【10.01.01 英国卫报】Intolerance can be a virtue

青蛙小王子

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/01/intolerance-virtue

We invited the commenter of the year in the Ciffies to write an article above the line. This is MoveAnyMountain's submission.

For centuries Great Britain has served as a safe haven for refugees from political persecution. The reason Britain has been so attractive is its long tradition of political tolerance. This is history Britain ought to be proud of, even if it has been abused by people such as Karl Marx.
What made Britain unique was that the British public was tolerant of larger issues such as politics and religion while remaining decidedly intolerant of petty issues. The curtain-twitching disapproval of "alternative lifestyles" remained strong in Britain until the 60s generation rebelled against such moral sternness. While Britain in the 50s was a repressive society in many ways that many could not accept, just because Britain has a proud tradition of tolerance, it does not mean that intolerance does not have its own advantages.
To see what a society looks like when tolerance goes wild, observers only have to look at southern Europe or much of the third world. China shows what a socially tolerant society looks like. While China is not tolerant of political differences, the people are generally tolerant of behaviours that would not be acceptable in Britain. In China, smoking, talking loudly, using mobile phones in theatres or restaurants is perfectly normal behaviour. This is extended to a nearly complete indifference to public spaces and to other people that comes as a surprise to any newly arrived visitor to the People's Republic. Driving in China is usually a shock even to those used to third world traffic as other drivers simply ignore anything not a direct danger to themselves.
As an example of the problems of excessive tolerance just compare the status of larger social issues such as crypto-science. While anyone in Britain who makes dubious claims for medical treatments can expect both the wrath of the authorities and public disapproval, in most of the rest of the world tolerance is extended to those claiming they can cure cancer or HIV with herbs.

In fact in China belief in the benefits of Chinese herbal medicines is extremely common, despite a noticeably lack of evidence to support such views. This extends up and down the social scale with the most educated Chinese often also being the most credulous towards such claims. Qian Xuesen, the American-educated founder of China's rocket programme, for instance, was also a strong supporter of various Qigong groups, including Falun Gong before it was banned.

This tolerant attitude may well have played a part in China's lack of an industrial revolution. For while British tolerance has not allowed the persecution of heretics in recent times, that has not been extended to their ideas. British scientists have inherited the Christian tradition of intolerance and that has driven technological progress.
This intolerant attitude is frequently displayed by writers such as Richard Dawkins, who shares the similar zeal for error as the Inquisition, while being unable to use their methods. In a more tolerant society people would wonder why he bothered. Albert Einstein may have wasted half his life trying to disprove quantum theory but science would never progress if errors were not exposed. Without the zeal to hunt out error, there is no need for people to hold a coherent and consistent world view. Without criticism from others there is no need to examine deeply held views to see if they are valid. It may well have been the tolerance of traditional China that meant the scientific revolution never took place and hence China did not industrialise.
As the British have become more tolerant of petty transgressions it is no surprise that such behaviours have increased. Litter is much more common than it was 50 years ago, as is antisocial behaviour in general. However, this increasing tolerance extends from the housing estates to the Houses of Parliament. Behaviour that would have led to resignation half a century ago is now viewed with benign tolerance. Civil servants are not dismissed no matter how badly they manage public projects; politicians no longer resign no matter how badly they have behaved.
None of this is inevitable. Litter is not unavoidable and should not be tolerated. The waste of billions of pounds in badly designed IT projects is not a fact of nature but a blot on society we choose to accept rather than challenge. We can find our inner Inquisitor and we should express disapproval of behaviour that we do not need to tolerate. Britain can be the tidy, clean and safe place it was 50 years ago if only we, as a society, have the will to embrace intolerance for antisocial behaviour.
So this holiday everyone should express a little mild disapproval when someone cuts you off on the road, or towards a youth who puts his feet on the railway seats or towards a tourist talking loudly in an art gallery. Should that intolerance be extended to people who try to sell you miracle cures or homeopathy or crack brained schemes to save the world, the frontiers of science may well be extended as well. Who knows, but if that intolerance is applied to politicians who take advantage of the system or who are just incompetent, British democracy may well benefit as well.

magicboy