The intolerance of Tolerance - D A Carson

I have found this book refreshing and instructive.  I have suspected that its thesis is true for some time now, yet I never knew the philosophical underpinnings of the views discussed.  Carson does an excellent job in overview of these issues.  Let me explain:

The first chapter is entitled '"The changing face of Tolerance" and seeks to explain the difference between what Carson calls the 'old tolerance" and the "new tolerance".

Old tolerance was about tolerating people, you would disagree with their views loudly and vociferously, yet you protected there right to hold that view and bring it into discussion in the public square.   The new tolerance insists that you tolerate every view as equally valid.  If you do not display tolerance to other views - you, yourself are being intolerant and that, simply cannot be tolerated!  Intolerant people cannot be tolerated - herein lies the incoherence of modern expressions of tolerance or judgement.  Carson says that when one reads the title he may be struck that this is 'arrant nonsense' or 'an obscure oxymoron'.  However, tolerance currently occupies a very high place in Western society; indeed it is often seen as the primary ethic upon which all ethical constructs are built.

"The new tolerance suggests that actually accepting another's positioned means believing that position to be true, or at least as true as your own." (pg.3)

This is a significant change from the past and it is had a profound effect on on society. Carson begins to give empirical evidence of the effect of this is having a society by narrating many stories currently the news.

Carson deserves to be quoted at length on this issue.

"The rising number of Muslims in England has prompted subtle eviction of pigs and the stories. In some schools, the story of the three little pigs is now banned, as Muslim school children might be offended by stories about unclean animals … Calendars with pigs, porcelain porcine figurines, even pink shaped stress reliever's all had to go, including a tissue box depicting Winnie the Pooh and Piglet … When pressed on why pigs had to go ... a Mulim counsellor in West Midlands, explained, "its a tolerance of people's beliefs." Stunning doublespeak! What about the tolerance of those who think differently about pigs? In the name of tolerance towards the beliefs of Muslims, intolerance is imposed"(p.24)

And again:

"In 2008, the Supreme Court of California will get two physicians could not legally refuse artificial insemination to a woman because she's a lesbian. The doctors have not withheld the service because they disagreed with her: they argued but they happily provide medical care to all kinds of people with whom they disagree. They would not withhold cancer treatment from a rapist, for example. But where they felt they had to draw a line was in their own participation in an act that they judged to be immoral … In this decision, the courts stated, "Do the rights of religious freedom and free speech, as guaranteed in both the Federal and the Californian constitutions, exempt the medical clinic's physician from complying with the California Unruh Civil Rights Acts prohibition against discrimination based on a person's sexual orientation? Our answer is no." (p.39)

In a chapter called the "jottings on the history of tolerance" Carson elucidates how society has always discussed what we should be tolerant & intolerant of.  This has always been against the backdrop of right and wrong, objective right and objective wrong. Rather than being a property predicated upon other ethical values, tolerance is now paramount in its own right.  It has become the ontological bedrock of modern ethical systems.  

One of the important issues that arises in discussion of tolerance and societies tolerance, is the issue of church and state. Many Christians, indeed I am one of them, support strict distinctions between church and state. However, this is been transformed into something that was never meant to be; either the American Constitution, with the letters to the Danbury Baptists, or the Australian Constitution. Carson says, "We start by insisting that state can either establish your prohibit religion, and agree that, reciprocally, religion does not have the right to control the state. Then in a mighty bound many infer further that religion does not have the right to influence any of the decisions of the state, and therefore conclude that religion must be restricted to a small and privatised world or the great barrier between church and state is jeopardised." (p. 67, Italics mine)

 In discussion of the gains that the new tolerance has made, in contrast to its losses, Carson is quite poignant:

