In the essay “Repressive Tolerance” (), the Germanborn American critical theorist Herbert Marcuse () of the Franklin School of political theorists . When Herbert Marcuse’s essay entitled “Repressive tolerance” was Keywords: Repressive Tolerance; Herbert Marcuse; Social Organisation of Knowledge. Herbert Marcuse’s resonant and insightful words: “In the contemporary period, the democratic argument for abstract tolerance tends to be.
|Published (Last):||28 December 2012|
|PDF File Size:||10.87 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||11.69 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Not ‘equal’ but more representation of the Left would be equalization of the prevailing inequality. Repressive tolerance and free speech. And the problem of making possible such a harmony between every individual liberty and the other is not that of finding a compromise between competitors, or between freedom and law, between general and individual interest, common and private welfare in an established society, but of creating the society in which man is no longer enslaved by institutions which vitiate self-determination from the beginning.
And such universal tolerance is possible only when no real or alleged enemy requires in the national interest the education and training of people in military violence and destruction. But the subject of this autonomy is never the contingent, private individual as that which he actually is or happens to be; it is rather the individual as a human being who is capable of being free with the others.
You are commenting using your Facebook account. Indeed, such a redressing seems to be tantamount to the establishment of a “right of resistance” to the point of subversion. All points of view can be heard: The same holds true for the General Strike. They would include the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements which promote aggressive policies, armament, chauvinism, discrimination on the grounds of race and religion, or which oppose the extension of public services, social security, medical care, etc.
Herbert Marcuse and Recent Liberation Philosophies. Who is an economist?
Marcuse argues that “the realization of the objective of tolerance” requires “intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed. The avenues of entrance are closed to the meaning of words and ideas other than the established one–established by the publicity of the herbett that be, and verified in their practices.
Repressive Tolerance, by Herbert Marcuse ()
The antagonistic structure of society rigs the rules of the game. Here, too, it is the whole which determines the tolerwnce. I shall presently try to suggest the direction in which an answer may be sought In any case, the contrast is not between democracy in the abstract and dictatorship in the abstract.
But even the all-inclusive character of liberalist tolerance was, at least in theory, based on the proposition that men were potential individuals who could learn to hear and see and feel by themselves, to develop their own thoughts, to grasp their true interests and rights and capabilities, also against established authority and opinion.
As deterrents against nuclear war, as police action against subversion, as technical aid in the fight against imperialism and communism, as methods of pacification in neo-colonial massacres, violence and suppression are promulgated, practiced, and defended by democratic and authoritarian governments alike, and the people subjected to these governments toperance educated to sustain such practices as necessary for the preservation of the status quo.
Yearly bonuses to workers are twisted into a cheep form of overtime which is only paid under certain conditions. Instead, Marcuse, in Aristotelian fashion, advocates a total revolution against the one-dimensional thinking that capitalist society introjects.
While the reversal of the trend in the educational enterprise at least could conceivably be enforced by the students and teachers themselves, and thus be self-imposed, the systematic withdrawal of tolerance toward regressive and repressive opinions and movements hrbert only be envisaged as results of large-scale pressure which would amount to an upheaval.
Consequently, the idea of tolerance implies the necessity, for the dissenting group or individuals, to become illegitimate if and when the established legitimacy prevents and counteracts the development of dissent.
Under the rule of monopolistic media—themselves the reptessive instruments of economic and political power—a mentality is created for which right and wrong, true and false are predefined wherever they affect the vital interests of the society.
Stoicism is persistently charged with holding contradictory views of determinism and human freedom: Robespierre’s distinction between the terror of liberty and the terror of despotism, and his moral glorification of the former belongs to the most convincingly condemned aberrations, even if the white terror was more bloody than the red terror.
Economic Sociology and Political Economy. A Critique of Pure Tolerance.
Herbert Marcuse on Tolerance | Guided History
In fact, the decision between opposed opinions has been made before the presentation and discussion get under way–made, not by a conspiracy or a sponsor or a publisher, not by any dictatorship, but rather by the ‘normal course of events’, which is the course of administered events, and by the mentality shaped in this course.
All points of view can be heard: You are commenting using your WordPress. Moreover, with respect to the latter, a policy of unequal treatment would protect radicalism on the Left against that on the Right. The very notion of false tolerance, and the distinction between right and wrong limitations on tolerance, between progressive and regressive indoctrination, revolutionary and reactionary violence demands the statement of criteria for its validity.
The issue was only the degree and extent of intolerance.
Where the false consciousness has become prevalent in national and popular behavior, it translates itself almost immediately into practice: Aggressiveness in Advanced Industrial Society. Therefore, all contesting opinions must be submitted to ‘the people’ for its deliberation and choice. The factual barriers which totalitarian democracy erects against the efficacy of qualitative dissent are weak and pleasant enough compared with the practices of a dictatorship which claims to educate the people in the truth.
The conclusion reached is that the realization of the objective of tolerance would call for intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed.
However, the alternative to the established semi-democratic process is not a dictatorship or elite, no matter how intellectual and intelligent, but the struggle for a real democracy. Moreover, in endlessly dragging debates over the media, the stupid opinion is treated with the same respect as the intelligent one, the misinformed may talk as long as the informed, and propaganda rides along with education, truth with falsehood.
Where the mind has been made into a subject-object of politics and policies, intellectual autonomy, the realm of ‘pure’ thought has become a matter of political education or rather: Scan of edition as pdf. It is the people who tolerate the government, which in turn tolerates opposition within the framework determined by the constituted authorities.
Recently I witnessed strike action which consisted of a dozen people holding signs and shuffling in a circle under the rather bored gaze of a police officer.