Limits of tolerance

[Marmalade]

"Leicester violence spreads to Birmingham as 200-strong masked mob surround Hindu temple: Riot police are pelted with bottles during protest after weeks of unrest between Muslims and Hindus 'fuelled by false claims of kidnap and mosque attacks'."

Is this what happens when we tolerate intolerance?

External Link/Members Only
External Link/Members Only

(Keep comments to thread title please to stay within the rules)

[sir wanksalot]

F*ck me Marmalade. You've got me snookered with that!

I don't know how to answer without falling foul of the rules so I will let this topic take shape before jumping in.

[lillythesavage]

F*ck me Marmalade. You've got me snookered with that!

I don't know how to answer without falling foul of the rules so I will let this topic take shape before jumping in.

Read it before you posted, snookered too, 

[bushman]

It's a difficult one. Extremism and intolerance will always be present even in the most tolerable societies.

[daviemac]

Hidden Image/Members Only

[lamboman]

(Keep comments to thread title please to stay within the rules)

Well that's not possible is it after what you posted which breaks at least 2 rules I'd say.

[king tarzan]

F*ck me Marmalade. You've got me snookered with that!

I don't know how to answer without falling foul of the rules so I will let this topic take shape before jumping in.

A minefield

[Marmalade]

OK. We can all think of examples. But how do we individually see what we mean by tolerance.
Is tolerance a virtue in itself? Parents, where do you draw the line in tolerating bad behavious from children? What about neighbours. Is turning the other cheek a long term strategy? What about the neighbours that don't tolerate you (or your children) doing something perfectly legal? When in company, at what point do you cease to tolerate bad behaviour from someone else and how do you deal with that?

I don't wnat to discuss politics or religion. The link is just to show an extreme example to question what exactly do we mean by being tolerant? What about disruptive children running amock in schools and terrorising teachers? There's a topic we can discuss. Teachers have to tolerate a lot these days.

Here's a couple of articles food for thought.
"Tolerance is more than putting up with things – it’s a moral virtue" (Do you agree?)
External Link/Members Only

another one,
"The limits of tolerance: ethics and human nature" (really? are we pre-programmed to be tolerant?)
External Link/Members Only

[king tarzan]

A cricket match started this..

A football match started the Yugoslavia conflict


Anyway endo subjecto as a ban looms for being out of el lino

[Bogof60]

I don't know if you are right or not KT but if you are in your first 2 paragraphs then I truly despair with the World.

[king tarzan]

I don't know if you are right or not KT but if you are in your first 2 paragraphs then I truly despair with the World.

First two 100% pure facts

Tensions were simmering beforehand and those two above just boiled everything over

It's a minefield to get banned on this thread.. so keep it lightweight opinionated language

[Adoniron]

It seems pretty similar to what Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland did for decades.

[petermisc]

How ironic to start a thread about tolerance for those breaking rules with a post that clearly breaks the site rules.

[Marmalade]

How ironic to start a thread about tolerance for those breaking rules with a post that clearly breaks the site rules.

Well I was quite careful. Tightropes are sometimes necessary. I’m not interested very much in religious or political conflagrations per se. But if I just said “are you a tolerant person” every right minded person would say yes of course. An extreme case highlights the problem of loose moral claims.

When we think of ourselves as ‘loving’ ‘kind’ ‘respectful’ ‘tolerant’ we tend to omit the “exceptions”. So we really have a very woolly moral code that equates to “loving … etcetc … tolerant” when it suits me.

We like to think we build our social bonds, our family, society, on certain values. Some people think we should have a written Constitution of values. But examine what it means in practice and, if not meaningless, quite close to a load of bollocks.

So we can keep certain banned topics in mind just as a reminder of dangers. But then answer the question, are you a ‘tolerant’ person and what does it mean to be tolerant?

[sir wanksalot]

Well I was quite careful. Tightropes are sometimes necessary. I’m not interested very much in religious or political conflagrations per se. But if I just said “are you a tolerant person” every right minded person would say yes of course. An extreme case highlights the problem of loose moral claims.

When we think of ourselves as ‘loving’ ‘kind’ ‘respectful’ ‘tolerant’ we tend to omit the “exceptions”. So we really have a very woolly moral code that equates to “loving … etcetc … tolerant” when it suits me.

