Tolerance does not require tolerating the intolerant
Bigots argue they should be tolerated. They are wrong.
On Oct. 14, my article about the challenges of identity and ethics facing journalists today went live on the Current’s website. The following day, Wayne Lela, founder of an anti-LGBTQ+ hate group, Heterosexuals Organized for a Moral Environment, based out of Downers Grove, Ill., sent an all-too-familiar right-wing screed to the Current. He claims the media in this country is getting what’s coming to it, and is allegedly dominated by “liberal bigots.”
Americans who share Lela’s similarly dehumanizing viewpoints about their fellow citizens often decry the media as being bigoted against them simply for fact-checking their views and statements. Even as they spew hateful rhetoric, they claim that any attempt at disproving or debating their beliefs is another form of hate.
They are wrong, whether they are the founder of a hate group that started in 1990, or the 45th President of the United States. There is no need to tolerate the Wayne Lelas of the world. It is dangerous to do so, and the only correct action is to confront them at every turn.
This is not the first time Lela has attempted to direct his misguided crusade against a college publication. In 2015, a letter of his was controversially published by The DePauw. In the letter he argued that tolerating homosexuality would eventually lead to the legalization of “incestuous relationships.”
Lela also had a letter published by the Mount Holyoke News in 2017. The paper offered its own blistering criticism of his views, which include accusations that the Southern Poverty Law Center is run by “liberal bigots” who are out promoting the “homosexual agenda.” Notably, the SPLC designated Lela’s hate group as such back in 2010 for spreading anti-gay propaganda and false information.
In addition to his regular letters to colleges outside of his state, he and his fellow hate group spokesman, John McCartney, frequent community college campuses across the United States, disseminating misinformation about gay and lesbian individuals and lifestyles.
In his letter to the Current, he complained about the “liberal bigots” in the media making “criminals out of decent, ethical business-people who merely don’t want to cater to heterophobic homosexuals.” These are the words of a man who wants to be treated with the respect and deference he has spent decades crusading against for a select group of Americans.
Sadly, the call of intolerance has sometimes come from inside our own house. On Nov. 28, 2017, an American River College student was arrested for flying a drone over San Francisco 49ers’ and Oakland Raiders’ football games and air-dropping anti-media leaflets onto the crowds. They also posted online plans to drop large containers of nails on the homes and businesses of their enemies via flying drones.
The individual in question had a troubled history with students and professors at ARC, including multiple near-physical altercations, some of which resulted in them being asked to leave classes.
ARC itself has dealt with white supremacist propaganda appearing on campus. “It’s Okay To Be White” posters were found on the campus in 2018, and again in 2019, along with “White Lives Matter” graffiti in restrooms.
These people believe they must be tolerated, and that failure to do so somehow exposes a form of hypocrisy in their enemies. But in the same breath, they will shout “You will not replace us” and “Jews will not replace us” while marching through neighborhoods bearing torches.
For years, social media networks like Facebook and Twitter have allowed these groups to spread their message to anyone who will listen. It has taken bodies to lay bleeding in our streets and schools, our places of rest and recreation, our churches, mosques and synagogues before social media networks found the gumption to begin the process of shutting down the online presence of hate groups.
That is the cost of tolerating the intolerant. When we believe that even those who wish to hurt and kill us deserve the rights and freedoms they would deny others, we collectively offer our silent consent to their beliefs. When our inaction and unwillingness to confront these ideas emboldens the Dylan Roofs, the Robert Gregory Bowers and the Patrick Crusiuses of America, the blood they shed is on all our hands.
In 1945, the philosopher Karl Popper authored “The Open Society and Its Enemies.” Within its pages, he stated:
“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 against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.”
America’s collective failure to take a stand against the roots of hateful ideologies is grounded in a belief that we can “coexist” with people who wish to restrict the rights of others, dehumanize religious or racial groups, or call for the deaths or expulsion of their enemies.
Ellen DeGeneres once called for unconditional tolerance in defense of her friendship with former president George W. Bush, who wanted a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage in the U.S.
She effectively made the same argument that people like Lela fall back upon when they have no actual defense for their statements and actions. In her eyes, it’s better to extend a hand to those who would harm you no matter what. In her own words:
“Just because I don’t agree with someone on everything doesn’t mean that I’m not going to be friends with them. When I say, ‘Be kind to one another,’ I don’t mean only the people that think the same way that you do. I mean, ‘Be kind to everyone, it doesn’t matter.’”
It’s a mindset for a world that doesn’t exist. It does nothing to defend the people who face real dangers posed by the intolerant. It instead puts the responsibility of fixing bigotry on the victims of this hate.
