The Rise of Intolerance

The Rise of Intolerance

All we have been hearing for the past 12 months is that Donald J. Trump is a sexist, homophobe, racist and/or a xenophobe.  It has been the cry of the Hillary Clinton machine and the DNC.  It has been sold to us so much that we are almost immune to it.  You can argue all you want about whether it’s true.  At this point, it really doesn’t matter.  What does matter is that the election is over and Hillary Clinton lost.  And, in my opinion, one of the reasons she lost is that she sold hate and nothing else.

Donald Trump will be the President on January 20th.  I’ve said that in prior articles and I’m saying that again.

Intolerance in America

However, there is a phenomenon that has occurred since the election which has me really scared.  (Not scared enough that I’m looking for safety pins, but a little scared).  And, that is the rise of Intolerance in America.  And, in this case, specifically, intolerance from the left.

According to the Oxford dictionary, intolerance is defined as:

Unwillingness to accept views, beliefs, or behaviour that differ from one’s own

Does that sound familiar?  Does it sound like the state of our country today?

intolerance

All one has to do is look at Facebook or Twitter.  Just, read the posts on the 2016 Election.  One quick glance and you will see that most of the parties on the left (and to a lesser extent on the right), are exhibiting mass intolerance.  I understand that people are angry.  I get it.  However, just because people are angry, doesn’t mean respect and an open dialogue with the other side is impossible.

My Personal Experience

To date, I have lost three close friends because of my support of Donald J. Trump.  Two of them were friends since high school and college.  One of those two I have been actively involved in business with over the past 20 years.  Both of them are liberals.  And, most importantly, both of them have become intolerant of opposing sides.

My business associate and college roommate, called me names and blocked me on Facebook without any warning.  He determined that I was a racist and un-caring.  How, could a thinking, intelligent man, ever think about voting for Donald Trump?  The reality is I don’t expect to ever hear from him again.  Meanwhile, his brother has become a close friend.  It’s a shame.

The second was a friend from high school.  In fact, we were almost like brothers.  The other day I got the following email from him:

Sorry frank. I have to separate from you. We really have different values now and I don’t want to w part of yours. I’m sorry. This is best. Bye.

This email is almost the definition of intolerance.

I was immediately blocked and de-friended.  I have tried to contact him vie email, but I have received no response.  However, other friends have told me he is still posting about the election.  I guess he just doesn’t want to hear from the other side, regardless of how intelligent or stupid the opposing arguments may be.

The third person is someone I’ve worked with for the past ten years.  Right after the Billy Bush video tape was released, I received a text from him stating that after this, was I still voting for Trump?  When I informed him I was, we argued for a few more minutes.  He finally couldn’t take it anymore.  I then got a text from him saying in part:  “Frank, I can no longer talk to you.  I feel sorry for you.  And, I will pray for you.”

An Intolerant Society

Based upon my personal experience, it appears obvious that we have become an intolerant society.  This is at least true, from the left.  If I had the time, I could give you many other examples.  However, I just don’t have the time right now.

I will leave you with two sites that hopefully will help the left understand what happened and why tolerance is important.  The first is an article I posted on Facebook today for all my left leaning friends:  https://hbr.org/2016/11/what-so-many-people-dont-get-about-the-u-s-working-class.  This article shows why tolerance is important.  It was written by a liberal, Democrat and explains what the elite establishment do not understand.  If you don’t listen to the other side, you will never see this article.

The second is a film made by DW Grifith in 1915.  After he made his epic film about racism, “The Birth of a Nation,” he was condemned as being a racist.  In response, he made another film called “Intolerance.”  It was his response to the criticism.  It shows the effects of Intolerance on the world.  Unfortunately, it’s a long film and it’s silent.  But, I think you should all watch it.

Let’s learn not only to be a loving and diverse society, but to be a tolerant society as well.  It is important that we listen to both sides of an argument.  Do not block the other side out.  You may still disagree, but at least you won’t need a safety pin to find a safe space if you don’t get your way.