"In reality, the genuine gains achieved by the new tournaments are slender in comparison with the losses. It has been moderately successful at diminishing demeaning epithets - " wogs"," chinks," and expressions of saying order. Even there the price is a certain kind of totalitarian political correctness.  More serious, however, is the way the new tolerance swamps penetrating discussion about truth morality: tolerance is widely perceived to be more important and more enduring them either. The result is a greater tendency to believe lies and to come adrift in immorality… far from bringing peace, the new tolerances progressively becoming more intolerant, fostering moral myopia, proving unable to engage in serious and competent discussions about truth, letting personal and social evils fester, the remaining blind to the political and international perceptions of our tolerant cultural profile" (p. 138-9)

Following this there is an outstanding little chapter on politics and democracy, where Carson has some insightful things to say about democracy as a form of government and how democracy works best predicated upon a worldview that values truth.

Finally a list of ten things that Christian's should do in response to the new tolerance:

1. Expose the new tolerances moral and epistemological bankruptcy
2. Preserve a place for truth
3. Expose the new tolerances condescending arrogance
4. Insist that the new tolerance is not progress
5. Distinguish between empirical diversity and the inherent goodness of all diversity
6. Challenge secularism's ostensible neutrality and superiority
7. Practice and encourage civility
8. Evangelise
9. Be prepared to suffer
10. Delight in and trust God

Insightful book & I couldn't agree more with Carson's list.  The only way that I can ensure that my views are heard - is if all views can be heard.  Limits on free speech are largely unwelcome in a liberal society and I worry about those that seek to curtail them.

5 Stars

All the way home (South Sudanese parent's stories for their children in Australia) - A Malual, A Maluk et al

It is so rare to find a book that will make me cry.  This is perhaps the most beautiful thing that I have read in recent times.  It is a truly moving book - I know some of the people in the book and, as such, I thought that I would find it interesting; however, I did not know what I was in for.

There is a story (as always) behind my reading of this book.  I was reading the local paper a week or so ago and I saw a picture of a young girl in my class holding a book up with her Dad.  This particular South Sudanese girl has the most beautiful smile, however, can be very quiet and reclusive.  Brazenly I said in class, in front of everyone, 'Did I see you in the paper holding a book that you had written?"  She was embarrassed and found me confrontational and the situation awkward.  I don't usually care about those things and powered on with my questioning anyway.  She eventually agreed that there was a book about the Sudanese community but it could have been her sister in the paper.  I said that I was interested in reading the book; I like to support the kids in your class.

Well, there are two other Sudanese students in the class, a quiet boy who was listening to the interaction but was silent the whole time.  The next class that we had - he approached me and passed on a copy of the latest book that the local South Sudanese community has produced.  I read it that night.  I simply couldn't put it down.

The book is an insight into South Sudanese culture and personal stories of refugees who have come into my local community.  It is more than that though.  It is the sharing of the stories and culture to their children.  It is an attempt to communicate with kids that want to be Australian and fit into Australian society.  It's a personal invitation to sit at their family dinner table and listen to these people communicate with their kids.  It is intensely personal - yet never voyeuristic.  You feel so special to read these personal accounts - so heartbroken at the trials faced by these people, and for me so jealous that they have such a strong culture.  Ours is broken and we seem hellbent on breaking it further - theirs is so strong.

In the introduction Abraham Malual shares how they want to assimilate into this country, however, not reject their own culture and stories.  This is the sort of bicultural substructure that Noel Pearson advocates, but seems so unwilling to be embraced among Indigenous peoples.  I, for one am glad that these people bring strong families into Australia - it is my hope that they will help us reclaim what we have lost.

The book is a set of stories about life in South Sudan or the difficulties of life in Australia.  Initiation, facial scars, menstruation, marriage dowry's, death of loved ones and problems with English teaching in Australia, it is all here.  Every story has a brief response from one of their children.  Some of them are priceless.  You'll laugh, cry, wince, laugh again and, if you are like me, feel jealous that such wonderful stories can be shared in families.

Storytelling simply doesn't get better than this - it will make these lovely people even more endearing to you.  Absolute must read.  I'm going to get them all.

5 -stars