5 ms·
I'm always wary of people bringing up the paradox of tolerance; most of the time, it's just used as an excuse to justify censorship while claiming to be opposed
by something765478 3mo ago
I'm always wary of people bringing up the paradox of tolerance; most of the time, it's just used as an excuse to justify censorship while claiming to be opposed to it. "When you censor me, you're being intolerant and that's wrong; when I censor you, I'm doing it in the name of tolerance, so I'm correct".
I'm not Swedish, so it's possible there's something that I am missing. But skimming the wikipedia page for the party (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96rebro_Party# https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96rebro_Party#), I don't see anything that says the party is pro censorship.
- panarky 3mo agoNo political party is going to say they're "pro censorship". But if they promise to target specific groups of people to close their schools, regulate how they dress, ban their prayers, and suppress their art, it's all about restricting their freedom of expression. That's the whole program.
- something765478 3mo ago> No political party is going to say they're "pro censorship". There are plenty of political parties that proudly claim to oppose "hate speech". > But if they promise to target specific groups of people to close their schools, regulate how they dress, ban their prayers, and suppress their art, it's all about restricting their freedom of expression. I could be wrong, but it looks like their plan is to cut public funding, not to censor those things.
- int_19h 3mo agoThe "paradox of tolerance" is only a paradox to people who can't tell the difference between words and actions, anyway. There's no paradox in tolerating the words if you draw the line at action to implement those words.