The intolerant will always use it as a shield against criticism of their ideas. They will demand tolerance from those they hate, even as they peddle ideologies that celebrate the oppression of other human beings over their sexuality, race or religion. They push pseudoscience and misinterpretation of real science as facts and expect the deference given to experts in a field.
This cannot go on. It is wrong to expect LGBTQ+ and BIPOC individuals to turn the other cheek to men like Wayne Lela. They do not crusade for decades on end against the human rights of other Americans simply out of a friendly disagreement.
For there to be an America worth fighting for, we cannot extend tolerance to the intolerant. Educate them if possible, but otherwise, shut them out and shut them down. They should not be allowed to feel comfortable or welcome in this nation. We already know their unwillingness to extend tolerance towards their enemies. We have counted the dead in their wake.
Alexander • Nov 5, 2020 at 7:00 pm
Unfortunately, Cal, your spiel about poor innocent apologists for traitors who betrayed their country to fight for “states rights” (slavery) and deserved to be crushed for doesn’t pass muster.
You posit a scenario about how mean leftists/liberals make these people feel unwanted (as they rightfully should, the Confederacy is not a hill worth dying on, as proven by the many who did actually fight to die on that hill and failed to accomplish anything meaningful in the process). You posit a scenario where these misguided souls feel endangered for their support of “history” or “heritage” that was mostly woven by embittered Southern white supremacist trash who have spent the better part of the post-Civil War years and this century, up until today, trying to convince the world that they had a Lost Cause worth more than the paper their propaganda and “alternative stances” on actual recorded history is printed on. You say that this “makes them sympathetic.”
What about the dead killed by those spree killers fueled by extreme right-wing propaganda I discussed before? Does that not also garner some sympathy for the people who stand up for their rights?
It’s true there are some people who would consider peaceful or violent opposition to modern day Confederacy apologists as reason enough to support a man who currently is in the middle of trying to disenfranchise Americans of their right to vote. A man who has cast doubt on the process of voting entirely because he fears losing more than he fears damaging our ailing democracy. A man who has sabotaged the postal service in order to make it even more difficult for Americans to vote. A man who openly supports violent white supremacists in our police departments every time they “get scared” and pump 20 rounds at the nearest African American.
What is also true is that the problem with those people isn’t that others disagree with them, violently or otherwise. The problem, in your scenario, is that these people believe that a heritage worth celebrating is one where their states kept human beings as cattle to do work that wealthy white land owners didn’t want to do themselves. An institution which led them to betray their so-called fellow Americans, leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths. And that doesn’t even factor in the slaves who died to their cruelty and during the war.
The scenario you posit, however, is very typical of many self-described “classic liberals.” It’s easy for you to equate those who march in support of real traitors to the country to those who march for the right to get married, the right to not get shot on a mere suspicion of criminal activity, sometimes both! You can pretend to be the adult in the room, admonishing disobedient children for not adhering to nebulously defined rules of decorum that one side has proven they have no intention of following. You risk nothing, and don’t actually worry about gaining anything.
And that is why I can never agree with you. They are not equivalent in the least. One group supports the questionably respectful remembrance of traitors who actively sought to enshrine an institution that turned real human beings into property to be used and discarded. People who march in support of BIPOC and LGBTQ+ rights want other human beings to be able to enjoy the absolute comfort and safety you and I do. Things we never had to march for.
Extremists on the right rely on the ardent defenses of their positions from people like you. By pretending those who champion disenfranchisement and oppression deserve the same tolerance as those who in many cases are the targets of the former, you aren’t defending free speech. In many cases during the discussion, you have defended hate speech.
Cal • Nov 3, 2020 at 6:38 pm
Alexander, first off let me correct my typo, that sentence should have read “I do believe LGBTQ+ individuals are human beings that deserve the same human rights that everyone else enjoys.”
For context and to make my positions more understandable, I’m a classic liberal. I’m pro-choice, democrat, civil libertarian. I’m guessing that as I write this, we’re both pulling for Joe Biden to get the orange buffoon out of the White House.
Where you and i differ is that I truly believe in free speech. Just because i may disagree with something someone is saying doesn’t give me the right to prevent them from speaking. This is especially true when violence or other unlawful means are used to prevent people from speaking.
I’ll give you typical scenario that illustrates my reasoning. Lets say some right wingers have a permit to march. Their message is to protect statues of Civil War Confederate Generals. They are marching peacefully when opposition groups start throwing rocks at them and hitting them with sticks. The result is that the right wingers end up looking like victims and gain sympathy for their cause, while the opposition groups look like bullies and lose support.
