Tolerance is a forgotten topic and a rather neglected practice, totally inexistent in the sphere of politics dominated by territorial states. These writings of John Zube rightly remind us of the importance of tolerance for all those who want to be and behave as human beings.
Tolerance and the Workers Party (by a dissenting member, John Zube)
The Workers Party has, in common with other parties, a basic intolerance: Its platform is to be realised for all, even dissenters. The possibility for them to opt out or not to be subjected to the Workers Party's laws in the first place, is not spelled out - or is at most only weakly hinted at or implied in some passages. But such an important truth must be got across as clearly and unmistakably as possible - if we want to avoid the usual party struggle.
We could gain the good will even of our opponents, their tolerance for all our tolerant experiments, if we would also and clearly fight for their freedom to experiment among themselves. Instead of a further struggle, we could and should offer our opponents the fulfilment or continuation of their ideals - for themselves and at their expense and risk. They cannot rightly ask for more.
When, at the same time, tolerantly realising our ideals for ourselves, we could hope that the others would soon see the light - our successes and solutions - and join us.
In other words:
Tolerant people could gain the support even of their enemies - if only they would leave their enemies alone in their pursuit of their happiness according to their ideals and utopias. We do not have to love our enemies but we do have to tolerate them. Then and only then could we expect the same in return.
Our intolerant approach makes us enemies everywhere whilst a tolerant approach could gain us friends everywhere. Threatening to dominate the followers of other parties - even with the objectively best system - only gets their hackles up, induces them to resist us. Offer them tolerance and they would also tend to let us go ahead, minding our own business while they pursue theirs - including their socialistic enterprises - at their expense and risk.
Tolerance is not just a liberal value, of value only to liberals, but an opportunity and a right and duty for all people who want to see their ideals realized, peacefully, non-coercively, in the fastest possible and in a completely just way - by and among their believers, for their benefit and, exclusively, at their own risk and expense. Nobody could benefit more from a generalised tolerance of this type than the members of the Workers Party could.
If we continue to be intolerant, we will encounter only intolerance, hatred, resistance and prosecution and will not even gain a fair hearing anywhere - with most people.
But once we become tolerant towards tolerant actions even of our enemies - and are clear and outspoken about this, then we would have the best chance to be tolerated ourselves in all our projects. What more could we ask for?
Do you doubt the practicability and profitability of freedom? Then you should not be in this party!
Do you doubt that even the smallest business enterprise or market agency based on individual freedom would have the chance for unlimited and voluntary growth when there is also freedom of expression and information? Do you doubt the persuasive power of facts, demonstrations, experiments, experience, observation? Then you should not be a member, either!
Do not expect new laws or regulations - or their repeal - to recover your liberty. Just ask for a 'fair go' - for exemptions and examples on the basis of the principle of freedom to experiment.
Your experiments are the only ones likely to be successful in the long run and to any large degree. So what are you afraid of? Are you afraid to appear to be too tolerant? Tolerance for your enemies' experiments would only help you to reveal the flaws in their theories and thus would make converts for yourself.
Discard the collectivist notion that all must undertake the same steps at the same time - that progress is to come only through general law repeal - after a change of public opinion. This way only numerous disappointments will be found. And it is one contrary to your general belief in individualism, free contracts and private initiative and experimentation.
Masses don't ever act progressively. At most they follow suit. Only individuals and minorities initiate progressive steps and it would be foolish for them to wait until they have converted the majority. Give them the chance, no matter under what flag they make their attempts. Or are you afraid that you might lose in free competition with the collectivists?
In short, claim your equal right to opt out or secede from the socialist and welfarist mess and to do your own things at your own risk and expense. You have nothing to lose but your subsidies, taxes and restrictions.
The Kind of Tolerance even Ludwig von Mises, Henry Hazlitt and Ayn Ran were Short of
Almost everyone subscribes to some general principle of rights, liberty and tolerance but only few bother or dare to apply it where it is most of all required: in the sphere of social, economic and political activities.
Here, most rights, liberties and tolerant relationships are ignored or outlawed and it is simply assumed that intolerance must be the rule, that all people in one territory must be subjected to one government, one law, one system, one set of institutions, that there exists only collective sovereignty and no individual sovereignty and that no individual or minority autonomy is permissible apart from some comparatively trivial private affairs.
To this single error are due almost all wars and civil wars and now the threat of nuclear war.
The limits of tolerance in the sphere of social, political and economic actions have not yet been fully explored and very few people have even looked at this question. This in spite of the fact that in this century, more than ever before, people have slaughtered each other on the altars of diverse ideologies.
