Tolerance is not a virtue
This is a post about tolerance - and Pride. It being Rainbow Month, it is time to consider what we are compelled to applaud at the moment.
I will warn the sensitive reader that this post contains some detail about the Rainbow Lifestyle which is distasteful.
The post is in three parts. Parts one and three discuss the nature of Tolerance and its functions. Part two is mainly concerned with the Rainbow Movement.
Introduction: Tolerance is not a virtue
In defence of defence
Tolerance versus instinct
Unweaving the Rainbow
Tolerating Fruits and Nuts
What consenting adults do in private…
The ride never ends
Tolerance is destruction
Tolerance and taboo
The price of Tolerance
Tolerance is not a virtue. It means to ‘endure, to forbear’ - which reduces to ‘putting up with bad things’. Consider then, what an ‘intolerant bigot’ might be. That would be someone who refuses to put up with what they know to be wrong.
Modern definitions reduce the meaning of tolerance to perspective. It’s simply ‘Sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own’
This is the kind of ‘my truth, my reality’ postmodern trash we can expect from a system of values which celebrates degradation. Tolerance in its meaning, its practice and in its function is utterly corrupted and corrupting. It was understood as enduring, then later, as restraining from responding. It is now an obligation, because that which must be endured is everywhere, and there is no end to the putting up with things.
Far from a positive trait, it is a wholly negative concept which reduces to a compulsion to submit to everything which offends common decency. Tolerance is the virtue of vice.
Tolerance, like so many popular buzzwords, has expanded to a broader common perception. To be tolerant these days is not merely to permit, but to celebrate that which we know to be wrong.
In defence of defence
There is a strong argument to be made that Western values derive from those of Christianity, and that the secular West is a continuation of it - without God. In His place, we have put Man. Tolerance is one idea that does not come from Christianity. Where does it come from?
With the increase in difference in society factionalism increased, between races, men and women, creeds and lifestyles. These identities have incompatible goals and values. As society fractures, something is required to prevent open conflict.
That something is tolerance. Yet it has an earlier provenance than the emergent multiculturalism of the 1950s and 1960s. Tolerance is a Masonic principle. It has been avowed by the self-styled ‘scientific illuminists’ as early as the 18th century, by Locke in the 17th century and promoted by Humanists such as Lord Russell in the early 20th century.
“Faith: a firm belief for which there is no evidence.”
– Bertrand Russell, Human Society in Ethics and Politics, 1954
There is no evidence for the belief that man is supremely rational, nor that his reason will make him sane. The evidence speaks against it, in fact, and that evidence is everywhere around us. The wreckage made of the world by the removal of restraint on the self, by the wholesale destruction of common sense, and the deliberate inversion of vice to virtue is the reason that tolerance is required. It is the only social glue remaining which can hold together the shards of society. This is the result of replacing God with Man.
What tolerance has wrought is the celebration of terrible ideas. It is degenerative, replacing instinct and judgement with unilateral disarmament. It is to enter a conversation without the power of speech. Tolerance tells you to put up - and shut up - and then to salute its flag. It leaves you defenceless against every assault, and it commands you to applaud every wound inflicted upon you and your way of life.
Tolerance versus instinct
Tolerance preaches against common sense, and against basic animal instinct. It will make you less wise than a field mouse, and have you respect the attraction to excrement. It will instruct you to disbelieve your own eyes, your senses, and the reflexes which preserve life from danger and from disease.
The instinct most basic to the preservation of life is ‘approach or avoid’. A close second would be the disgust reflex, meaning the rejection of things we prefer not to taste.
To decide whether to approach - or to avoid - some unknown creature is the decision whether to survive or not. It is an aversion to unmitigated risk. It is safer to avoid in all cases, of course, yet where approach is chosen it is probably due to a presumption based on preference, calculation or knowledge.
Alternatively, we can be compelled by ‘tolerance’ to overrule any instinctual or even reasonable objection and suffer the consequences of a moral victory.
The disgust reflex is undeniable. Even in people who have been trained to suppress it in order to keep their job, it is measurable.
“Why is analism disgusting?” is a question which baffles scientists. Consider the following.
Why should you not submit to moral lectures from Peter Tatchell, who wished to abolish the age of consent? It has been shown that over half of homosexual men suffer from intestinal worms as a result of their practices. A lifestyle effectively based on sexual behaviour involving faecal matter is understandably revolting when considered as such.
