Hacker News Reader

That's great until someone else with a different definition of intolerance is in control.

I'd rather have a defensible tolerant system, to prevent such people in the first place. If they come into power, and are able to redefine the definition of intolerance/tolerance to such degree, they have many other means, like control over the executive or legislative to do whatever they like.

Arguments like these just make it so much harder for tolerant people to actually act against attackers of their system, to such a degree that they struggle to defend it. These arguments are about spreading doubt - in that way they are like propaganda, because only tolerant people will think about trying to keep this balanced out.

Ok well such a defensible tolerance architecture does not exist and would be extremely susceptible to capture. So I'd rather not. And in general I find invoking the Paradox of Tolerance to be an indicator of bad faith because it has been so badly abused by people who just want to shut down dialogue, e.g. the author of this OP.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com