We have still to make the giant step from freedom of thought, belief, expression and information to freedom of action and experimentation, to individual and minority autonomy, so that tolerance becomes the rule at least as much in this second sphere as it is now in the first.
How could this extended principle be best worded, to be least misunderstood? I do not have the final answer to that question. How could any short formula embrace not only freedom of communication but also freedom of action for all? The old and conventional formulas were apparently expressed in too general terms to be thus interpreted although, logically, they cover the same ground. In formulating the new principle of tolerance one would have to account for the fact that actions, quite obviously, tend to clash much more than mere words do.
The degree of intolerance in existence makes the need for the introduction of rational and consistent tolerance into this mess all the more acute - and the need for a good definition as the first step. We certainly need a workable formula for peaceful coexistence at a time when socialists are unwilling to tolerate capitalism and capitalists are unwilling to tolerate socialism - in what each considers to be his exclusive "hunting" domain, when followers of the opposed ideologies are armed against each other even with mass extermination devices.
Many approaches have so far been tried and proposed to prevent mutual repression and slaughter, the early ones usually resting exclusively on domination and subordination:
Submit to my empire, my religion, or else!
Submit to the majority - or else!
Apply my scientific theories - or else!
A long and vain attempt was made to introduce love, even of one's enemy, as a ruling principle - and how many have been slaughtered under the banners of this religion?
Many attempted to unify and pacify through what they perceived to be justice. They all had to fail due to the vast discrepancy of views on just what is just. Justice towards one's enemy was too often interpreted as an authority to exterminate him or to demand his unconditional surrender. The few scholars who had some clear ideas on justice never succeeded in educating the majority sufficiently. So, the slaughter and repression went on - under the banners of 'uniform and national justice', 'equal liberty and laws for all'. There were always dissenters, ready to fight or terrorise in return.
In other words, all attempts to submit all others to one system, one set of principles, one way of life, failed, are failures and are likely to fail in the future.
Even the least aggressive system, if proposed for all, will not be found acceptable by all or most because so many people have been conditioned by the bad systems, which they and their ancestors have been living under for uncounted generations. Thus even the best system is not uniformly suitable for men as they are now. This is a seemingly obvious conclusion and yet it is one hard to draw for most people.
Look only for the best system - or what you think to be the best system - and for the freedom to apply it to yourself, leaving all others free to live and suffer or benefit under their own systems, no matter how much these differ from yours.
Respect for national independence recognises just one facet of this tolerance but by no means all or most. Nations themselves (as usually defined and organized) are extremely intolerant towards 'their' minorities and individuals and rest on the intolerant basis of exclusive territorial rule.
Religious freedom sets another and better precedent - but it took hundreds of years to obtain widespread recognition for the principle of religious tolerance. Now we do not have hundreds of years left to obtain full recognition for political and economic tolerance.
Long before this prolonged struggle would be over, we would wipe ourselves out in a nuclear holocaust. We have at best some years or decades left.
The old formulas for social relationships have prepared the ground but they are still too much misunderstood:
For Freedom to be general, and individual rights to result in a just society, they must be consistently granted to all, i.e., no one's freedom of action may go so far as to infringe the equal freedom and rights of others to act for themselves and all others must be tolerated and in their full possession of them, while the exercise or non-use of their rights and liberties must be a matter for individual choice.
Only this would create a general condition of freedom, natural law rule and tolerance. Only this approach would maximise freedom (as each sees it), rights (as each perceives them) and toleration (as all would have to recognise).
The principle of tolerance is the only one all would have to agree upon - or to suffer the consequences, starting with forceful resistance.
This means intolerance towards all attempts at centralised and monopolised regulation and domination, totalitarian regimes, dictatorships, uniform territorial legislation, States, unions, armies and public services - as organised and imposed today, by territorialist notions or fixed ideas. In other words:
Intolerance towards all intolerant actions.
Maximum tolerance for tolerant actions
This means not only tolerance for actions within one's private sphere, as for some business and work activities, for artistic and creative activities, for fashions, sexual preferences, food, drug and drink intakes, for tools, methods, organisational choices, hobbies and sports activities, religious cults, scientific and technological experiments by volunteers.
All these may be considered as already or largely achieved or as relatively unimportant - but, moreover, for all other activities also, for all actions which can be practised tolerantly, especially all such actions in the social, economic and political sphere. (Which are now mostly pre-empted by territorial governments.)