Share This Post

8 Responses to "The Rise of Intolerance"

  1. We all have the wisdom, now to practice it on an individual level!

    Actions have consequences. Some call it “tough love”.

    “Be sure you put your feet in the right place, then stand firm.” Abraham Lincoln

    “Let’s learn not only to be a loving and diverse society, but to be a tolerant society as well. It is important that we listen to both sides of an argument.”

    If “tolerance”, compromise, requires one to deviate from “To thine own self be true”, it is a fool’s choice. Listening to both sides of an argument never violates this “principle”.

    I would change the word “tolerance” to “accepting”, with the understanding that accepting is understanding, not capitulation, but respectful, honorable, and loyal opposition.

    There is a point at which some become incapacitated and unable to function because the merits of the argument, ideology or situation cannot be rationally resolved. Thus they shut down, walk away, and refuse to participate.

    There is a quote by F. Scott Fitzgerald which talks about this as well: “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.”

    Tolerance often requires or implies social or political suicide. Rather consider accepting, not tolerating, but free to disagree and act accordingly. This is one of the 1960s “Est” movement principles. Opposites attract when they are morally ethical.

    The challenge is to compromise where possible, but never on principles. (Gandhi). There is a profound chasm between an ideologue and pragmatist. Our arena, in good times and bad times, is Ayn Rand’s ethical egoism where “moral agents” “ought” to do what is in their best interest”.

    “Tolerance” is an inbreed abrasiveness of the ideologues world, where true peace can only be found through isolation with sameness. “Accepting” is a pragmatists world where differences are not always understood, but they are embraced.

    Don’t give in but don’t give up. Being “principled” is not free, but superior!

    Reply
  2. The rash of hate crimes against immigrants, Muslims, transgender, gay people and minorities since Trump’s election is a testament to how “tolerant” his supporters are. Hillary received over 2,000,000 more votes than Trump so it wasn’t exactly a rousing endorsement of Trump.. I don’t see how not wanting the supporters of the candidate of the KKK and the American Nazi Party in my life is being “intolerant.” Trump’s own words have shown him to be lacking in compassion, diplomacy or any true understanding of the Constitution, but his choice of an anti-Semite white supremicist as his chief advisor confirmed that he is going to pursue the most intolerant, right wing path. I am willing to put my 69 year old body on the line to defend anyone I witness being bullied or intimidated….and that’s why I’m wearing a safety pin. It is a committment to not stand idly by while all our social progress is attacked or while anyone is demeaned or threatened. And yes, you can tell a lot about a person by their friends, and if one’s friends think it’s ok to ridicule the disabled, demean women, scapegoat immigrants, and have David Duke, Jerry Falwell and Putin on their side, iI think those are “friends” I can do without. Gosh, I’m so intolerant!

    Reply
  3. Sorry Frank, the logic is flawed. You are assuming that Trump’s vile rhetoric is somehow ‘normal’. It is far from normal and I resist your attempts at normalizing it. That is something I cannot tolerate. So, if that’s intolerance, sign me up.

    PS don’t talk about me again in the 3rd person. That is rude.

    Reply
  4. One who does not acknowledge that “vile’ is in the interpretation, you see what you want to see, hear what you want to hear, and when applied to all, it appears at the fringes, for all. It is defended as “free speech”. If you have no stomach for that, then you are at odds with our constitution and the 1st Amendment.

    Trump did not say or imply a vast swath of that which is applied to him. He did not, to most, imply all Hispanics, and those from third world countries, were rapist. He did say criminal rapist from Mexico should and would be deported. And he gave us a civics lesson many are inclined to ignore. Sex with a twelve year old in Mexico is legal in all but one of it states. Bring that culture here, allow them to refuse to assimilate, and you have statutory rape.

    In the 1920s we shut down our borders because of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti. As with the current chaos, they both adhered to an anarchist movement that advocated relentless warfare against what they perceived as a violent and oppressive government. This is the essence of radical progressivism, or do we not notice?

