[flagged]
Now if tolerance isn't supposed to be a virtue and you aren't supposed to get brownie points for being tolerant, then fine whatever. But that isn't how people act when they misuse the paradox of tolerance, they are still looking to get brownie points while just hating on their enemies just as humans have for millennia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Go back to debate class
My tolerance is not performative and fuck you for strawmanning it
Like, I strongly disagree with the Biden-style Democrat. I think they are nonsense garbage centrists with nothing worthwhile to say and weak spines. But I tolerate them coming in and saying things like, "We should means test food stamps!" I also tolerate the absurd notion that somehow, Biden-style Dems are "the far left". I think it's hilariously uneducated, but I tolerate it.
I do not tolerate people coming in with sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic rhetoric. It's unacceptable. I will shut down, block, kick, ban or otherwise remove it without any questions.
You're arguing with a strawman. I just want to have a civil discussion without it degrading into racial slurs as the bare minimum. Personal attacks in general should be discoraged, but I've been around a while and my standards are low.
The psychological question of morals and tolerance doesn't seem to amount to much. I don't think anyone would ever claim the internet is full of moral actors. but sure. The ability to accept and consider multiple viewpoints is a good moral to strive to.
Hence, the paradox of tolerance: in that you must reject concepts that overall limit your ability to empathize and expand your viewpoints. dismissing information because of superficial physical features of the speaker is simply ignorant.