Posted by Dan Ewert : 4/30/2002 12:10:00 AM (Archive Link)
A word that commonly gets bandied about by many is “tolerance.” We must have tolerance for other people or for such and such group or for this type of individual. It’s been said so much and has been used as such a cure-all word that it has become a part of cultural dogma. You just believe it and don’t question it. What I find odd about this word is its base verb, tolerate. When you tolerate something, you are putting up with it even though you don’t like it. It is the lowest level of co-existence allowed before one party can no longer “tolerate” the other and works at its removal. In fact, you never hear the verb used in common speech, you only hear the noun as being possessed. For example, you will read, “We must have tolerance for our Muslim citizens,” not “We must tolerate our Muslim citizens.” The latter sentence puts the Muslim citizens in a bad light because it gives the impression that we don’t like them but will grudgingly endure their presence nonetheless. The first sentence doesn’t come off that way even though they say the exact same thing. I imagine many people would be annoyed if they realized that others were just barely putting up with them and their beliefs. They should be more annoyed with themselves for imploring others to do just that.

Really, my problem is with the word “tolerance” itself. I don’t like it. It has a negative connotation, is overused, and is carelessly misapplied. If all you want recognized are your rights to exist and to believe as you will, then by all means, ask for tolerance; ask to be merely tolerated. In some cases, such as Bosnia or Rwanda, that’s about the best you can hope for. However, if you would like something that’s a step above muted, passive hostility, ask for education, ask for understanding, or even better, ask for acceptance. Just please stop using the word as the band-aid for the world’s ills because it does nothing to heal the seething wound underneath. Something more is needed for that.