The total tolerance of tolerance and pluralism as an end in itself is not a methodical error. This is a purposeful activity oriented towards the destruction of society, followed by its destruction.
The concepts of tolerance and pluralism became the most important elements of the mental system, which, under the name of universal human values, was introduced in the countries of Western civilization and was imposed by it on other peoples. With respect to some countries, by means of information influence, others, less pliable, by economic pressure, and to some by brute military force. The very fact that this system of values is far from being always accepted by the peoples shows: it is not universal. And references to the backwardness of one or another ethnos, which they use to impose, are incorrect. What is the reason for the rejection of these values?
Behind the screen of beautiful words
First of all, I recall the double standards of the West, when universal values are used as an ideological cover for banal military aggression with an obvious mercantile interest: the seizure of resources and territory. There are plenty of examples - from Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan to Libya, Syria and Ukraine. However, not only the facts of using these values as an informational screen of aggression make them unacceptable for many countries. There are more weighty reasons. They underlie the mechanisms for managing society and its self-organization, often even survival itself. After all, in the countries of Western civilization, where these values are being introduced for real, and not as a screen, they are not perceived by a significant part of the population. Moreover, their large-scale and widespread distribution leads to the spiritual degradation of the peoples of these countries, as well as to the inevitably following crises in the economy.
“Information about children's bodies found in southeastern Ukraine with organs seized no longer causes any special reaction in the world”
What is the matter? To answer the question, it is necessary to analyze the mechanisms of the functioning of society, more precisely, its management system at all levels of the organization - from state to group - and the impact of these values on social development.
The concept of "universal values" includes a fairly wide range of certain moral norms. One of the most important are tolerance and pluralism of opinions.
In sociology, tolerance refers to tolerance for a different world view, lifestyle, behavior and customs. Pluralism is closely associated with it, which presupposes the coexistence of many independent substances that compete in the development process, in particular, knowledge and positions that differ in form and content. With regard to the social sphere, this diversity and competition of political platforms and organizations (parties, movements).
The Western liberal ideological school defines these values as self-sufficient, necessary in themselves for the development of society. Is it so? Does tolerance or pluralism ensure the existence of a society and its progressive development? Or more precisely: can they be an independent goal?
In relation to social construction, the goal is usually understood as a kind of collective state, to which members of society consciously or subconsciously strive. It can be stability, conflict-free, developmental perspective. Such a state is achieved by the formation in society of a certain system of relations between individuals and their social groups. In her tolerance and pluralism are only one aspect. At the same time there are many others that may conflict with the two mentioned. If such competitive relations play a key role, ensuring the welfare of society, the introduction of tolerance and pluralism (sometimes violent) has a negative impact. Up to destruction. Thus, by themselves, tolerance and pluralism cannot be the goal, they only contribute to the achievement of prosperity, and even then not always, as even Western civilization shows, not to mention others. It is clear that tolerance and pluralism are far from universal values. Nevertheless, they continue to spread.
Infestation by spiritlessness
Equal coexistence and competition in the society of many different ideological and religious systems are consolidated. However, they may differ ideas about the purpose of life. Carriers of one of the systems, being in unfavorable conditions, will be suppressed by ideological competitors. So, for example, if in one belief system, the maximum enrichment is declared as the meaning of existence (as in Protestantism, where wealth is considered a sign of God's good will, regardless of how it is received, or in a system of liberal values), and in the other — labor and creativity (in Orthodoxy, Islam, the communist concept), then in more favorable conditions it will be the carrier of the first ideology (or religion), which will not limit itself to moral standards in pursuit of wealth. Similarly, it is possible to say about the possibility of coexistence of groups, differently understanding what is more important: the general or the particular. The “community members” coexisting with the “individualists” will always be the losers. Tolerant attitude towards people oriented towards appropriation of other social technologies created by others (the so-called people who know how to live, people with a “social” type of mind) puts losing conditions inadequate for this, who see their social role in creating material or other product ("creative" type of mind). Tolerance begins to act as a spiritual tool for creating competitive advantages for one of the social groups, and, as a rule, far from being the most useful for the development of society. Building a stable, prosperous and equitable society becomes impossible. Moreover, conflict is provoked.
A different understanding of good and evil also inevitably leads to the erosion of concepts, and society is made susceptible to the most anti-human ideas. That is, tolerance and pluralism are the destroyers of the spiritual immunity of society, a kind of HIV, affecting the mass consciousness. And when the protective mechanisms of society are weakened, other technologies can be applied, already leading to its destruction.
