Sign In Subscribe
Hero Banner

|

☰
  • Home
  • News
    • Top Stories
    • US
    • World
    • Elections Polls
    • Business
    • Tech
    • The Media
    • Genz
    • Public Policy
    • AI News
  • Voices
    • Opinions
    • Proposals
    • Explainers
    • Influencers
    • Pundits
  • Multimedia
  • Get Involved
  • About
Donate
Home » Explaining the Paradox of Tolerance
Culture

Explaining the Paradox of Tolerance

Ryan DulaneyBy Ryan DulaneyFebruary 21, 2024Updated:December 2, 2025No Comments3 Mins Read
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr WhatsApp VKontakte Email
the paradox of tolerance
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

An essential element of a democratic society is the universal tolerance of all political perspectives. Through tolerance, interactions between the multitude of perspectives within the spectrum take place. Democracy is the product of these interactions being expressed at the ballot.

It is because of tolerance that political ideas can coexist and that no one perspective is held sacred. Citizens are free to form opinions and vote based on those opinions. However there exists a concept that has become increasingly relevant in the past decade, the idea that universal tolerance is dangerous.

In his influential work The Open Society and Its Enemies, Karl Popper posited a self-contradictory idea known as the ‘paradox of tolerance.’ This concept holds that a tolerant society should not have unlimited tolerance. The reason for this contradiction is that unlimited tolerance implies the toleration of those who are intolerant.

He argues that without tolerance limits, those who are intolerant will work with impunity to subvert those whom they consider to be the ‘other.’ If these intolerant ideas are allowed to exist and eventually spread, they will bring about the dissolution of the tolerant society from within.

It is a paradox because a tolerant society must fortify against intolerance by being tolerant. Popper states “We should claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. Furthermore, he says intolerant ideas should be “placed outside of the law,” in other words, certain ideas should be made illegal.

Currently, there exists a debate along this line of thinking. Should democratic societies allow for intolerant and anti-democratic ideas to persist, despite their implied protection under the democratic principle of tolerance?

It has long been understood that there is a political spectrum and that at either side of that spectrum lies extreme political ideologies. Both of these ends of the spectrum include intolerant ideas. The extreme right generally is intolerant of modernist ideas like egalitarianism and multiculturalism. The extreme left is generally intolerant of traditionalism, nationalism and hierarchical structures. 

Antifa serves as an example of the manifestation of Popper’s thought. It is a far-left organized political movement that looks to prevent the spread of intolerant racist and neo-fascist ideologies. These ideas are detested by Antifa based on their intolerance and potential for violence. Passively denouncing or exposing these ideas as falsifiable, bigoted and unsophisticated is not enough–as that allows the ideology to persist and continue its intolerant bigotry. Instead, Antifa kinetically persecutes those who hold intolerant beliefs. Put simply, Antifa does not tolerate ideas that are perceived as intolerant and seeks to eradicate them by force.

Political extremes are defined by their distance from the center. While extreme ideas are not favored by the majority of citizens due to their deviation from the norm, they exist because of the right to hold any opinion and the principle of universal tolerance. To counter intolerant extremism and protect a tolerant society, Popper suggests overriding the democratic principle of universal tolerance.

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr WhatsApp Email
Previous ArticleWhy Morality and Politics are Separate
Next Article The Dangerous Overuse of Impeachment
Ryan Dulaney
  • X (Twitter)
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn

Ryan Dulaney contributes insightful articles across a variety of topics.Passionate about delivering engaging and informative content.Dedicated to keeping readers informed and inspired.Explores stories that spark curiosity and thoughtful discussion.

Related Posts

Political Humor Roundup: The First Week of March 2026

March 6, 2026

Kristi Noem Replaced as Head of Homeland Security

March 6, 2026

Pro-Palestinian Green Party Candidate’s Anti-Israel Agenda Fuels Senate Hearing Stunt

March 6, 2026

The Great MAGA Unraveling

March 6, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

HOT TAKES

Pakistan’s Hypocrisy

March 6, 2026

The TikTok Power Grab

March 5, 2026

So Long, “ICE Barbie”

March 5, 2026

Leftists’ Selective Outrage Over Iran War

March 4, 2026
Connect with Us
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
Don't Miss
Culture

Political Humor Roundup: The First Week of March 2026

By Jason LunaMarch 6, 20260

1. Biden Asks Why Trump Didn’t Just Bomb Ayatollah In The Leg – The Babylon…

Kristi Noem Replaced as Head of Homeland Security

March 6, 2026

Pro-Palestinian Green Party Candidate’s Anti-Israel Agenda Fuels Senate Hearing Stunt

March 6, 2026

The Great MAGA Unraveling

March 6, 2026
Subscribe to ONC's Newsletter

Get the latest balanced blend of news, opinion and policy proposals from OUR NATIONAL CONVERSATION. Published weekly.

Our National Conversation

Less Hate. More Debate.

HOME NEWS VOICES MULTIMEDIA GET INVOLVED ABOUT
Donate