Live according to your own system, plan, errors, beliefs, philosophy, religion, reasoning, your own organisation. methods, tools, media, banking, credit, finance and insurance system, experts, protection agencies, utilities, laws, rules and regulations, all for yourself and your followers or fellow-members - but do not force them on anyone else.
Towards others, use only your example combined with persuasion and the invitation to join you. Organise with like-minded people in your municipality, your state or continent, or even in the whole world, as you please, but leave all dissenters alone, as long as they do only their own things for or to themselves. Claim only the right to secede from them and grant them the right to secede from you.
Give up all attempts at territorial and uniform rule - extending beyond your private real estate property and concentrate on using, to your best advantage, and defending, what is yours.
You can defend yourself and what is yours not only alone but together with the other autonomous and exterritorial communities of volunteers, all united by the principle of mutual tolerance, only against all intolerant people and groups, against all aggressors, the common enemies of all rational individuals and groups.
In practice you will need at least:
a) An ideal wording for this kind of tolerance.
b) A code of basic rights - which you would have to respect in others (who do claim them) even if you do not want to claim them for yourself.
c) Recognition for individual secession and exterritorial and autonomous organizations of volunteers (individual sovereignty and minority autonomy).
d) A militia of volunteers for the protection of human rights.
e) Arbitration courts to settle the remaining relatively few cases of clashes between personal law systems.
f) A new free market system of adult education in order to speed up sufficiently the process of enlightenment.
g) A revolutionary and warfare programme based on the new concept of tolerance and assuring its victories against all kinds of totalitarians with a minimum of bloodshed, particularly by fully respecting the rights even of enemies, most of all those of the conscripted, taxed and oppressed victims of enemy regimes.
The further and particular institutions required, e.g. free banks, free trade associations, leagues of nuclear disarmers, would all be natural offshoots of the above.
Advantages of Tolerance
"A wise man will find his enemies more useful than a fool his friends."
1. It is the only moral approach, one fully respecting individual rights and liberties.
2. It makes peaceful coexistence possible - preventing wars and revolutions - especially nuclear war, and even party struggles.
3. Through successful experiments it would soon do away with compulsory taxation, inflation, unemployment and other poverty-promoting policies. Most people understand and appreciate alternatives only once they are placed before their eyes.
4. It would minimise the power of States and bureaucracies, eliminate most corrupting offices and leave largely only a system of division of labour among experts.
5. It would largely eliminate the political process - wherever it is not continued on a completely voluntary basis and for these volunteers only.
6. It would promote the social sciences as it did the natural sciences and technology - through experiments.
7. It would speed up progress, education and enlightenment, mainly by example, avoiding most of the difficulties of persuasion and agitation. One man's mistake is a lesson for others. It is visibly put before him, in all its effects. Moreover, it does not become imposed on all others. (Few are inclined to study experiments undertaken far away, in other nations and other language areas, and under territorial rule these are also not as diverse, radical and instructive and segregated as they could and should be.)
Quite a few men would become wise only through their own experiences:
"One of the best ways to convince someone he's got a wrong idea
is to mousetrap him into trying to make it work."
(Robert Silverberg in "Precedent", Astounding SF, 4/58)
It will teach by example.
Albert Schweitzer, when someone asked him what was the greatest power and force in the whole world? replied:
"Reason, persuasion and example, but the greatest by far is example."
Another aspect is:
"How will you succeed in doing it on a large scale
if you do not begin on a small scale?"
(F. Doubla Nieuwenhuis, "The Pyramid of Tyranny", 1909)
8. It would make progressive individuals and minorities independent of majority views and thus not hinder them in any way.
9. It would largely disarm terrorists and fanatics. Instead of being motivated to fight their opponents (these having disappeared except in discussions and debates), they would have their hands full coping with all the practical difficulties in realising their systems and ideals among themselves.
10. Such groups could not even grow dangerously large and powerful any more since already their first small experiments would soon fail due to flaws in their theories, thus cutting off the influx of further believers.
No longer would anybody be able to fob-off his critics and followers with long-term promises unbacked by experience. They would want to see some immediate results and successes - in order to become or remain convinced. These groups would also have to do without the propaganda asset of having prosecuted martyrs.
11. It would largely do away with compromises and corresponding in-fighting, excuses. white-washing and scape-goatism.
12. It would largely replace the struggle of conflicting interests by a harmony of interests.
13. It would do away with most propaganda lies. They could not persist in the presence of non-working models of new societies and of successful alternatives to them, sometimes right next door.