I don’t expect you to agree with me and it’s fine if you want to end the debate, I’ll give you the last word if you wish. I do appreciate the civil tone of your debate and your willingness to engage with those you disagree with.
Hopefully there are no grievous typos in this response. Take care and thanks.
Alexander • Nov 2, 2020 at 5:44 pm
I will answer two of your questions more openly, Cal, but I recommend you actually read my first response. I addressed what should be done there as well.
Should someone opposing same-sex marriage on religious grounds be physically attacked? Should someone criticizing Black Lives Matter be stoned? No. But they should be opposed by every non-violent means possible, they should be deplatformed and driven out. And if they do get violent, then I don’t feel sorry one bit for what happens to them afterwards.
Because you seem to be unable to understand me, let me be absolutely clear once more: I do not believe extreme right wingers deserve to have their views legitimized in any form of peaceful public debate. They should not be allowed to march. When they are treated with tolerance, when they are allowed to propagate their views, they use that to legitimize other extreme acts.
I again reference Robert Gregory Bowers and Dylan Roof. Those are the people you believe deserve legitimacy and tolerance. You claim otherwise, but you are also a liar.
You claim that LGBTQ+ individuals are not human beings who deserve rights that you believe Nazis should enjoy, which is either a typo or your immaculate hood slipping off your head a little more. If it’s the latter, why should anyone believe you when you claim that you do not support mass murderers who shoot up synagogues or mosques? You’re willing to make excuses for the continued tolerance of those who do.
As for “what should LGTBTQ+ individuals have done about Obama?” They protested for their rights, as they have done before his presidency, and after. You can find plenty of news about it, though I’m not sure any news sources you approve of would have covered their marches.
If you believe the bad guys are those who use violence to silence ideas, why are you specifically angry about actual fascists getting punched for openly wishing for the deaths of their enemies here in the United States, like “Chucky Sneed” so eloquently put it? Where is your outrage for the injustices that LGBTQ+ and BIPOC individuals have experienced?
I will answer that question for you: You don’t actually care. For people like you, all lives never actually matter. If they did, you wouldn’t have such a thinly veiled problem with the concept of black people telling the world that their lives have the same legitimacy as every other human being’s on the planet.
Your initial comment was never about “all voices should be heard.” You were upset specifically at the prospect of hate groups lead by people such as Wayne Lela being called out for what they are and actively opposed for it.
That you can claim, with allegedly sound mind and body, that you “don’t know” whether the Nazis had good OR bad ideas, but they should be allowed to express all those ideas anyway is the canary in the coal mine for further discussion with you. You believe they should be legitimized, you believe the people who fueled right-wing spree killers should be legitimized. I do not, and never will.
Somehow, I don’t believe you when you said you do not support the men who have committed mass murder in support of extreme right-wing positions on race and religion. Somehow, I don’t expect you to have the same fire your your belly to stand against those who threatened Biden supporters with their vehicles in Texas this past Sunday. Somehow, I don’t believe you would speak out against the armed “poll watchers” being deployed to polling sites by right-wing extremists.
You have spent the last three days stumping for those who have used violence, in all the ways you say you stand against, to try and suppress opposing voices. Somehow, I don’t believe you when you claim that all voices should be heard in our society.
Cal • Nov 2, 2020 at 4:35 pm
Alexander, I’ll answer your questions even though you only tangentially addressed my questions.
I do not believe that peaceful marchers should have police vehicles driven through their crowds. However I also believe that extreme right wingers should also be allowed to march peacefully without rocks being thrown at them. Do you disagree?
I do believe LGBTQ+ individuals are not human beings that deserve the same human rights that everyone else enjoys. I also believe that Nazis should be afforded these same rights.
I do not support anyone who shoots up a synagogue or a mosque or any other establishment.
I really don’t know if Nazis have good ideas, all their ideas might be misguided at best and harmful at worst. But here’s the deal as Joe Biden likes to put it, people should be allowed to have ideas. People should be allowed to peacefully express ideas. Even if you don’t like someone’s ideas, they are allowed to peacefully speak their minds.
To me, it’s easy to tell who the bad guys are. The bad guys are the ones who use violence to silence ideas. People who resort to violence and break the law should be arrested, regardless of whether they are skin-heads or antifa.
Alexander • Nov 1, 2020 at 6:48 pm
You appear to have neglected the part of the article where I wrote “Educate them if possible”.