We like to think we build our social bonds, our family, society, on certain values. Some people think we should have a written Constitution of values. But examine what it means in practice and, if not meaningless, quite close to a load of bollocks.

So we can keep certain banned topics in mind just as a reminder of dangers. But then answer the question, are you a ‘tolerant’ person and what does it mean to be tolerant?

I think you're reframing your intended purpose of this post That's why none of us want to touch it with a barge pole.

[Marmalade]

That's why none of us want to touch it with a barge pole.

Ahhhh scardie custard you! 

[Stevelondon]

A minefield indeed.
Perhaps tolerances should be chatted about rather than trying to ascertain if we, us, you, he etc….. are tolerant.
Someone might say they are tolerant. But what of.
You may be tolerant of a million things and yet have no tolerance for others of a different faith.
Are you then, still thinking of yourself as being tolerant. ?

I have no religious beliefs and think the whole sad sordid business of it is utter shite.
I have no political leanings either and can’t stand the complexities and lies associated with it.

I tolerate you lot. Nuff said. 😂

[Marmalade]

I think I prefer 'reserving judgment' to tolerance myself. Tolerance implies looking down on somebody. I'd like to get rid of it instead of limiting it. I don't mean that in a bad way.

I probably practice it too much. I tend to remove myself from company I don't like, when sometimes embracing or having a set-to could yield better results. I think we are maybe 'hard-wired' to love or hate. Denying both of those at once, if they arise – the impulse is pretty similar psychologically, just a hormone – denying them probably creates some sort of repressed feeling that has to be dealt with later. Out of the two, embracing seems more desirable, but makes us uncritical.

[JontyR]

Well I think I can safely answer the question first detailed and keep within the rules.

Is this what happens when we tolerate intolerance?

No.

[chrishornx]

Well I think I can safely answer the question first detailed and keep within the rules.

No.

good answer leave it at that

[Marmalade]

Well I think I can safely answer the question first detailed and keep within the rules.

No.

I think there's new evidence (if you check the news) that the Leicester skirmishes were indeed intentional ignited by intolerance on one party, not tolerated by the other. (No details as it is too close to the edge of the rules against discussing religion). WHat I do feel is needed is to avoid tolerating intolerance before it gets to a dangerous level.

Good example. As soon as a woman finds a man is trying to be controlling she should either put him in his place or get out of there. If it is allowed to carry on, she could find herself in a postion she cannot escape. Another example. If young children are taught the difference between right and wrong early on it is easier to correct.

Both cases are about one party insisting on getting their own way against the interests of the other party.

[JontyR]

. WHat I do feel is needed is to avoid tolerating intolerance before it gets to a dangerous level.

Post it on Anon-Opin then. The reference to Leicester and the groups concerned is framing this in a way which doesn't sit with the rules of the off topic section.

It's an emotive issue and by posting potentially inflammatory messages you may attract posts which incite others. I'm guessing you aren't Muslim or a Hindu and haven't been directly impacted by the disturbances in Leicester.

I answered your original question as "no".

To give a fuller answer. "No, some people are shits. Some you men are disafffected and disenfrancised and searching for an identity, couple this with testosterone, a lack of moderating influences provided by role models, a lack of regular oral sex and you end up having gangs which can become violent. "

It's not that different to football firms or other low level gangs that you see in the provinces. In fact despite what may be felt about reporting in the MSM on religious lines I doubt if these matters would be reported if it were low level gang or football skirimishes out of the site of the community.

[Marmalade]

Thank you for your advice but I don't care to post on whatever board you mention or I would have done. I sometimes post provocatively, but last time I checked, you're not a mod, so as far as I'm concerned you can just post or not post, simple. I don't care that much actually whether you do or not. But if you're going to lose the rag, although that's interesting as well, it's not worthy of a conversation. 

[sir wanksalot]

I think there's new evidence (if you check the news) that the Leicester skirmishes were indeed intentional ignited by intolerance on one party, not tolerated by the other. (No details as it is too close to the edge of the rules against discussing religion). WHat I do feel is needed is to avoid tolerating intolerance before it gets to a dangerous level.

