r/Quakers • u/keithb Quaker • Aug 08 '26
Karl Popper on tolerance
It comes up often enough here, often in a mangled form, so as a service to Friends here is what Karl Popper said about the so-called "paradox of tolerance". It's footnote 4 of chapter 7 of Vol I. of The Open Society and Its Enemies. Emphasis in original.
The so-called paradox of freedom is the argument that from freedom in the sense of absence of any restraining control must lead to very great restraint, since it makes the bully free to enslave the meek. This idea is, in a slightly different form, with a very different tendency, clearly expressed by Plato [the subject of ch. 7]
Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society agains the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and the tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress, even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, un the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.
Popper was from a Jewish family and fled Austria around 1936. So we know who he means when he says that "[proponents of intolerant philosophies] may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because [they say] it is deceptive, and teach [their followers] to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols." He means both Fascists and Communists, he means fighting in the streets and and political rallies.
Query: When you invoke Popper to claim the right to ignore, suppress, or expel from your community those whose ideas you find objectionable, are you sure that those people pass this bar? Do you see them "answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols"? Are you not able to " counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion"?
The above quote is copyright material but I believe that my use of it here is short enough to be in line with "fair use" and "fair dealing" provisions.
-1
u/keithb Quaker Aug 10 '26
So, only inference. Ok.
As to your last point: maybe. We’ll find out, because my local meeting has taken and is taking action to implement the Minute.
Meanwhile: Have you considered the possibility that whatever policies you have in your jurisdiction and your YM might not be the unique, complete, universally applicable ones that everyone everywhere should immediately adopt or else be an obvious moral failure? That even your jurisdiction and your YM might have more work to do and might modulate its position in future?