14. It would minimize the effects of mistakes which are now maximised through monopolistic and territorial experimentation by goverments, usually wronging and harming whole people and "their" countries.
15. It fits human nature and the diversity of views and characters represented among men.
16. It would establish and prove even to dictocrats the usefulness and morality of freedom. Freedom will win this competition in the not so far future. The free systems would find the widest possible acceptance. Tolerance itself is already a great step towards freedom.
"The stars shine only in the dark"
"All the darkness in the world cannot extinguish the light of a single candle"
"A single candle can light a million others".
17. It would make use of individual consumer choice and the free pricing system to settle controversial social questions. The inefficient systems would price themselves out of the market. The disservices would no longer be widely or involuntarily bought as they are, e.g. with compulsory taxes.
18. This could almost create a paradise on Earth - according to the diverse happiness standards existing - and nobody would be prosecuted or thrown out by any authoritarian - because he ate his apple.
At most we would see excommunications of dissenters, non-conformists and Protestants. But mostly they would not even wait for excommunication but simply secede.
A Short A - Z for Tolerance
ACTION, FREEDOM FOR TOLERANT ACTIONS:
Freedom of expression and information is not enough. Tolerant actions must also be tolerated. In case of differences of opinion everyone has the right to realize his own opinions at his own expense and risk.
Tolerance does not mean that you should stop criticising others but just that you should not interfere when they do their own thing - to or for themselves. Tolerate even ignorance, foolishness and stupidity - as a matter of individual choice, whenever they are expressed in actions not infringing the rights of others.
"This is the beauty of anarcho-libertarianism: utter and complete toleration for any and all styles of life so long as they are voluntary and non-aggressive in nature. Only under such a system can the capitalist and socialist mentality coexist peacefully, without infringing the rights of other individuals and communities." - Jerome Tuccille, Radical Libertarianism, p.60.
You want autonomy? Grant it to others! Never insist upon unconditional surrender of your enemies. Always offer them autonomy over their own affairs.
Tolerate the practice of other beliefs among their believers.
Capitalism, at least in the way it is usually advocated, is as intolerant as socialism and for this only the philosophers of capitalism are to blame. There need only be a tolerant advocacy and practice of the ideal of laissez faire capitalism (not monopoly "capitalism"), in order to gain its victory in the speediest way possible and with complete justice.
"We have the right to choose the society most acceptable to us." - J. S. Mill, On Liberty, Great Books, 304.
"People ought to be free to choose - individually or collectively - whatever economic, social, moral etc., system they want." - Jerry Millett. Texas, ANALOG, June 61.
When people are free to refuse or to buy capitalism, free enterprise and free market services then capitalism will be sold in the fastest possible way.
Respect for others, tolerance of their ideas and foibles, compassion in their misfortunes, are the marks of the truly civilised human being. - IPA Facts, 12/68
Especially in economics nobody is authorised to impose any coercive system upon his fellow citizens. He may not even impose a free market system.
Two standard collectivist objections are:
1. The old must be destroyed before the new can be constructed and
2. Only large-scale experiments can succeed.
In reality, the old can remain for its adherents while the new can be constructed and used by its followers.
Large-scale experiments guarantee many large-scale failures and nothing is likely to succeed on a large scale which fails already on a small scale.
"… the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because in the opinion of others to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreating him, but not for compelling him, or visiting him with any evil in case he does otherwise." - J. S. Mill, On Liberty, G.B. p. 271.
Toleration means freedom to follow the dictates of one's own conscience, reason and belief - as long as one can do so at the own risk and expense.
"You contend that I am wrong to practise Catholicism; and I contend that you are wrong to practise Lutheranism. Let us leave it to God to judge. Why should I strike at you, or why should you strike at me? If it is not good that one of us should strike at the other, how can it be good that we should delegate to a third party, who controls the public police force, the authority to strike at one of us in order to please the other? You contend that I am wrong to teach my son science and philosophy; I believe you are wrong to teach your's Greek and Latin. Let us both follow the dictates of our conscience. Let us allow the law of responsibility to operate for our families. It will punish the one who is wrong. Let us not call in human law; it could well punish the one who is not wrong." - Bastiat, quoted in Roche III's biography, Bastiat, 193.
Every action that is tolerant is not a crime but every action that is intolerant is!
"The wearer only knows where the shoe pinches." - Only under individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteers could decentralisation reach its optimum.
DEFINITION OF TOLERANCE ATTEMPTS:
1. The only tolerance in the political sphere which is sensible and justified is one which respects the right to organise or participate in all kinds of social, political and economic experiments undertaken by volunteers, at their expense and risk, without let or hindrance by the majority or any of the minorities.
All experiments which are forced upon a disagreeing majority or minority or which occur at the expense or risk of others than the voluntary members, offend against this principle of tolerance and should, therefore, not be tolerated.
2. "No government has the right to force individuals not to do something which they may desire to do at their own risk, provided that they, in turn, do not force their will on others or put others at risk." - From a Workers Party discussion paper on drugs, 1975.
3. Tolerance means fully free competition for all, even those who offer disservices for sale, as long as they do so without deceiving their customers any more than they are deceived themselves.
4. Tolerance means self-ownership and the abolition of monopolies, especially the economic and political ones.
5. Don't desire for others what you desire for yourself. Let them follow their own aspirations. Tolerance demands that you not only tolerate what you love or could not care less about - but also what you hate - as long as it is tolerantly practised
Don't argue the truth - demonstrate it, and allow others to demonstrate even their errors, at their expense and risk.
No group has the right to impose upon its fellow citizens rules not approved by them, when through disregard of these rules only the lives, the health, the property, the earnings and the employment opportunities of those are affected who disagree. - U. v. Beckerath, 1953
"Let them do their countless things ... permit ... me to do my thing." - L. E. Read, THE FREEMAN, 3/74.
"It takes all kinds to make a world." - Common proverb.
"While my mother believes in the Golden Rule, she also advocates a second maxim, which she terms her Iron Rule: 'Don't do for others what they wouldn't take the trouble to do for themselves.' " - Mrs. D. Fulton, Reader's Digest, 1/65.
DO YOUR OWN THING:
Do your own thing and let others do theirs - that's all that tolerance demands.
One can be intolerant in a thousand different ways but tolerant only by fully recognising the natural rights even of one's enemies, by sticking to one's contracts and letting one's enemies stick to theirs.
One does not have to love one's enemy but one ought to tolerate his tolerant actions.
"The best way to defeat an enemy is to make a friend of him."- Friendship starts by respecting the autonomy of others.
Become tolerant, otherwise "we become what we fight", said Roy Campbell, in a poem, 1965.
Everyone is authorised to gain experience at his own expense and risk, even when the methods tried by him are considered as unsuitable by others who believe themselves to be experts.
"The most important one of all - freedom to try." - John C. Sparks.
"Give it a try!"- "Have a stab at anything!" - "Fair go!" - are supposedly typical Australian sentiments.
"Men must be free to try their ideas in a competitive and voluntary market." - John C. Sparks.
Don't experiment with other people than yourself and volunteers.
"The people, organizations and individuals, have the right to undertake at the own expense and risk social experiments - even when based on errors and when making mistakes. The freedom to correct their errors and to learn from the own experiences and then to undertake, at the own expense and risk, new experiments, belongs to the human rights." - J.Z., free after U. von Beckerath.
Nobody may be forced to adapt his life-style to any temporarily prevailing theory. Thus the State may not interfere with any law in any theoretical scientific dispute and any scientific experiment in the economic, social, juridical and political sphere, as long as they take place exclusively at the expense and risk of the experimenters. - J.Z., free after U. von Beckerath.
"Groups and associations intending to realize at their own expense and risk any particular economic system among themselves, may not be hindered to do so, even when those who believe to be experts do not agree with the system." - U. von Beckerath, 1953.
Everyone has the right to undertake social, economic and political experiments at his expense and risk - as long as he does not infringe the principle of tolerance.
Grant experimental freedom even to socialists and others of your enemies.
Governments should not be free to experiment with individuals but individuals should be free to experiment with themselves and like-minded individuals - under their own exterritorially autonomous and competing governments, or free societies, which are truly based on individual consent.
To tolerate an evil is not an evil if it is a self-chosen evil. A self-chosen evil is not even an evil as it has great educational value for people unwilling or unable to pay heed to rational warnings.
"We have no patience with the mawkish philanthropy which would ward-off the punishment of stupidity. The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools." - Herbert Spencer, Essays, State-Tamperings with Money and Banks."
"Everybody considers himself an expert and almost all others consider him a fool. Thus only one way out remains: Each tries his system with his followers - at the own expense and risk - and also concedes to all others the right to take measures at their own expense and risk, regardless of whether they appear to him to be completely foolish. - U. v. Beckerath, 1953.
Be a fool at your own expense and risk.
Tolerance could also be defined as non-initiation of force or fraud. The State may not force any services upon the citizens which they are willing and able to supply themselves or which they do not want for themselves.
"Freedom is the only thing you cannot have without also granting it to others."
"The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way." - J. S. Mill
"There is a natural freedom to promote one's well-being without infringing the rights of others."
Freedom consists in the authority to do everything that does not infringe the natural and equal rights of others.
"We should agree upon a convention conceding to every group the right to practice the principles of its ideal social order within the circle of like-minded people..." - Karl Walker.
Tolerance means granting freedom even to your enemies - freedom to do their own thing and no chance to meddle with your affairs.
Nobody should be forced into freedom or given it against his will. Freedom embraces the choice not to be free, to voluntarily accept a condition of slavery - as long as one likes it. Freedom should also be a matter of individual choice - one should be free to decline its benefits and responsibilities.
You can have whatever 'ism' you want to have - but I want to be free.
Don't ever force freedom on anyone. Leave people in self-chosen slavery as long as they prefer it. Otherwise, you might get a slave rising against you, by slaves who want a new master and will see to it that you get one also and again. If you are not tolerant then you are not for freedom!
To "sell" the free market in the most efficient way, you should not force it upon anybody but allow it instead, for everyone who already appreciates it and who is willing to pay free market prices. and accepts free market responsibilities. Free market salesmanship sells the free market best.
"I should, of course, like to see society organized so that the individual would be free to carry on his 'pursuit of happiness' as he sees fit and in accordance with his own capacities. That is because I assume that the individual is endowed at birth with the right to do so. I cannot deny that right to my fellow man without implying that I do not have that right for myself, and that I will not admit." - Frank Chodorov, "Out of Step", 105.
"Various routes to happiness lie open and he is free to choose what seems to him the best for the purpose." - Etienne Gilson, "The Spirit of Medieval Philosophy".
Respect for human rights is the greatest degree of tolerance which is morally still justified and it implies anti-totalitarianism or condemnation of communist, Nazi and other dictatorships. There is no justification for tolerance towards the intolerant.
"When I signed the Declaration of Independence I had in view not only our independence from England but the toleration of all sects." - Charles Carroll, letter to G. W. Parke Custis.
Tolerance is inherently individualistic, intolerance is inherently collectivistic.
"No matter what anybody else thinks and acts like - think and act for yourself!" - D.Z., 1975. - and let them do the same! - J.Z.
Be yourself and allow others to be themselves: "In spite of that I am the Illuminated, if you disagree with me - follow your own convictions, not mine!" - Buddha
If men would recognize the imperative need of others to be themselves, to be different, most of the ills of the world would vanish. - Free after IPA Facts, 12/68.
" ... the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually and collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection ... " - Mill, "On Liberty", G.B. 271.
The worst examples of intolerance are wars, civil wars, violent revolutions ABC mass murder devices and terrorist acts.
"Let us hang no one, and set everybody free." - F. Bastiat, Economic Sophisms, 241.
All compulsory licensing is intolerant.
Tolerant actions promote life, intolerant actions promote death.
LIMITS OF TOLERANCE:
Nobody is wholly tolerant. The more you believe in tolerance, the less you can tolerate the intolerant." - R. Q. in Readers' Digest, 7/66.
Be tolerant to all tolerant people and intolerant to all intolerant people.
Be intolerant of intolerant actions and opinions furthering them, but tolerant of tolerant actions and the views upon which they are based.
Tolerate only tolerant people and offer intolerant people tolerance only on condition that they become tolerant also.
Others have the right to protect their liberty against you but they have no right to interfere with yours. Tolerance does not demand any more. Don't tolerate intolerance!
Don't tolerate ABC mass murder devices - the worst instances of intolerance!
LIVE AND LET LIVE:
Live and let live - is the essence of tolerance.
Everybody has the right to take measures at the own cost and risk which others consider as impractical - even those who are regarded as experts.
Tolerance means a mutual agreement to refrain from meddling.
Everyone has the right to make mistakes, to try out his errors in practice - at his own expense and risk.
MUSIC: LET EACH DANCE TO HIS OWN:
"If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music he hears, however measured or far away." - Thoreau
MYOB: MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS:
A condition where everyone minded only his own business would be a condition of maximum tolerance.
Nonconformism is a virtue, not a vice, in most instances. Thus it should not be generally outlawed.
Tolerant people "make a religion of not interfering with each other." - J. R. Wilson, "The Side of the Angels", Collins, London, 1968, p. 86.
