Pernicious Tolerance: How Teaching to Accept Differences Undermines Civil Society

185 Pages·2008·0.66 MB·English

by  Robert Weissberg

This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
www.Transactionpub.com
Transaction Publishers
New Brunswick (U.S.A.) and London (U.K.)
Copyright © 2008 by Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright
Conventions. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form
or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or
any information storage and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing
from the publisher. All inquiries should be addressed to Transaction Publishers,
Rutgers—The State University of New Jersey, 35 Berrue Circle, Piscataway,
New Jersey 08854-8042. www.transactionpub.com
This book is printed on acid-free paper that meets the American National
Standard for Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials.
Library of Congress Catalog Number: 2007031976
ISBN: 978-1-4128-0952-8
Printed in the United States of America
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Weissberg, Robert, 1941
Pernicious tolerance: how teaching to “accept differences” undermines
civil society/ Robert Weissberg.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-4128-0952-8 (E-Book)
1. Toleration. 2. Toleration—Study and teaching. 3. Pluralism (Social
sciences) 4. Difference (Psychology)—Social aspects. 5. Civil society.
I. Title.

HM1271.W462007
179'.9—dc22 2007031976
Dedicated to N., the Perfect Child
1977-2004
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
www.Transactionpub.com
Contents
Preface ix
1. Two Tolerance Visions: From John Locke to PBS 1
2. Some Arduous Choices on the Road to Social Harmony 15
3. Preaching the Tolerance Gospel 39
4. Empirical Foundations 69
5. Bringing Tolerance by Criminalizing Hate 93
6. Summing Up and a Disconcerting Alert 125
An Epilogue 155
References 163
Index 171
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
www.Transactionpub.com
Preface
After completing Political Tolerance: Balancing Community and Diversity
a decade ago, I reasonably assumed that I had exhausted what I might have to
say about tolerance. Matters, obviously, have turned out differently. Returning
to this topic was almost accidental—a request to contribute a chapter to an
anthology, Tolerance in the Twenty-First Century, edited by Gerson Moreno-
Riaño. In undertaking this task I began noticing a “literature” barely existing
years back, namely a steady parade of heartfelt pleas and alleged accomplish-
ments to instruct children about “appreciating differences,” all in the name of
“tolerance,” so as to quell burgeoning “hate.” Curiosity arouusseedd,, aanndd tthhaannkkss ttoo
mmooddeerrnn WWeebb--bbaasseedd tteecchhnnoollooggyy,, II ssoooonn uunnccoovveerreedd ddoozzeennss uuppoonn ddoozzeennss ooff eexx--
aammpplleess ooff tthhiiss eenntteerrpprriissee,, mmaannyy ooff wwhhiicchh aappppeeaarreedd iinn ssmmaallll--ttoowwnn nneewwssppaappeerrss oorr
oobbssccuurree jjoouurrnnaallss ddiirreecctteedd aatt ccllaassssrroooomm tteeaacchheerrss.. AAss tthheessee aaccccoouunnttss mmuullttiipplliieedd,, mmyy
rreeaaccttiioonn wwaass aakkiinn ttoo tthhaatt ooff ssaavvvvyy NNeeww YYoorrkkeerrss ((lliikkee mmee)) wwhhoo,, uuppoonn eennccoouunntteerr--
iinngg aann ooccccaassiioonnaall ccoocckkrrooaacchh ssccuurrrryyiinngg bbeehhiinndd tthhee rreeffrriiggeerraattoorr,, wwoouulldd rriigghhttffuullllyy
aassssuummee tthhaatt tthhee oonnee oorr ttwwoo vviissiibbllee ccrriitttteerrss iinnddiiccaatteedd hhuunnddrreeddss iinn hhiiddiinngg..
TThhiiss ccaammppaaiiggnn wwaass eevviiddeennttllyy ppaarrtt ooff aa mmuucchh llaarrggeerr,, oonnggooiinngg rraaddiiccaall iiddeeoo--
llooggiiccaall ((““ccuullttuurree wwaarr””)) qquueesstt ttoo ttrraannssffoorrmm AAmmeerriiccaa bbyy fifi rrsstt ccaappttuurriinngg eedduuccaattiioonn..
EEnnddlleessss oobbsseessssiioonn wwiitthh hhoommoopphhoobbiiaa,, sseexxiissmm,, rraacciissmm,, aanndd ootthheerr aalllleeggeedd “hateful”
disorders made that conclusion indisputable. What most instigated my ire was not
that ideologues were infi ltrating schools to gain their ends. Though I reject their
aims, politicizing education is certainly permissible (though ultimately unwise)
in a democracy. Rather, in pursuing their objectives, radical pedagogues were
substituting an incredibly worthy idea—tolerance as enduring the odious—with
a fantasy—tolerance as blank-check appreciation of diversity—guaranteed to
promote civil strife. This is the equivalent of fi ghting fi re with gasoline, all the
while rejecting a proven formula that will bring tranquility at lower costs without
creating totalitarian-like Thoughtcrimes.
This oddity, I argue, is explainable only by the primacy of a truly subversive
ideological agenda. Put bluntly, today’s professional educators risk civic disaster
in the hope of achieving legitimacy for those they believe are unfairly marginal-
ized, stigmatized, under-appreciated, or otherwise disdained. That such people
are never persecuted by the state, and enjoy ample police protection from harm,
all the while often receiving special state-mandated favors, hardly matters to these
ideologues. This is a utopian campaign of leveling human accomplishment, a
plea to make everything just as worthy as anything else. A “medical” fl avor also
ix