If there is one word that the Left employs more than “inclusiveness” it is “toleration”.
Unfortunately, listening to Trudeau it becomes immediately apparent that his ability to grasp the essence and nuances of the concept of toleration equates nicely with Greta Thuneberg’s understanding of actual mathematical challenges in determining an average temperature for planet Earth.
In both cases we have a child-like mind attempting to grapple with a concept which has challenged the acumen of the world’s best philosophers. The result, in Canada’s case, is endless babbling about “toleration” without any consideration as to the detrimental effects of such mindless blithering on the stability and health of the nation.
THE CONCEPT OF TOLERATION.
Possibly the easiest way to understand the concept of Toleration is to examine its usage in the construction trades where tradesman are daily confronted with the necessity of determining how much deviation from specified plans or designated values is tolerated. Each building material has its allowable tolerances and the ability of the builder to stay within these accepted tolerances dictates as to whether or not his building will ultimately be approved upon inspection.
No board is ever cut to precisely, perfectly, and exactly 10 feet in length. No brick is laid precisely and exactly and perfectly plumb and level. Therefore no structure is ever exactly and precisely in conformance with the specifications in the blue prints and no building is perfectly plumb and level. The question is always the same for the builder: “what is the allowable deviation from the specifications and the blue prints which is allowed or tolerated and still have the building pass inspection?”
So toleration involves the allowable amount of deviation from the specifications. A board which is less than one-tenth of an inch shorter than the specified length of 8 feet will “be within tolerances” whereas a board which is 2 inches shorter than 8 feet will not be considered to be “within tolerances.” Toleration is a matter of the degree of deviation from a specified standard …. it is not a foundational principle like equality or justice.
THE APPROACH TO TOLERATION IN CANADA
In Canada the Political Left has attempted to transform the concept of toleration from a idea to be discussed and pursued on a rational basis into a quasi-religious concept of which any analytical assessment of the allowable degree of deviation is considered to be taboo.
During the past Federal Election, Maxime Bernier had the temerity and the integrity to question the accepted degree of toleration. He pointed out an obvious truth, namely: a society can not be structurally sound and cohesive unless there are some limits on the amount of deviation which is to be allowed from the common core Canadian values.
Bernier maintained that a society which is based on the idea that the secular law is supreme cannot, at the same time, tolerate the principle that religious laws have supremacy over the secular laws. Bernier pointed out that a society which believes in gender equality cannot, at the same time, tolerate the idea that women are not equal to men. Bernier argued that a society which believes that sexual orientation is to be tolerated as a reality of the human condition cannot, at the same time, be throwing homosexuals off of tall buildings.
Of course, the Laurentian Elites, and thereby their toadies on the Political Left and in the Media, immediately declared that the application of Reason and Logic to their sacred religious doctrine of “toleration” was sacrilegious and verboten. In the best of Left Wing tradition they immediately invested in a smear campaign and labelled Bernier to be a racist alt-right extremist who was threatening the very fabric of their liberal globalist society. All the powers of the government paid for Media were employed to demonize Bernier and ensure no rational discussion of the appropriate limits of the concept of toleration ever occurred in the public square.
Just as a builder must be given the freedom to deviate from exact compliance with the specifications otherwise a building could not be built, the citizens of a society must be allowed some room to deviate from the strict rules of a society. In a liberal democratic society people are not required to wear exactly the same clothes, follow the same religion, of follow the same customs. A certain amount of deviation from the norm is allowed if the society wants to be a free society.
However, this idea of tolerances does not allow the builder to throw away his tape measure and his spirit level. He must still construct on the plumb and level. To have his building pass inspection, he must stay within the tolerances allowed for the building material he is using. If the required tolerances are not observed by the builder, the resulting structure will not be safe for future inhabitants.
In like manner, a society must develop a set of standards or common core values upon which their society is built. While a certain amount of deviation from these common values is to be allowed in a freedom loving society, it remains an immutable fact that there cannot be a complete rejection of those common core values. If a society decides that there are to be no limits to the degree of deviation from its customs, traditions, and foundational beliefs it will be no different than a building built without a level and a plumb rule …. it is headed for collapse.
The next time you hear Trudeau babbling about toleration as he dresses up and panders to some identifiable minority, it may be prudent to take a look at the blue print for your Canadian society and decide for yourself whether his building is within acceptable tolerances and passes inspection
Visit https://www.facebook.com/Camerons-Canadian-Cache-714441835562238/ for more of Cameron’s articles.