Good example. As soon as a woman finds a man is trying to be controlling she should either put him in his place or get out of there. If it is allowed to carry on, she could find herself in a postion she cannot escape. Another example. If young children are taught the difference between right and wrong early on it is easier to correct.

Both cases are about one party insisting on getting their own way against the interests of the other party.

There is also evidence that much of the tensions we've seen in Leicester has been fuelled by misinformation (from both sides I think).

[petermisc]

I think there's new evidence (if you check the news) that the Leicester skirmishes were indeed intentional ignited by intolerance on one party, not tolerated by the other. (No details as it is too close to the edge of the rules against discussing religion). WHat I do feel is needed is to avoid tolerating intolerance before it gets to a dangerous level.

"What I do feel is needed is to avoid tolerating intolerance before it gets to a dangerous level".  You don't say!  As you yourself said in a previous post, is any right minded person going to disagree with that kind of woolly statement?

And why raise the issue of the Leicester skirmishes once again, if you know that we cannot go into the details?   Are you deliberately trying to lure someone else into saying something that gets them banned?

[JontyR]

Thank you for your advice but I don't care to post on whatever board you mention or I would have done. I sometimes post provocatively, but last time I checked, you're not a mod, so as far as I'm concerned you can just post or not post, simple. I don't care that much actually whether you do or not. But if you're going to lose the rag, although that's interesting as well, it's not worthy of a conversation. 

Why do you post provocatively? What purpose does it serve? Some folks may not feel able to challenge you, those people may already be marginalised or cowed or face attivudes liek this:

Islam is the religion of peace and Muslims integrate so well into our society?

No. IS IT FUCK AND DO THEY FUCK.

Both BBC and Channel 4 News did undercover journalist reporting and secretly filmed the Saudi cow ‘demonstrating’ to David Cameron and other visiting dignitaries at the top U.K. mosque how they ‘promote multiculturalism’ and how ‘there is no place for violence’ in Islam (contrary to the extremist videos in the mosque shop). And as soon as the kaffir had left her tone changed to a snarl as she preached hate, saying you can say anything to the kaffir, you are a state within a state, until Allah decides it is time to kill them. And educating young children. “What must we do to the kaffir”? She yelled at them, “Kill them! Kill them!” And added, “but not yet”.

(Interestingly the word “kaffir”, once used in Africa for black peoples, was banned as a racial slur. But of course it is ok to use it as a religious slur if you are cunting muslim.)

Islam stinks. No matter how much fake news every day tells us how wonderful it is, most people that can past their Rose-tinted politically correct thick optical lenses realise instinctively it is not exactly ‘good’ for Britain.

It would be nice to believe they are mostly living and tolerant. I’m know some of them are or would like to be. Just not enough of them or enough of the ones that count.

.

At least in this post you were honest enough to say what you mean rather than dancing on the head of a pin.

I'm getting a distinct sense of deja-vu.

[Marmalade]

Well thank you for taking the time to go back through my posts, Sir! 

What a pity you couldn't find anything that brought you enlightenment for your trouble. 
f.y.i. I'm always honest. I use the tone I find appropriate – and within the rules.

I actually credited you with the intelligence to see more subtlety, but maybe that 2017 post is more to your level. Anyway, I see it was before you joined. Maybe it was also before the rules about religion. I don't recall. As to people feeling "intimidated", most of the people on here are adults: I suggest, politely if you will, that you do try to join them. Or try another thread. Or maybe just "go for a wee" somewhere. 

[daviemac]

At least in this post you were honest enough to say what you mean rather than dancing on the head of a pin.
I'm getting a distinct sense of deja-vu.

Your second quote was from 2017, different owners, different rules now.

[PepeMAGA]

.


It's not that different to football firms or other low level gangs that you see in the provinces. In fact despite what may be felt about reporting in the MSM on religious lines I doubt if these matters would be reported if it were low level gang or football skirimishes out of the site of the community.

Well its very different. They are two of the biggest communities in Leicester and this could easily erupt again... To make matters worse some have suggested its neither groups fault, but was actually started by white people... So you've got another group possibly being brought into it.

[sir wanksalot]

Well its very different. They are two of the biggest communities in Leicester and this could easily erupt again... To make matters worse some have suggested its neither groups fault, but was actually started by white people... So you've got another group possibly being brought into it.

I think that's bullshit.

There's been tension between Indian and Muslim communities for years.

Media are touting Leicester as a beacon of multiculturism when it is anything but. People tolerate each other (to coin Marmalade's OP) but that tolerance isn't very strong and it doesn't take much to spark a problem.

[spiralnotebook]

Could it be argued that multiculturalism does not work?

[daviemac]

Just a note, don't let Marmalade entice anyone into breaking the rules, he himself is testing the limits of tolerance.

Forum Rules Apply. No religion, race, or politics.

[king tarzan]

Just a note, don't let Marmalade entice anyone into breaking the rules, he himself is testing the limits of tolerance.

Forum Rules Apply. No religion, race, or politics.

Maybe best to lock this thread???
Then no one gets burned

[Colston36]

If I am allowed to tell a true story:

About 200 years ago a Bishop when blessing soe church bells, destined for the South Seas said.

"God bless the Church of England - and down with enthusiasm!"

[daviemac]

If I am allowed to tell a true story:

About 200 years ago a Bishop when blessing soe church bells, destined for the South Seas said.

"God bless the Church of England - and down with enthusiasm!"

Why post this after the warning posted 30 minutes ago. 

The thread isn't getting locked KT if adults cant control themselves then they don't deserve to be here.

[sir wanksalot]

Just a note, don't let Marmalade entice anyone into breaking the rules, he himself is testing the limits of tolerance.

Forum Rules Apply. No religion, race, or politics.

Duly noted.

I had my legal team pore over my last post before they gave me permission to publish it 

[JontyR]

Well thank you for taking the time to go back through my posts, Sir! 

What a pity you couldn't find anything that brought you enlightenment for your trouble. 
f.y.i. I'm always honest. I use the tone I find appropriate – and within the rules.

I actually credited you with the intelligence to see more subtlety, but maybe that 2017 post is more to your level. Anyway, I see it was before you joined. Maybe it was also before the rules about religion. I don't recall. As to people feeling "intimidated", most of the people on here are adults: I suggest, politely if you will, that you do try to join them. Or try another thread. Or maybe just "go for a wee" somewhere. 

You flatter yourself. It took around 20 seconds to find that post. I remember that you'd mentioned integration or integrate on another thread I'd read recently so searched for those terms by date. a Ctrl F on "marm" and low and behold, the thread from 2017 appeared. It took longer to read the whole thread to see if it was an ironic post or taken out of context.

I think it shows, and I'm pretty sure definitely fitting within the rules of the site when I say this, that that is the kind of statements and threads which occur when you tolerate intolerance. Thankfully the site has moved on.

What I think I can also note is that you jumped on the personal point and ignored the ones that tried to answer or expand on the discussion within the rules. Something you have again continuted with your latest posting. You mention most people here are adults, well, even adults don't frequent places where they and their loved ones are pigeonholed or judged based on some characteristic. And I can relate to this, I don't care what you think about me. But if you made comments about my friends or family I will react very differently. And here by making such sweeping statements you are likely to upset or make the community less welcoming for others.

Your posts on this thread are not subtle. They are snide.

[Marmalade]

Blah blah blah.

Keep going. Is that the best insult you can throw at me?
(Mind and check the rules before you do  )

Must say, I’m getting bored with it now. On the one hand it would have been interesting to discuss tolerance as an ethical principle. Not the specific examples but the principle itself. A fiery specific was to light the fire, throw some light on the abstract idea, not invite a general arson. Principles are fixed: whereas if you don’t like my opinions I have others (to parody Oscar Wilde). It’s the essence of debate. But it also draws out people who simply can’t control themselves, like Mr Jontyboy. So sad! 

[JontyR]

Keep going. Is that the best insult you can throw at me?
(Mind and check the rules before you do  )

Must say, I’m getting bored with it now. On the one hand it would have been interesting to discuss tolerance as an ethical principle. Not the specific examples but the principle itself. A fiery specific was to light the fire, throw some light on the abstract idea, not invite a general arson. Principles are fixed: whereas if you don’t like my opinions I have others (to parody Oscar Wilde). It’s the essence of debate. But it also draws out people who simply can’t control themselves, like Mr Jontyboy. So sad! 

