Not tolerating someone ("the intolerant") makes you, to a certain extent, intolerant yourself. According to your own logic, they then should not tolerate you (the shouldn't "tolerate the intolerant").
Essentially, who is "intolerant" depends on your subjective opinion and cannot be objectively determimed, except if that person accepts all voices to be heard, in that case we could say they are very much tolerant. In any other case, it depends on your opinion.
Well I dont think we can really draw a line objectively between "should be allowed" and "should be cencored". It will always be based around one opinion (or one range of opinions but never truely objective).
Killing and enslaving are both means to do something, not the actual reason itself. If any person with a different political view wanted to do the same, it would be just as bad. Everyones opinion should be allowed.
I have to assume that you are a Nazi yourself
(Wrong). Its interesting that you think that just because I argued everyones opinion should be allowed.
Everyone's OPINION has to be tolerated. If you dont tolerate the people you deem "the intolerant" then those people will see you as intolerant (against them) aswell. According to you, they would then be right not not tolerate you (as "the intolerant" that doesnt tolerate them).
As long as they dont take away from anybody else's freedom (and by just stating one's opinion one doesnt do that) it has to be tolerated, otherwise it is censorship.
Measuring quantun superpositions can have different outcomes under the same circumstances, right? So therefore, it cannot be deterministic (= what you described) because randomness is involved.
If you say you are right to censor your worst enemys then the Nazis were logically also right to censor the opinions of the people THEY hated the most...
Supporting only certain peoples freedom of speech is the definition of censorship...
"Freedom of expression of opinion" would be a more fitting term, as it is called in most languages. Death threads and shouting fire in a crowded theater are not opinions...
Censorship of any opinion is bad.
(What I meant is: Capitalism is not relevant here. Maybe sometimes it is the root of the problem but not in every case (and certainly not in this one).
@Flumsy
@feddit.de