Unweaving the rainbow
This is one reason that tolerance for this practice is wrapped in bright, happy colours which bear no relation whatsoever to the decision to base your identity, lifestyle and community on your sexual behaviour. This in itself would be startling had we not been nullified by tolerance. What kind of person sees their unlimited sexual appetite as the basis of their reality?
Of course, the rainbow was God’s sign that he would not flood the world again. It is an inversion typical of the corrupt, whose chief wish is to corrupt everything else - to take a holy promise and to make it profane.
Tolerating Fruits and Nuts
We are compelled this month to witness the annual spectacle of major corporations and state bureaucracies ‘celebrating pride’. This means changing their logos to reflect the increasingly bizarre arrangement of rainbow colours and what we could term The Tranny Triangle. The attempt to integrate both BLM and Ukraine into this solidarity of Sodom has resulted in the Dublin Pride masterpiece below:
To prevent further complexity or indeed embarrassment at the exclusion of future groups - men who marry their sons, furries, the interspecies community, paedophiles - I suggest the rainbow flag be replaced with a more honest depiction of the common factor:
The correct shades of the flag would resemble the Bristol Stool chart. This of course would be both true and repellent to non-analists. The decoration of this lifestyle in bright colours which appeal to children is a deliberate misrepresentation of a thing most objectionable. This is the reason we must tolerate it. It is, from the point of view of instinct, something which is deeply wrong and drives understandable feelings of disgust even amongst the men who practise it.
We teach our children not to play with excrement, and they teach our children to be proud of it. Why are they so interested in your children?
Tolerance now compels you to accept that deranged men are women. To dress as a freakish parody of a woman, wigs, garish makeup, fishnet - to purchase hormones and receive taxpayer funded surgery - is to become a woman. It is the ultimate fusion of consumer choice and sexual fetishism, this personhood-as-product. Many women have noticed this effectively negates the very idea of ‘woman’, whose dictionary definition when stated in public is a matter of legal controversy.
It is to the self appointed elites we must turn for a definition of ‘woman’ these days. The law is now on the side of the identitarians, the extreme individualists, whose basis for their claims of absolute licence derive from their idea of their human rights.
There is no human right, it seems, to be left alone by perverts.
What consenting adults do in private…
These people will advance in their defence the argument that what is done in private is no business of anyone else. Firstly, it is no longer ‘done in private’. It is everywhere. Rainbow flags, multicultural propaganda - this is the idiom of mainstream media, of entertainment, of public bureaucracies, charities, of corporations, of police forces and of armies.
Secondly, this saturation has come about precisely due to ‘what is done in private’. Privacy hardly exists any longer anyway, thanks to the digital surveillance of big data. It is the practices of these private individuals which have made a movement - and a vocal and strident one at that - in the teeth of public opinion. The rainbow movement, the alphabet people - these extremists enjoy a prominent platform. Why? They are avaricious consumers due to higher disposable income. They don’t breed - unless they buy someone’s baby. They tell you ‘love is love’ - when what they mean is up to a thousand, often anonymous, sexual partners over a lifetime. To them love is just sex - between men, children, animals. They aren’t a stable cohesive unit like the family. Polysexual, polyamorous, genderflux - everything to them is sex. Rainbow lifestyles are pure self gratification. They are perfect consumers.
The ride never ends
Tolerance compels you to submit and to celebrate your own humiliation. To look into the actual practices of these lifestyles, to consider some of the public actions and statements of its most visible members is to confront a reality so revolting as to beggar belief. To consider the effects of unlimited immigration, of the debt culture of credentialism, the crisis of competence arising from awarding jobs to the incapable on the basis of identity is to be a bigot. Is this the price of progress?
What has happened to society is not that it has become ‘more tolerant’. The price for noticing reality has risen, along with that of everything else.
Noticing things out loud used to cost you nothing. Gradually that cost has risen to include your relationships, your current job, your career and even your liberty.
You are penalised for noticing things which would offend anyone who has not gone completely insane. What is more, the penalties for noticing - which did not exist at all generation ago - are attached to a growing number of no-no facts. The ride never ends, the slope is indeed very slippery. This is because the whole project of Liberalism requires both ‘progress’ and extreme individualism. Simply put, every year must be weirder than the last. Here is a visual guide to one future protected group, coming to a kindergarten near you:
Analists in their many guises reproduce by molesting children. This is so obvious as to be an outrageous remark. Everything that is obvious is controversial today, since we have had order replaced with chaos, virtue with vice, and sense with nonsense.
