> Intolerant zealots (religious or otherwise) can weaponize tolerance against itself. > Bigots can weaponize the paradox of tolerance for purely hateful aims.

> Intolerant zealots (religious or otherwise) can weaponize tolerance against itself. > Bigots can weaponize the paradox of tolerance for purely hateful aims. If tolerance and the paradox of tolerance can both be weaponized equally easily, what does this make of the recommendation for not being "tolerant of the intolerant"? Isn't it simply a case of "damned if you do, damned if you don't"?