Following on from yesterday’s blog about social contracts, but not requiring you to have read it…
Civilization is, in practice, underpinned by co-operation. There will always be those who try to compete and exploit, and to a degree, that can be coped with. A grouping of people that goes too far into power hunger or exploitation is likely to experience conflict. The laws held by countries, and the rules held by groups of people exist to try and keep everyone co-operative enough for things to work. Crimes are things that have the capacity to undermine your culture.
Any culture, community or civilization has the right to resist behaviours that will undermine its viability. This is not at all the same as having the right to make laws and rules that destroy the freedom of others. There’s only so much rigid control you can inflict on a group before it will shatter under the pressure of that. Those who wish to restrict reasonable freedoms will often justify what they do as being a way of upholding and protecting culture, but that doesn’t make it so. Those who do not want their ‘freedom’ to break social contracts restricted, will call any effort to protect the basis of society an encroachment on their rights.
I think these are the things we need to bear in mind when talking about the right to free speech and the limits of tolerance. If we allow the kind of speech that undermines social bonds we move towards a more oppressive arrangement and if we keep moving that way, we get massive social unrest and violence. If we tolerate people who want to make society intolerable for some, then we’re moving our group towards a state of unviability.
We can afford to accommodate any amount of difference if that difference doesn’t prevent anyone else from quietly getting on with their own lives. Women wearing headscarves are not stopping anyone getting on with their own lives. Women forced to wear headscarves are being prevented from getting on with their own lives. Being LGBT doesn’t stop anyone else from quietly getting on with their own life. If being LGBT is illegal, or encounters violence, then people aren’t being allowed to quietly get on with their own lives.
Tolerance must be limited by whether being tolerant will undermine the feasibility of your people. Tolerance that allows people the maximum freedom it can to live in their own ways, is a good thing. Tolerance that allows people to restrict the freedoms of others is problematic and sows the seeds of its own destruction. The only freedoms we should not allow each other are the freedoms to harm each other. As the intention of hate speech is to bring harmful practices into a culture, hate speech should not be tolerated.
Intolerant societies have violence hardwired into them, and/or break down into violence. Peaceful societies are inclusive, and only restrict freedoms in so far as that’s necessary to prevent harm.
July 26th, 2018 at 11:28 am
Reblogged this on Blue Dragon Journal.
July 26th, 2018 at 8:19 pm
Yes to all of this. Your point about head scarves reminded me of this quote I found on Pinterest:
“There is nothing inherently liberating about showing skin. There is nothing inherently liberating in covering up. The liberation lies in the choice.”
Speaking of Pinterest, I hope you’ll consider adding photos to your posts–that way they can easily be shared there (right now the pin button picks up photos from your sidebar but they tend not to match the post topic) 🙂
July 27th, 2018 at 8:18 am
I’n very lazy about images – it’s a matter of how much time I can afford to spend on blogging every day, and I’m not inherently good at the visual stuff so it takes a while.
July 28th, 2018 at 1:10 am
Understandable. If it helps at all, WordPress offers a free image library, and it’s searchable 🙂 But either way I enjoy your posts, so thanks for all your hard work!