Letter Accepting 2018 Andrei Sakharov Prizefrom (2018)
Context: Thoughts and dreams don’t die. Belief in freedom and justice does not perish with imprisonment, torture or even death and tyranny do not prevail over freedom, even when they rely on the power of the state. Sitting here in the prison, I am deeply humbled by the honor you have bestowed on me and I will continue my efforts until we achieve peace, tolerance for a plurality of views, and human rights.
Dissenting, CLS v. Martinez, 130 S. Ct. 2971, 3015-16 (2010).
Source: Perspectives on the World: an interdisciplinary reflection. (1995), p. iv
“Pluralist India must, by definition, tolerate plural expressions of its many identities.”
The Hindu, "After the Dust is Settled", April 15, 2001
2000s
1960s, Letter to Ho Chi Minh (1967)
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bz7pTxwy1dI Interview on Youtube
which the Scriptures call "false peace"
Source: Peace of Soul (1949), Ch. 6, p. 112
Tadić položio zakletvu, B92, 2008-02-15, 2008-02-16, Serbian http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2008&mm=02&dd=15&nav_category=11&nav_id=285045,.
“We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.”
Vol. 1, Notes to the Chapters: Ch. 7, Note 4
The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945)
Context: The so-called paradox of freedom is the argument that freedom in the sense of absence of any constraining control must lead to very great restraint, since it makes the bully free to enslave the meek. The idea is, in a slightly different form, and with very different tendency, clearly expressed in Plato.
Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. 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. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.
Source: Modern Man in Search of a Soul
Letter Accepting 2018 Andrei Sakharov Prizefrom (2018)