The bright colours, the drag queen story hours, the flags and anal propaganda in infant schools, the deranged pervert teachers boasting on TikTok about grooming your kids. It is supported by Kinsey and every sexual researcher thereafter. Even professional analist Peter Tatchell proudly opines that some of his best friends were raped as nine year old boys - by men like him.
This to Tatchell is consensual, healthy - friendly, even. It is to this practice your submission is demanded by the cult of tolerance. Remember - when your son is raped by an older man, it is not abuse. It is joyous.
Tolerance is destruction
Tolerance is now an obligation - not a choice - because of the mess made of society by its managers.
Here is a list of wrongs we are to endure in silence:
The compulsion to get a vaccine which may well kill or disable you
Being locked up and made bankrupt over a non-serious virus
Soaring crime due to social collapse
Ever higher prices and taxes
Falling living standards
Lies and misdirection from the media
Unfunny comedy, dire films
Low quality plastic trash
The aggressive promotion of addiction
A pointless war with Russia and perhaps with China too
The complete collapse of the Western way of life
Tolerance is a command to the normal and the lawful. If you are a degenerate, a foreigner with no right to be here, a criminal, a rapist, a child molester, a groomer, a burglar, a street thief, if you are a corrupt public official, a lying politician, a member of the scum media - tolerance is legally enforced for your protection.
Tolerance enables a two tier society, where the majority are legally sanctioned and the minorities given licence. This is a zero sum game, meaning one side’s win is a loss for the other. Why is this wicked notion so prevalent?
Tolerance is a necessary evil - to protect evil. The fact it is seen as the utmost virtue is a sign of the debasement of our values. If you were told to your face that you must obey when instructed to applaud these vices, these injuries and insults, you would laugh at the sheer insanity of the idea. Yet I fear that many readers will feel that little lurch of guilt at the mere suggestion of revoking tolerance, because it is the crown of all the sicknesses and sins that we call goodness today.
Karl Popper wrote a book in 1962 - ‘The Open Society and its Enemies’ - about people like him versus people like me - and you. He warned that there were limits to tolerance. Can you guess what they were? Did he mean that there were things we should not tolerate because they are wrong, destructive, wicked?
“lolno”, as intellectuals like to say. I know this because I say “lol”.
Of course Popper meant that the intolerant should not be tolerated. A child of five could probably point out the paradox here, but it did not stop Popper:
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.
If you do not tolerate evil you are an enemy of the Open Society. That is a society whose ethics reduce to pleasure and preference - but not yours.
Tolerance and Taboo
To speak against tolerance is a great taboo, but taboo is for the superstitious. These terms of obligation under which we live, like the idea of progress itself and the mad cult of the self - are primitive beliefs in modern clothes. They are examples of magical thinking, which eventually do change reality - but only for the person who believes in them.
Outside their fantasies, made real by repetition and reinforcement, the world is unchanged. Is moral progress a myth? Of course it is. We have rapidly slipped into a midden. Is the self the perfect axle of the world? Of course not. To behave thus is to shatter the world.
Does tolerance improve society? Of course not. As problems multiply, powers increase to silence their observation.
Tolerance makes reality a taboo subject. The horrid facts indicated in this post are true. This is the reason for tolerance - to render you powerless against disgusting outrages - or ‘business as usual’. It is the victimisation of the normal, and it is they who bear all the expense and share none of the advantage.
The price of tolerance
Everything you are commanded to tolerate benefits people who are not you. Tolerance is what is taught in the defence of the destruction of morality, of conscience, of the innocence of children. It is pushed to promote the destruction of your homeland by waves of men with no attachment nor love for your nor your country. It is to make you complicit in the devaluation of your wages, of your profession, of everything of value.
Tolerance is the magic word of the boiling frog, which teaches it to welcome the ever hotter water. Say no to tolerance. It is the gateway drug to every evil. So, instead of putting up with everything, try putting down that burden and walk awhile without it.
It is wise to refuse to comply with your own humiliation. I would prefer not to.
If you enjoyed this counterblast to flaggotry please consider funding this campaign to destroy any realistic chance of my working for anyone again, ever. I rely on paid subscriptions to fund my covert meme-harvesting operation.