A relevant expirience from my past that involves the klan would be the MLK day parades I participated in Denver back in the early 90s. The KKK and some affiliated Nazi skinhead groups would hold a rally at the same time that was directly on the parade route. The first year I joined the small amount of MLK parade marchers and others who gathered around where the klan was having thier little rally and joined in the shouting and rock throwing. I was prepared to do violence on the klan people. It turned out very bad: teargas and police beatiung people with batons, a full fledged riot ensued after the clan had escaped in a county jail bus ( ironicly enough).

Upon reflection I realized that I had violated the spirit of MLK day and that I had behaved no better than those same skinheads who beat me up in an alley a few months before because they incorrectly thought I was of hispanic descent. I realized that to have free speech, that also means that even the most distastful and innappropriately timed display of speech, must be allowed or having free speech was pointless.

The next year, I stayed with the MLK parade the whole way. My spirit had changed, no longer did I feel hate for the klan and their ideaology, but I felt compassion instead. I realized that marching peacefully for equality, desegregation and tolerance was the way to go. By responding to the hateful rhetoric they espoused via bullhorns with peacful march full of song and prayer we countered and challenged the intolerant veiwpoint without resorting to being intolerant ourselves.

[ 04-09-2004, 08:03 PM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]

Boo yah! I think you nailed it Chewie! Don't stretch the meaning of the word 'intolerance' to encompass actions that it does not entail. I think Dr King was a pretty decent guy, had some great ideas and enough charisma and willpower to convince people to do (not necessarily think) as he said. But he wasn't about tolerance, no way. He was about equality, which is very different.

To be honest, universal tolerance isnt possible anyway. You can be tolerant of individual people's actions (which can link us back to the smoking ban issue). But you can't be (in)tolerant of abstract concepts such as 'hate' or 'prejudice', because 'tolerance' itself is essentially an abstract concept, and when you go abstract, you go subjective. Everyone has their own ideas as to what abstract concepts are, whether or not you can effectively communicate your ideas through language is another thing entirely. Hence all the hissing and scratching between Yorick and yourself [img]smile.gif[/img]

My stance is that it is folly to apply tolerance to abstract social ideas. Because I don't think that 'tolerance' is necessarily a 'good' (oooooh, another abstract concept) thing. Conflict is necessary in order to create your reality. To preach the benefits of tolerance, it is necessary to create sweeping, dogmatic principles of social order, conduct, and physical law. Yet, dogma is subjective. And this subjective knowledge must be justified by personal conviction, otherwise it is merely a collection of words, sounds and visual symbols. And this personal conviction creates individual verifiability (ie: it is right/true because I personally believe it to be so')which in turn conflicts with the concept of detatched, unpersonalised universal knowledge. So tolerance ultimately, is intolerable... in a universal framework ('universal' again being a subjective abstract term).

Bad logic, yes, but I don't care, I'm tolerance-intolerant. </font>[/QUOTE]Interesting perspective. I doesn't totally work for me though. I do agree that growth comes from conflict- how we individually define that conflict as good or bad is subjective.

I am a firm believer that at some point our abstract concepts about reality manifest in some way or another. If we (collectively and/or individually) beleive that racial/religious/social tolerance is the ideal reality, we will manifest that reality. So on one hand while abtract concepts like tolerance, good, evil, ect. are just subjective abstract ideas, they also have the potential to become tangible and objectively discernable in our social order. Anyway, my .02 on the idea of abstract vs reality. Interestingly enough, on several message boards that allow for custom user titles, I have chosen "Realistic Abstract" for mine.

I do have to disagree that Dr. King wasn't about tolerance. His actions and words were not only chosen to win equality for Black Americans, but to also win over the White population that supported segregation, either directly by advocating it or indirectly by allowing it.

His words support this, a few examples:

This last quote is the most telling of the depth of tolerance King stood for:

Chewie: In your quotes Dr King seems to be preaching love and understanding, born out of a desire for peace after centuries of hatred and racial oppression. And I'd have gladly stood with him in that pursuit. However, I don't think he is asking that 'black' and 'white' people tolerate each other, rather that they dissolve the definitions in their minds that they use to segregate and alienate each other with, and unite in fellowship. That's not tolerance, that's brother/sisterhood.

I'd say that tolerance is coexistence with elements of the world which you do not like or agree with. Putting up with the unpleasant so to speak. Dr King did not put up with racial prejudice, he openly defied and opposed it. He did not tolerate it, nor did he ask for his views to be tolerated. Rather, he suggested that his notions of peaceful fellowship be accepted by all. ACCEPTED, not TOLERATED. This difference in terminolgy seems only slight at first, but it fundamentally defines the way in which people approach conflict.

Bottom line is, Dude, I'm with ya! :D I agree with you on the merits of your belief, we just differ in our definitions of tolerance. And by my definition, I think tolerance is a bad idea. It means you bottle up your discomfort, balling up your disgust. Tolerance is unhealthy man. You gotta be yourself, unabashedly. Don't put up with shit on your doorstep [img]smile.gif[/img] Conflict is NOT to be avoided at all costs, conflict makes the world go 'round.

[ 04-10-2004, 01:38 AM: Message edited by: The Hierophant ]

Heirophant,
I see your perspective, and acknowledge that we have different perspectives concerning the defintion and practical application of the concept of tolerance.

Cheers!

Right on bro! :D

HAS ANYBODY SEEN MY SMOKING THREAD ? I'M SURE I LEFT IT HERE

Uh....I ate it. (I had help) [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Sorry!

Yeah I helped him. Uuuuuuuuugh! Cronic dioreah.
(If that's how you spell it.)

[ 04-10-2004, 11:49 AM: Message edited by: General Nosaj ]

I think it was banned.

This was a Smoking Ban thread? Who knew? Oh, did I see on page 5 that Dr. King smoked? Yo soy confuzzled. [img]graemlins/hidesbehindsofa.gif[/img]

Well, at least this Smoking Ban thread didn't spawn of two offsprings.