Promoting Tolerance

Tolerance Theory:

It has been argued that freedom of speech, especially through our  practice of extending protection to speech that we find hateful or personally upsetting, teaches us to become more tolerant in other aspects of life — and that a more tolerant society is a better society. Somewhat counter-intuitive, the First Amendment protects hate speech because society learns valuable lessons from, including why it is hateful and worthy of condemnation. It’s how we spread norms about acceptable behavior.

The tolerance theory is the belief that promoting expressive freedoms will make individuals and institutions more open to ideas than they would be otherwise. John Stuart Mill and Lee Bollinger promoted the tolerance theory. According to Mill, the free exchange of ideas should be encouraged to promote the discovery of the truth. As argued by Bollinger, he endorses a standpoint of tolerance in favor of protecting extremist speech, which provides a shield for more mainstream political discourse. 

I feel that of the eight values, tolerance theory is an important value because it allows individuals to express their social, economic, and political viewpoints. This theory is inspiring to individuals and institutions because they have become more open to ideas and beliefs of others. This theory is underrated in that Bollinger argues this theory to protect extremist speech; I didn’t know this theory existed, let alone protects extremist speech or even hate speech. This theory is meaningful to me because I am able to see all viewpoints in order to understand the norms about acceptable behavior.

Tolerance was turned into a theory for the First Amendment jurisprudence and for judicial review. Tolerance of jurisprudence suggests that Nazis should be permitted to parade down the streets of Illinois, as in Collin v. Smith (1978), even though the community is populated with survivors of the German Holocaust. The rational is that protecting the speech of the Nazi group protects other forms of political expression. Tolerance of judicial review suggests that courts protect the First Amendment from censorship laws, which are laws that suppress speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that it is considered harmful.

Collin v. Smith (1978):

In March 1977, Collin and the National Socialist Party of America publicly announced plans to hold assembly in Skokie Village Hall. Skokie Village has a population of approximately 70,000 people, with a majority of them being Jewish, and a big portion of the Jewish population being survivors of World War II persecution. On May 2, the village enacted three ordinances. The first established a permit system for parades and public assemblies and required public liability and damage insurance. The second prohibited the broadcasting of material that incited racial or religious hatred. The third prohibited public demonstrations by members of political parties while wearing military-style uniforms. Collin applied for a permit; however, he was denied. The courts stuck firm to the First Amendment principle and the tolerance theory that unpopular groups must be allowed to express their political opinions. With that being said, the court decision in the Collin v. Smith case was that Skokie could not prevent the Nazis from marching.

Related Articles:

The First Amendment Encyclopedia

Encyclopedia.com

Justia