Windows for perverts
Absolutization of tolerance and pluralism as a self-sufficient goal makes it possible to make legal those manifestations of human nature that were considered unacceptable in previous times of the epoch of civilized development. This mechanism was substantiated by the American sociologist Joseph Overton. Any concept is accepted by society if it falls into the “window of opportunity”, within which it is widely discussed, openly supported, promoted, and won recognition: initially public, then legislative. And these windows can be moved in one direction or another. A chain is built up: “how boldly it is” - “why not” - “it should be” - “in a good sense” - “we are the authorities”. That is how the most anti-human ideas are being introduced as the norm.
Initially, a paradoxical assumption is put forward, which essentially rejects the generally accepted rules of behavior and moral principles. Tolerance and pluralism of opinions require that authors should not be persecuted for such originality. They are still regarded as marginalized, but no longer criminals. The “window of opportunity” for the idea has moved in a direction that is favorable to it. It is the turn of the ethical justification: "why not?" Yes, say apologists, the idea does not meet existing standards. But after all, they are not a dogma. We live in a tolerant society that involves pluralism. At the same time, mostly young people are suggested that being a supporter is “very cool”, even if “backward old people” call the idea anti-human. This is the true "freedom of expression." As a result, a certain legal social group of open carriers of the idea and its subculture are formed. The next step is demarginalization: “this is the way to live”, such principles are permissible. At this stage, the antihuman idea gains public acceptance. And again, the key role is played by tolerance and pluralism. It is argued that once a certain social group adheres to the idea, then let it live that way. Previously, she was considered marginalized, but in a tolerant society they are the same as everyone else, just sticking to several different views, and very interesting ones, you should look and try. By the end of this stage, in certain, sometimes very broad and influential layers, which are already far from marginal, it seems that this is the way to live. This is not yet considered a sign of good tone. But then comes the recognition of following this idea. Being a supporter becomes evidence of the involvement of something advanced, rising above the "simple and backward" supporters of the tradition. The last step remains - legislative consolidation of the idea as generally accepted, encroachment on which is unacceptable. And the carriers, connected by an anti-human concept into a cohesive group, begin to dictate their will to society: “we are the authorities here”.
According to such a scheme, homosexuality was legalized in Europe, the USA and other countries of Western civilization, whose supporters today actually dictate the rules of behavior to its peoples. Any attempts to limit its distribution, including among children, meet with fierce resistance from apologists, as well as tough opposition from the authorities. The key role in this is played by all the same tolerance and pluralism. Protesters against imposing such relationships are reminded: in our society, we cannot forbid people to live as they like, if they do not violate the laws. It is ignored that the supporters of perversion already have a dominant influence on the power, infringing the rights of normal people. In Germany, a mother was sentenced to prison because her teenage daughter refused to attend a lesson that promoted pornography. In the same non-tolerant Western elites relate to countries seeking to protect their citizens from the spread of homophilia, imposing various sanctions against them.
Under the banner of tolerance and pluralism, the propaganda of pedophilia continues. Judging by the materials of the media and social networks, this perversion is going through a stage of demarginalization. Similarly, euthanasia is legalized in Europe and the USA. The criminal trade in human organs is gradually becoming the norm. A few years ago, such facts revealed in Kosovo shocked most people around the world, but today the information about the bodies of young women and children with organs removed in the south-eastern Ukraine does not cause such a violent reaction. Got used to.
The introduction of the so-called juvenile justice, which involves the removal of children from families under the most contrived pretexts, continues. In Europe, this perversion has entered the final phase of the consolidation phase: “we are the power here”. Mass withdrawals of children from normal families have become a tradition.
The same logic underlay the legalization of Nazism in Ukraine. Today it is almost the official ideology. The result - the ruins of the Donbass and Luhansk region.
The tolerance underlying the concept of multiculturalism led to a demographic catastrophe in Western Europe.
You can further give examples of the results of the destructive power of tolerance and pluralism. Overton windows are open. Continuing the consistent introduction of new anti-human ideas, more terrible than those mentioned. In particular, the process of legalizing cannibalism began. The idea of “isn’t it time?” Is actively discussed on social networks and in some forums it finds support up to 77 percent. On Swedish television, the two hosts ate a piece of meat each other on the air. Cannibalism is going through a “how bold” stage. Another 15 – 20 years, and it will become the norm for a certain circle of people.
The introduction of antisocial, anti-human ideas into society leads to its destruction. History replete with such examples. The brightest is the fall of the greatest empire of the world, the Roman one. Today, humanity as a whole is under threat. In the state of Georgia (USA) there are tablets, where principles of the future world are set out in ten languages (including Russian). In accordance with one of them, the population should be reduced to 500 million people. Today we are about seven billion. That is, more than 90 percent of the population should be destroyed.
Tolerance and pluralism in its current quality is a dangerous informational weaponthat needs to be effectively confronted.