Keith’s Blog

Give me that old time Tolerance!

Give me that old time Tolerance!.

If you haven’t yet encountered the wonderful humour of the folks at despair.com then I’d heartily recommend that you give them a visit. Tired of all the trite and hopelessly idealistic motivational material we have all been systemically subjected to in our schools and offices for years, despair.com proudly presents its ‘de-motivator’ range of posters, mugs and desk ware as a welcome tonic for all who would dare rebel in the face of such optimism. Their fun alternatives come with excellent backgrounds warmly complemented with witty alter-slogans that ring every bit as true in the real world. Under ‘Consultancy’, for example, they insightfully offer: ‘If you are not part of the solution there’s good money to be made in prolonging the problem!’ There are lots to choose from and its hard to pick one above any of the others. Having said that, I was particularly struck this week by their one on Agony. The picture is of a boxer who has just been hit unmercifully by (what I presume to be) an upper cut to the chin. Beneath his compressed, contorted, recoiling face as sweat drops fly in all directions from the blow are these sagious words: ‘Not all pain is gain!’ Hard to argue with that!

What I do want to argue with, though, is the ever growing dictum people seem to be succumbing to these days that says ‘No pain has gain.’ Whatever has happened to us in our privileged, wealthy, mollycoddled, Celtic-tiger created, new Ireland, we now seem to be striving to avoid, deny, prevent anything that might cause us discomfort in any form. One of these days, we will be provided with climate controlled, cotton wool suits just to walk to the corner shop. For me, such a philosophy can only lead to shallowness.

Take the currently emerging reinvention of tolerance, for example. These days, to openly disagree with anyone else’s position is viewed with the greatest of distain. Particularly in the public arena, but also increasingly in private gatherings, if someone states an opinion strongly out of line with the ‘approved’ view, it seems to evoke an immediate and unwavering surge of disapproval, if not anger, from all sides. ‘How dare he or she say such a thing about my politics, my viewpoint or my beliefs!’ It’s as if difference has become the unwelcome, unwanted guest at any gathering or discussion and, like children in Victorian Britain, may have to be endured but should never be heard. I’ve been around a few people recently who looked genuinely indignant when a viewpoint they expressed was not simply endorsed. It felt like, internally, they were stating: ‘If you must insist on having a differing viewpoint to mine, then at least keep it to yourself!’ If this is tolerance at all, then it is a reinvented one. Yet this – let me call it neo-tolerance for want of a better insult – seems to be one of the new core values of our state and its challenge or defiance the only thing utterly un-tolerated. Adults and children alike can now be heard chanting the mantra that we should never talk about politics, religion or sexuality as it will only lead to fighting. Instead of the invigorating discussions and debates that marked so much of our culture in years past, today students, and older adults alike, seem afraid, unable even, to voice a genuine opinion for fear of rejection or offence. If anyone does dare to stir up the conversation they are quickly dismissed as vulgar, sectarian, judgemental or self-opinionated.

To be fair, from some perspectives, it is possible to understand (ish) why this is so. Hasn’t our nation and many of those around the world, been torn apart by the lack of tolerance? Surely the troubles in the North, apartheid in South Africa and the current debacle in Kenya only serve to emphasis the importance of this ‘new’ position? Surely for the sake of harmony it is better to advocate a life of tolerant approach and of tolerant response.

Well, for me at least, whilst I agree with the goal, I wholeheartedly disagree with the methodology to get us there. A tolerant approach and a tolerant response would seem to me to be the invitation to perpetual shallowness and seems just as crazy a position as any held in this world. How on earth can we advocate a society where no-one’s ideas get to be investigated and tested? How can any of us want to journey through our lives with our theories, philosophies, and even our faith understandings never truly evaluated in the light of others insights and reasonings?

I can’t help thinking back to what tolerance meant to my Dad and the other neighbours living around us when we were growing up. To our left were devout Catholics; to our right, nominal Protestants; and we in the middle were doing our best to argue that religion of any formal kind could only be a hindrance. (Looks like God got the better of me in that exchange!) My Dad was a terrier in the various discussions they had and nothing was off the agenda for discussion. He was more than matched by his friends. Just about every one of the conversation taboos of today were raised and covered until they were satisfied with where they had got to and they moved on to the next subject. During the summer months, sometimes three or even four nights in the week, when the weather was favourable, they would stand at one of their gates and chat, argue and debate until bedtime. They had all left school by the age of 15 but, oh my, did they have opinions on just about every single thing going on around then and in the news! I can remember raised voices on many occasions, wholeheartedly divergent viewpoints hotly argued back and forth, but always in the midst of laughter, acceptance and tolerance – at least as it was then. All this, while the troubles were raging around them. You see, tolerance for them was not in the avoidance of diversity or disagreement but in the acceptance and embracing of such diversity and disagreement. It would never have occurred to any of those ‘old-timers’ to take personally the difference of opinion expressed and fought for. They expected it, welcomed it, loved it even. For them, even large differences allowed the articulation and exploration of contrasting viewpoints and the opportunity to learn from and speak into the experiences each of them had had. If someone were to take offence or withdraw from involvement just because others disagreed with them, they would have regarded that person as immature, insecure. I can’t help thinking they were right.

Now, of course, I am not saying here that those advocating sectarian violence against innocent neighbours or the suicide murder of women and children should be given full opportunity to preach their hatred. But how sad it will be if, in the future, my Catholic friends will never get to quiz me about why on earth I am not part of the ‘one true Church’ or, as I was asked today, ‘Why on earth do I not believe in praying for the dead?’ because they wouldn’t want to be intolerant of my position. How sad, if I could not challenge them about their view of scripture or of communion. How sad if those in the American church are never permitted to hear and respond to the views of European Christians on their government’s foreign policy; how sad if those in the gay community are never allowed to challenge the church on its view of their position or vice versa. How sad if those for Séin Fein are not allowed to challenge or be challenged by those in the Ulster Unionist Party. Of course we need to handle these encounters properly and healthily but what a paltry nation we will be if no-one is going to be allowed to passionately debate and disagree with anyone else anymore – all for the sake of some false and belittling modern notion of what it means to be tolerant. In our history, there has been to so much bad experience of dealing with our differences, that arguing for the old idea of tolerance can sometimes feel like arguing for the joys of marriage in a room filled with those who are divorced. Nonetheless would it not be worse to live in a society devoid of the vital contribution difference (or marriage) can make, than to live in one where it is ignored or avoided for fear of abuse? This modern pseudo-tolerance, sounds to me like a disguised oppressor, a veiled vehicle for imposing control and conformity upon an unsuspecting public. Is Ireland really going to become a place where once the ‘accepted’ position has been agreed, no-one can challenge it? No wonder I am a dissenter! Bring back the days when our leaders, and we ourselves, can say to one another, ‘I disagree with your position with every fibre in my being, but I will go to my grave defending your right to hold it!’ Sometimes the old ways are definitely the best.