3 ms·
What is the point here? Sure, tolerance is a peace treaty and certainly not everything should be tolerated. But what does the author argue is a violation? They
by rasmus-kirk 2y ago
What is the point here? Sure, tolerance is a peace treaty and certainly not everything should be tolerated. But what does the author argue is a violation? They say "nazis", but who defines what that is? That's vague and ripe for abuse.
- csours 2y ago> But what does the author argue is a violation? This question seems to suggest that there is some external or higher referee for this peace treaty. There isn't. The real cop was inside you all along. Lots of things can be violations, like using highly motivating, low information communication like Rush Limbaugh or Tucker Carlson. The response to a violation is also a violation - aka an escalation. There is not a bright line between peace and war. War is a failure of negotiation. People lose faith in negotiation when they feel they are unrepresented or that the other side is cheating. The greater point is, faith in negotiation is very valuable, but easy to destroy.