>> Tolerance, right up to the limit where it actually starts hurting, is the best strategy for a peaceful and prosperous society. > It really is not. Unbounded

>> Tolerance, right up to the limit where it actually starts hurting, is the best strategy for a peaceful and prosperous society. > It really is not. Unbounded tolerance is how free and open societies commit suicide and succumb to authoritarian regimes where intolerance is the norm. This is a non sequitur. GP placed a bound on tolerance. > You're just asserting that refusing to help out authoritarian and outright xenophobic political movements further their goals "is the wrong approach" without any rationale or insight or argument at all. GP can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think he has asserted anything of the kind. In fact, I suspect he's somewhat opposed to the same, since he's opposed to "illiberal political beliefs" which are themselves quite aligned with "xenophobic political movements". In any case, I think you've entirely missed the pragmatic points of the GP's post, which is that such illiberal policies are, throughout history, used against the marginalized peoples they are ostensibly intended to protect. Given your previous statement about unbounded tolerance, it feels like you should be in agreement with the GP on this point; unless you're saying we should just skip the tolerance and go straight to intolerance.