It's not actually a paradox, it's just playing with semantics. Wiktionary[1] defines "intolerant": 1. Unable or indisposed to tolerate, endure or bear. 2. No

It's not actually a paradox, it's just playing with semantics. Wiktionary[1] defines "intolerant": 1. Unable or indisposed to tolerate, endure or bear. 2. Not tolerant; close-minded about new or different ideas; indisposed to tolerate contrary opinions or beliefs; impatient of dissent or opposition; denying or refusing the right of private opinion or choice in others; inclined to persecute or suppress dissent. Bigotry (or discrimination, or prejudice), in general, is a subcategory of the broad definition #1. You are indisposed to tolerate a group of people, or a religion, or whatever. Seeking to suppress speech or marginalize opinions (of any kind) falls under definition #2. English might as well have two separate words for these two definitions, in case there is no "paradox". It's only a paradox if you seek to suppress speech from people who seek to suppress speech with their speech. [1]: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/intolerant https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/intolerant