crime hoaxes. Every sacrament requires the proper form and matter, and the Death Cult’s rituals are no different. The form consists of whipping the media into a frenzy over the matter–usually a noose or a backwards swastika left in a convenient spot.
Such liturgies define the Death Cult since they a) demonstrate that the Cultists know nothing about the normal people they despise and b) epitomize the kind of Charlotte’s Web thinking that drives most Cultists. They project as a rule, and since they delight in shoving their symbols in our faces, they solipsistically assume their enemies desire to do the same to them. Their delusion that all non-Cultists are KKK Nazis explains their choice of symbols. Note that they never plant crucifixes or icons.
A recent performance of this ritual was vitiated since the matter was found to be invalid. But not before NASCAR leapt at the chance to humiliate its own fans. Expect these hoaxes to increase in frequency and hysteria as the Cult flexes is dominance. Contrary evidence will be suppressed in the name of tolerance.
Last night I sat down with author Jon Del Arroz and comic book creators Mike and Mindy Wheeler to discus these and many other topics. Watch the replay of the stream here: