Three times in the last couple of weeks I've had various formulations of "paradox of tolerance" quoted at me.

Please stop. There is no paradox. It doesn't exist. The only "paradox" is that people use the word "tolerate" to mean two entirely different things, namely: 1) "don't stop people from being who they are and living their best lives"; and 2) "don't stop people from interfering with other people's lives."
+

@DavidSalo Well said. Many of us "tolerate" without accepting or becoming, and we must accept that it's the most many people can do.

But it also means not attacking, fomenting hate, interfering, stopping or dictating that other people change into something we decide is personally acceptable.

Some things must NEVER be codified into law or enforced with the tools of terror and power. That puts us into a state of fascism...and stopping fascism is now our greatest battle.

@QueenPhillippa @DavidSalo Speaking of paradoxes... how does one battle an "absolute" ideology without becoming "absolute" in your opposition? This is basically the depressive dungeon I'm stuck in. It has been said to me a couple times in just a few days on social media that my compassion for people (which does not imply acceptance or endorsement of their beliefs) is a problem. I was literally called out for refusing to call someone a N____.

????????? Help?!?!?!?!

@PeaceMob @DavidSalo I refer to James Tiberius Kirk's way of thinking. He solved the impossible to win test by simply changing the rules so he could win.

Remove the absolute and go the way you wish to go.

Or blow the idiot's mind by turning it into Shroedinger's Absolute? Is it alive or is it dead? You can only find out by opening the box.

Then open up a box of whooppee when idiots go too far away from argument and into bullying.