I've not tried to insult you. You would know if I had.

Despite your words there is precious little here from you that passes for debate. Several posters have (I'm guessing somewhat nervously) posted points which fall within the rules and you've ignored them. Which does beg the question what your motivations for this thread, on this forum, at this time actually are?

[Marmalade]

I've not tried to insult you.
Which does beg the question what … blahblahblah

Silly boy. You’ve been personally antagonistic and now trolled me on another thread. You couldn’t understand what I posted earlier yet you think I’m going to waste my breath explaining further to you, someone who seems to me at the moment to be a bit of a retard.

You could try looking up the meaning of “begging the question” as you don’t understand that either.

And no, I’m not going to explain that to you either. Nor argue with you when you think you might have got an inkling of it. Just look it up and use it correctly. I do have one principle that even you will have to understand: I don’t engage with people who are rude.

Btw (footnote) : another principle I don’t hold grudges either. I’m simply not that emotionally engaged with anything that’s written here. It’s interesting, pleasant or useful, or not. If you come to your senses and regain normal civility at some point in the future, I’ll respond or not respond to you as with anyone, on the merit of what you write, not on the basis of you acting a bit twattishly previously.

[JontyR]

I've not trolled you on another thread. You flatter yourself far too much. It may explain your condescending and patronising attitude. On that thread you made a ridiculous statement which grouped 90% of a population of 1.38 billion people together. I don't care who posted that, I would have called it out. The fact that it was you who made it probably isn't that much of a surprise to anyone reading this thread.

Saying things are light hearted or joking is easy when you aren't the subject of such comments. What's next? - calling it bantz?   

I stand by my use of "begs the question" and would direct you to the following: External Link/Members Only and External Link/Members Only or just put the phrase beg the question into google . You know sometimes you just have to read a little bit more and a little bit further to have a wider knowledge and understanding rather than just picking the bits and stopping when you think it agrees with you.

If you think I have been rude then I apologise. I'd like to know where I have though. I think you have attempted to be a lot more personally insulting than what I have in this thread. Yes, I have given my opinion on your posts and opinions, I have not once made any non-factual or deliberately insulting comment about you personally until this post. Could you say the same?

Footnote. Putting things in bold face doesn't make them any more true.

[sir wanksalot]

Silly boy. You’ve been personally antagonistic and now trolled me on another thread. You couldn’t understand what I posted earlier yet you think I’m going to waste my breath explaining further to you, someone who seems to me at the moment to be a bit of a retard.

You could try looking up the meaning of “begging the question” as you don’t understand that either.

And no, I’m not going to explain that to you either. Nor argue with you when you think you might have got an inkling of it. Just look it up and use it correctly. I do have one principle that even you will have to understand: I don’t engage with people who are rude.

Btw (footnote) : another principle I don’t hold grudges either. I’m simply not that emotionally engaged with anything that’s written here. It’s interesting, pleasant or useful, or not. If you come to your senses and regain normal civility at some point in the future, I’ll respond or not respond to you as with anyone, on the merit of what you write, not on the basis of you acting a bit twattishly previously.

I usually enjoy reading your posts but you do appear to have taken some grumpy pills lately.

[Marmalade]

Knock yourself out mate. Discussion is fine but getting into a big barney with someone really isn’t.
The primary purpose of the forum is exchange of useful p4p info.
Getting into an argument with someone on off-topic is plain stupid: you never know when that person might be able to offer something practical in the main boards.

[PumpDump]

"Leicester violence spreads to Birmingham as 200-strong masked mob surround Hindu temple: Riot police are pelted with bottles during protest after weeks of unrest between Muslims and Hindus 'fuelled by false claims of kidnap and mosque attacks'."

Is this what happens when we tolerate intolerance?

External Link/Members Only
External Link/Members Only

(Keep comments to thread title please to stay within the rules)

I think it is unfair to post a selective quote from a selective news paper giving one side of the story. TBH this topic has no place on this forum.

[Marmalade]

I think it is unfair to post a selective quote from a selective news paper giving one side of the story. TBH this topic has no place on this forum.

I respect your view. I don’t agree, but it’s a valid comment.