    Speech often appears as innocuous as Joe Biden’s whisper into Obama’s ear “It is a big fucking deal” (ObamaCare). Certainly vile to all, to some, but behold, it is normal. Both men and women are crude and vile in their Hillary discriminated “private and public persona”, discretionary speech. Equality maybe not admired. At the fringes it is “normal”, and getting worse, ask your mother. It often makes a clear point with passionate inference through slang.

    There is a psychological deepness that was simplified by Churchill, when he was accused, of all things, not speaking correct Kings English. His rejoinder was “If you understood me, I was speaking perfect English! Is it the message or the semantic delivery that confuses us? We complain about “truth” because of its delivery?

    It was but a century ago that “Dam,” got you mouth washed out with soap by your mother. God, how we miss her, a great champion against secularism and an acolyte of Judeo-Christianity.

    Then on to the gutters of the “Black Lives Matters”, “Occupy Wall Street”, those marches and boycotts, the George Soros paid demonstrators, and the signs that are, to many, morally and materially despicable. It is those signs that come from the real “baskets of deplorables”, or the Sal Alinsky army of secular progressives, an example of the intolerant demanding tolerance.

    Maybe some of us do need a “trigger warning” and a “safe place to retreat to.” If we reject friends because we disagree with them, not because of what they do, then it is our friends that benefit and are blessed. Those who cannot stand the heat should get out of the kitchen.

    Reply
  5. Peace, civility and tolerance, individual well being for all, universal opportunity for all to advance socially and materially, and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were JFK classical liberal ideologies which were complimentary with conservatism…..well that was back then?

    Liberalism today is infected with radical progressivism, and not your JFK liberalism. Wedge issues suppliant the “merits of the argument”…..when the argument fails on the merits!

    It is not what Trump said but how he said it, how we interpreted it and how we heard it. This concept says all too much more about us, than him. So much is an assumption where “ass-u-me” makes an “ass” out of “u” and “me”.

    Benjamin Bergen is the author of the book: “What the F: What Swearing Reveals About Our Language, Our Brains, and Ourselves.” The professor of Cognitive Science at UC San Diego said cursing could be linked to higher intelligence. Hold on, that might infuriate the alt left.

    Remember the seven dirty words or “Filthy Words”, they are seven English language words that American comedian George Carlin first listed in 1972 in his monologue “Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television”.. Well, surprise, they are normal now, lyrics in all too many “Normal” hip hop ultra-Hollywood word librettos.

    “We start to discover that they are just words. It’s kind of like George Carlin put it: The words are innocent. It’s the uses that “you” put them to, your interpretation, that can be harmful or not,” he said.

    “I don’t know that there was a ‘Eureka!’ moment or anything like that. […] On these other things, we get into the field of hypocrisy. Where you really cannot pin down what these rules they want to enforce are. It’s just impossible to say ‘this is a blanket rule.’ You’ll see some newspapers print ‘f blank blank k’. Some print ‘f asterisk asterisk k’. Some blank– Some put ‘f blank blank blank’. Some put the word ‘bleep’. Some put, um… ‘expletive deleted’. So there’s no… there’s no real consistent standard. It’s not a science. It’s a notion that they have and its superstitious. These words have no power. We give them this power by refusing to be free and easy with them. We give them great power over us. They really, in themselves, have no power. It’s the thrust of the sentence that makes them either good or bad.
    — George Carlin, Comedian and Actor George Carlin, NPR (2004)

    Kinda throws a wrench into the definition of vile, the intolerance of the tolerant. But, hey, civility around my mother….or else…is still in style!

    Reply
  6. Frank DeMartini, I am sorry for what happen to you. That being said, even though I do not want to excuse your ex-friends, there is another point here that needs to be make. Politics is a reflect of your values, when you accept a candidate, you throw your support to what he stands for. This can be usually overlooked but when things go to the extremes, something gets broken. For us, Trump is the “perfect” example of what it´s unacceptable, he has crossed the red line loooooong ago. And when you jump in his boat, it is very difficult for us to justify it or look passed it; because we know that you not only accept it but think similarly. And that´s painful with a friend. If the candidate is “normal” or morally justificable, a regular Republican, then no biggie.

    Reply

Post Comment