OBJECTIONS AGAINST TOLERANCE:
I for one am intolerant even of mere objections against tolerance. People who would argue even against tolerance towards the tolerant should be stopped with a big stick! Or at least ignored and ostracised and never be given any offices and powers with one's consent.
You be the judge - on all your own affairs!
Let each party struggle only for the benefit of its own members and voters - and exclusively at their expense and risk. This would end all party struggles and replace them by peaceful and non-coercive competition.
"Make your own law for yourself, no matter what anybody else thinks about it." - D. Z., 1975.
Exterritorial personal laws would beat the existing territorial and uniform laws anytime - in free competition.
We have to be pioneers. We have to establish a new world in this chaotic, barbaric wilderness, called our civilisation and culture - but without chopping it down or setting fire to it.
PLANNING, PRIVATE AND VOLUNTARISTIC:
Whosoever attempts with his followers to realize an economic plan that he considers to be good, may not be forced, not even by the State, to submit to any other plan nor may he force anyone to submit to his.
Tolerance is the best and the only sensible policy. Every policy coercively regulating the affairs of others amounts to a declaration of war.
Exercising tolerance is the opposite of exercising power.
"With power comes the exercise of intolerance" - said Mises in "Socialism", p. 189.
While tolerance means: no power over the affairs of others, it also means: full power over the own affairs.
Private property (which may also be used as voluntarily pooled, collectivised or socialised property) forms the best basis for a tolerant and peaceful coexistence between the members of diverse ideological groups. To each his own, no more, no less!
Toleration for the followers of all prophets, be they Marx and Lenin or Mises and Rand.
"It is much better to reconcile an enemy than to conquer him."
Tolerance optimises the chances for reconciliation.
"If governments had ever tried to dominate physical and mathematical opinions of the public as much as political and religious views, then we would have wars for and against differential calculus as we had for the Holy Trinity of God."- Franz von Bader.
When the followers of any system attempt to coerce others to apply this system, then this is tyranny and it authorises resistance.
The revolution that establishes tolerance is the only worthwhile and probably last revolution.
Right is the restriction of arbitrary actions of each so that they can agree with the arbitrary actions of others according to a general law of freedom. - Free after Kant, Populäre Schriften, 63.
If tolerance of diversity involves an admitted element of risk, intolerance involves a certainty of destruction.
If you don't like it for yourself - at least tolerate it for others - including all types of socialism.
Allow a safety valve: permit the socialists to become educated through the failures of their own free experiments.
You have no chance or serious intention or hope of shooting or converting all socialists. So, start by tolerating them or seceding from them.
I plead for a declaration of rightful 'war aims' towards the socialists. Don't demand unconditional surrender of them. Leave them an honourable way out, a chance to practise their religion. Offer them autonomy on a voluntary basis, at their expense and risk, under their own exterritorial and personal laws.
First step towards turning State socialists into tolerant people is for free enterprise advocates and capitalists to become tolerant themselves, to mind their own business, not asking for hand-outs any longer, for privileges or limited government laws, becoming instead, fully tolerant towards tolerant actions, experiments and communities of socialists.
Socialists will appreciate economic freedom only when they can freely buy or refuse to buy its services, goods and institutions, over the counter, so to speak, and individually. Groups declining all the progressive steps proposed by us should not be obstructed when among themselves they organise production and exchange according to their customary way of thinking and acting. But they have, naturally, to cease exploiting us or forcing upon us methods of production and exchange which they consider to be right or useful. The more this becomes a published and practised policy, the more the animosity against us must decline.
SOCIAL REFORM EXPERIMENTS:
Everyone is entitled to associate with like-minded people in order to try out social reform proposals within the group and at its expense and risk and to invite everyone to join, no matter whether the 'experts' consider their principles to be right or wrong. I predict that the capitalistic experiments will be the most successful ones.
A solidarity of all tolerant people against all intolerant people is required, regardless of ideology, comparable to the solidarity of resistance fighters against the Nazis.
"In each person's own concerns his individual spontaneity is entitled to free exercise." - J. S. Mill, On Liberty, Great Books edition, p. 303.
SPREAD OF TOLERANCE:
"There are only few friends of tolerance left in the West" said Mises in Omnipotent Government, p.11, and perhaps none in the East. (Mises himself was not a friend of the degree of tolerance here advocated.)
Only tolerance can make you strong enough for whatever you want to do - for it disarms your enemies.
Everybody has the right to be stupid - at his own expense and risk.
Everyone has the right to search for an economic system he considers to be right and, when he has found it, to try it out in practice, together with his followers.
Everyone may, together with his adherents, form a group practising at the own expense and risk whatever system he and they like for themselves. More cannot be demanded by any group which does not want to be accused of attempting to set up an economic tyranny. Economists may say: Your system of typified clearing-house cheques will result in chaos and we do not have to put up with this. Answer: No, indeed, you do not have to put up with it. You have the right to be fools at your own expense and to consider our solution as chaotic etc.. This is your right and it shall not be infringed. But it would go too far to legally stop us from applying among ourselves a system which we found suitable. Be tolerant or the devil may take you by milligrams. Starve with your system - if you like. We will not hinder you. It will be a task of the future political science to describe the spheres in which one cannot be tolerant. - Free after U. von Beckerath.
Nobody has the right to force his own economic and other theories upon his fellow citizens, as guidelines for their actions.
The State may not put into force, by legislation, any scientific theory and force the opponents of this theory, and the people in general, to act as if this theory were right.
TOTALITARIANISM AND NUCLEAR WAR:
Unless you learn to become tolerant - prepare yourself to become a slave or to die!
(Compare especially PEACE PLANS 16-17 and 61-65, now online at: www.exterritorial.info)
"Everything would be alright
if only we could wipe out
all those who think that
everything would be alright
if only we could wipe out..."
"There is a sphere of action in which society, as distinguished from the individual, has, if any, only an indirect interest; comprehending all that portion of a person's life and conduct which affects only himself, or if it also affects others, only with their free, voluntary and undeceived consent and participation." - Mill, On Liberty, G.B. 272.
Be tolerant or perish!
The alternative to the maximisation of tolerance is the maximisation of murder and destruction through mutual mass extermination. What helps it if man wins the whole world - but cannot stand others, cannot be tolerant? Then he will lose it again and perish. He has prepared the means for his destruction.
Tolerance is the shortest connection between war and peace, poverty and wealth, oppression and liberty. Take your pick. There is also a unique kind of tolerant warfare and revolutionary action, yet to be consistently and comprehensively practised. It outmodes all current military theories and preparations. (See Peace Plans 16-17 & 61-65.)
Have it your way. If you think this is the way then this is the way - but only for you.
The Main Terms of the Vocabulary of Tolerance
Action, freedom of
Autarchy, in LeFevre's meaning
Bill of Rights
Capitalism, laissez faire type
Coexistence, peacefully competing exterritorial governments of volunteers
Conscience, freedom of
Crimes without victims
Emigration, internal & external
Experience, right to gain it at the own expense
Freedom of action
Freedom of contract
Harmonies, natural, economic
Ignoring the State
Insurance, voluntary, private & competitive
Laissez faire, laissez passer
Mind your own business
Non-initiation of force
Outlawry of tyrants & their helpers
Power over self
Pursuit of happiness
Revolution, individual, libertarian, voluntaristic
Rights, individual, human, natural
Right to err and make mistakes
Right to own property
Right to pursue happiness
Right to associate in exterritorial and autonomous communities of volunteers
Right to dissociate oneself
Right to secede or opt out
Right to resist any attacks on individual rights and liberties
Rightful war aims in recognition of individual rights and of all voluntary communities
Separate development, voluntary
Voting an one's own affairs
Warfare, revolutionary, libertarian
Welfare institutions, voluntaristic
The Main Terms of the Vocabulary of Intolerance
Anarchism, terrorist type
Anti-communism, with the bomb
Crime with victims
Enemy, conventional concept
Extortion, as practised e.g. towards all tax payers
Force, initiation of force
Foreign policy, conventional
Frontiers, imposed and forcefully preserved ones
Hierarchical systems, coercive
Insurance, compulsory and regulated
Law & order, imposed, uniform
Legislation, uniform and territorial
Liberalism, modern and statist "liberalism" as opposed to classical liberalism
Liberation wars, conventional
Planning, coercive, centralised, monopolised
Power over others
Protectionism, coercive or fraudulent
Robbery, even in its democratic forms
Rule over others
Selfishness, short-sighted & irrational
Socialism, statist, coercive type
Territorial nation States & sovereignty
Theft, including that camouflaged as 'fiscal policy'
Unconditional surrender demand
Voting on other people's affairs
War, collectivist type
War aims, unjust
Welfare Statism, imposed. etc.
* * *
Everybody should add his/her own and add comments to these terms.
Without sufficient discussion none of these terms will be sufficiently and widely enough clarified.