3 ms·
Liberalism is already very intolerant of intolerance. Sadly this intolerance-of-intolerance is very narrowly focused and its goal, if we are all honest, is to c
by steve19 12y ago
Liberalism is already very intolerant of intolerance. Sadly this intolerance-of-intolerance is very narrowly focused and its goal, if we are all honest, is to change society not defend it.
I could give examples of how we are letting our guard down to those who seek to destroy us... but I won't because I am a coward. I don't want to be hounded by a Twitter or Reddit lynch mod for being "intolerant" or "racist" (despite being neither). Freedom to express our views, when they disagree with the majority, has been successfully suppressed. In other words, Liberalism has won... but now what? How do we move forward? We are not in a good place.
Has our society ever really believed that Great Frenchman Voltaire's principle "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" (as written by Evelyn Beatrice Hall). I can't think of a time it has. The pendulum of society swings from tolerating one viewpoint to tolerating the opposing viewpoints.
I stay awake at night worrying about our civilization, not that it does me or anyone any good to do so.
Edit: A little off topic, but if major societal change in history interests you I highly recommend Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast. Wrath of the Khans (the story of Genghis Khan) is my favorite so far http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/ http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
- pc2g4d 12y agoDan Carlin also has a political show, Common Sense with Dan Carlin. It's worth checking out, too. Even if you disagree with the guy I think his ideas deserve a hearing. http://www.dancarlin.com/common-sense-home-landing-page/ http://www.dancarlin.com/common-sense-home-landing-page/
- pyre 12y ago> Has our society ever really believed "Society" is a great mass of people with varying belief systems. Most of the cultural norms are dictated from above, not necessarily by populist consensus. > Freedom to express our views, when they disagree with the majority, has been successfully suppressed. Huh? Will you be jailed for expressing your views? Lose your job? End up homeless and destitute? Get beaten up by a pack of rowdy youths? Freedom to express one's views doesn't mean that everyone else has to listen to them. If a Bible-thumper starts preaching in the middle of a music concert, should everyone stop and listen to respect his free speech rights? Is tossing him out of the concert oppressing his religious views?
- TheSpiceIsLife 12y ago> Most of the cultural norms are dictated from above, not necessarily by populist consensus. Steven Pinker might not agree with you here. See his book 'The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined' and the reference in it for some examples of cultural norm changes occurring from the bottom up.
- woodchuck64 12y agoJonathan Haidt's formulation makes it simple, really. Liberalism prioritizes the moral themes of care and fairness. Other moral themes--loyalty, authority, purity-- must always defer to the first two (in a liberal society). But this is precisely what moral conservatives can not do. Harming or treating others less fairly is morally right for conservatives if it is done so based on loyalty (patriotism, religion, group identity), authority (religion, tradition), and/or purity (religion, sexual mores).