There exists people who are actually willing to change for the better, if pushed. As you have so helpfully reminded us all, President Obama changed his positions on same-sex marriage, even if it was out of political expedience. A man who readily ordered missiles to be fired into crowded civilians markets on the other side of the globe can show the willingness to change. But they had to be pushed.
Do you know how LGBTQ+ individuals have fought for their rights over the years? It was through protest. They got loud. They’ve had to fight for it in a way that likely you, and definitely myself have never had to experience. Some were hurt and killed in the process.
People complained about their protests as well, even the peaceful ones, claiming they were violent or dangerous as a means to discredit them. It’s nothing new for regressives and those who defend them. Even today LGBTQ+ individuals in this country must take care where they walk and in what cities they openly express themselves, lest some hateful mob make an attempt on their lives.
It is through these efforts that many people ultimately changed their positions on LGBTQ+ rights over the years. I know I have. I am not the same man today as I was twenty years ago, and I’m still learning more about things and adjusting my positions as I learn from the people who will be most affected by the decisions of those in power. It turns out that one of the most important aspects of humanity is the ability to empathize with others, a trait that people like Wayne Lela lack.
Let’s turn your questions around.
Do you believe anyone who peacefully marches for equal rights under the law should have police vehicles driven through their crowds? Do you believe LGBTQ+ individuals are not human beings that deserve the same human rights that you and I enjoy? Do you support men like Robert Gregory Bowers shooting up a synagogue out of the misguided belief that the Jewish population of this country are somehow responsible for bringing “invaders” to live among us? Do you believe the Nazis had actually good ideas beyond simply getting some trains to run on time? Do you believe the Trump supporters in Richmond this Sunday to be justified in shooting at unarmed counter-protestors?
Do you only ever grow concerned with the sanctity of human life when it is white supremacists and members of other hate groups who are at risk?
You are free to criticize BLM, you are free to claim that LGBTQ+ individuals don’t deserve the same protections under the law that you and I share. We are free to call you out for what you are. If Nazis getting punched makes you nervous, if the founder of a hate group is who you intend to side with in any given debate regarding equality in this country, you are part of the problem, and should feel uncomfortable about that. Once you start making excuses for those people, you’ve put yourself in the same wheelhouse.
And once you go beyond “merely” espousing hate, and act on that hate to oppress, hurt or kill people based on a belief that they are somehow inferior to you, you’ve crossed a point of no return.
I openly advocate for the dismantling and deplatforming of hate groups. By “shut them out and shut them down”, I mean exactly that. Social media networks should do more to completely remove their presence. When they make websites, they should be made impossible to find via search engines. Major hosting providers should decline to do business with hate groups, and force them to find their own means to maintain an online presence.
When they march through cities with torches at night shouting “Jews will not replace us,” it would be nice if the police would put in the same effort to intimidate them and shut down their hate marches as they do for people protesting against their fellow boys in blue planting a knee on the neck of a man until he asphyxiates. But seeing as how they aren’t the most reliable of allies when it comes to protecting minorities in this country, especially right now, we will need to settle for counter protests.
Unfortunately, when a Dylan Roof emerges among the bigots and actually finds the intestinal fortitude to act on their depraved “beliefs”, violence may be sadly necessary to stop them. That’s what it means to be willing to defend society and the concept of tolerance against the intolerant. I’d rather it wasn’t, but some people, like Robert Gregory Bowers, made that decision for those they murdered.
Chucky Sneed • Nov 1, 2020 at 5:42 pm
We don’t want to oppress you. We want you exterminated like the vermin you are.
Sigrun • Nov 1, 2020 at 3:46 pm
ABSOLUTELY!! If you give bigots like this an inch, they’ll take the entire house. A reasonable and just has no place for people whose entire ideology rests upon hate, and giving them a platform does nothing but tell them that their ideology is worth engaging with. Shut them down and shut them out!
Mea • Nov 1, 2020 at 3:39 pm
Amazing how someone can suggest it’s wrong to advocate punching a Nazi when they literally tried to genocide Jewish people. They deserve far worse, along with people who hurt and kill POC and LGBT folks! Maybe think about the murders before you get upset about punching nazis.
Cal • Oct 31, 2020 at 8:05 pm
You say “shut them out and shut them down.” How do you propose doing this? Should someone opposing same-sex marriage on religious grounds be physically attacked? Should someone criticizing Black Lives Matter be stoned? Do you advocate punching a Nazi?
In other words, do you advocate physical violence towards those who are espousing ideas that you disagree with? Keep in mind that just a few years ago Barack Obama opposed same-sex marriage. How do you think people should have dealt with President Obama’s intolerance?