Furthest Right

Unraveling The “Paradox of Tolerance”

Karl Popper knew that if he said some pseudo-profound gibberish, it would appeal to Leftists who want a reason to believe in nonsense. All of his big theories are lies; he glibly restates Hegel with his logical positivism, but never considers the contradictions within that idea.

If you like highly intelligent fools, you will like Popper. He writes about fedora-pleasing ideas like the paradox of tolerance:

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.

If an idea cannot handle dissent, it is an incoherent idea. “Intolerant” people have no paradox in how they treat those that oppose them; they are, after all, intolerant of them.

Tolerance, like pacifism and pluralism, which are related ideas, bases itself on the idea that we can “agree to disagree.” That is: we do not need to make a choice.

In that view, it is more important that we follow the right method — being nice to each other — than it is that we arrive at ultimate answers, like what our values, culture, behaviors, or goals are.

Pacifism means giving way to the unreasonable every time. If you decide that you will not fight, then those who do fight will take over. Popper basically says, “Well at that point, you have to stop being pacifistic and fight them,” but he always wants to preserve the idea of pacifism.

Pluralism similarly means avoiding conflict in order to co-exist. In theory, that means that Nazis rub shoulders with Rabbis and Black Panthers on the subway. In reality, we know how that ends: these groups oppose each other and will fight. Popper believes that this can be avoided.

It does not work that way, Karl. If your philosophy reverses itself, it is not complete; instead, it is simply a paradox. The paradox of tolerance is that tolerance is a paradox; it preserves contrary goals, namely both to tolerate everything and go to war against anyone who does not tolerate anything.

The best viruses are all paradoxes. They exist in order to exist and take over everything and have no goal beyond that. As such, they are parasites, taking your energy and health for their own existence, but without a useful reason for doing so.

Sane thinkers are ends-over-means. That is, they decide what is right and then go ahead and do it by any means necessary. Sometimes you have to kill in order to have peace. That is not paradoxical, but rightly assertive and aggressive in maintaining the end, or a goal.

Popper like other pacifists has no goal except to keep existing with you paying the bill. That means that he is a parasite, as is anyone who adopts his “philosophy.”

Tags: , , ,

Share on FacebookShare on RedditTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn