Rather good thinking here. Our problem is not tolerance, but the intolerance of certain groups we have allowed into our communities.
Popper is also invoked. I have recently read one of his works and appreciate his stance. It is a strong reminder that conservative and liberal actually represent the mainstream of political thinking, but neither embrace violence at all. This actually makes clear that it is their duty to suppress it and that most certainly includes violent Islam.
The West is slowly winding up to do this.
Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.
- A tolerant society should be tolerant by default,
- With one exception: it should not tolerate intolerance itself.
I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise.