: . : .

1. ????????: ??????? ??????. ?????????: ???????? ??????????.

2. Tolerance ????’????, -?, ??. 1. ??????????? ??????? (? 1 ????.). ???????? ?. ???????? ?????? ?. ??????? ?? ???????? (??????????). ????????? ~? (????????? ???? ???????). ?. ??????? (?? ??????? ????????; ????.). 2. ?????????????, ???????? ? ???????? ? ?????-?. ????, ??????. ??????? ?????? ???????? ~?. ?. ? ???? ??? ???????? (????.). ??????? «tolerance» (????.) — ??????????, ????????????? ????-?., ????????

3. Toleration and tolerance Toleration and tolerance are terms used in social, cultural and religious contexts to describe attitudes which are "tolerant" (or moderately respectful) of practices or group memberships that may be disapproved of by those in the majority. In practice, "tolerance" indicates support for practices that prohibit ethnic and religious discrimination. Conversely, 'intolerance' may be used to refer to the discriminatory practices sought to be prohibited. Though developed to refer to the religious toleration of minority religious sects following the Protestant Reformation, these terms are increasingly used to refer to a wider range of tolerated practices and groups, or of political parties or ideas widely considered objectionable.

4. Tolerance and monotheism. One theory of the origins of religious intolerance, propounded by Sigmund Freud in Moses and Monotheism, links intolerance to monotheism. More recently, Bernard Lewis and Mark Cohen have argued that the modern understanding of tolerance, involving concepts of national identity and equal citizenship for persons of different religions, was not considered a value by pre-modern Muslims or Christians, due to the implications of monotheism. The historian G.R. Elton explains that in pre-modern times, monotheists viewed such toleration as a sign of weakness or even wickedness towards God. The usual definition of tolerance in pre-modern times as Bernard Lewis puts it was that:“ I am in charge. I will allow you some though not all of the rights and privileges that I enjoy, provided that you behave yourself according to rules that I will lay down and enforce.

5. Tolerance and monotheism. Mark Cohen states that it seems that all the monotheistic religions in power throughout the history have felt it proper, if not obligatory, to persecute nonconforming religions. Therefore, Cohen concludes, Medieval Islam and Medieval Christianity in power should have persecuted non-believers in their lands and "Judaism, briefly in power during the Hasmonean period (second century BCE) should have persecuted pagan Idumeans". Cohen continues: "When all is said and done, however, the historical evidence indicates that the Jews of Islam, especially during the formative and classical centuries (up to thirteenth century), experienced much less persecution than did the Jews of Christendom. This begs a more thorough and nuanced explanation than has hitherto been given."

6. Tolerating the intolerant Philosopher Karl Popper asserted, in The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1, that we are warranted in refusing to tolerate intolerance; illustrating that there are limits to tolerance. Philosopher John Rawls devotes a section of his influential and controversial book A Theory of Justice to this problem; whether a just society should or should not tolerate the intolerant. He also addresses the related issue of whether or not the intolerant have any right to complain when they are not tolerated, within their society. Rawls concludes that a just society must be tolerant; therefore, the intolerant must be tolerated, for otherwise, the society would then itself be intolerant, and thus unjust. However, Rawls qualifies this conclusion by insisting, like Popper, that society and its social institutions have a reasonable right of self-preservation that supersedes the principle of tolerance. Hence, the intolerant must be tolerated but only insofar as they do not endanger the tolerant society and its institutions.[citation needed] Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi used tolerance to force the British out of India. He pioneered the use of tolerance which was used by many i.e. Martin Luther King, and Nelson Mandela.

7. Promoting Tolerance On the day of its fiftieth anniversary, 16 November 1995, UNESCO's Member States adopted a Declaration of Principles on Tolerance. Among other things, the Declaration affirms that tolerance is neither indulgence nor indifference. It is respect and appreciation of the rich variety of our world's cultures, our forms of expression and ways of being human. Tolerance recognizes the universal human rights and fundamental freedoms of others. People are naturally diverse; only tolerance can ensure the survival of mixed communities in every region of the globe. Along with outright injustice and violence, discrimination and marginalization are common forms of intolerance. Education for tolerance should aim at countering influences that lead to fear and exclusion of others, and should help young people develop capacities for independent judgement, critical thinking and ethical reasoning. The diversity of our world's many religions, languages, cultures and ethnicities is not a pretext for conflict, but is a treasure that enriches us all.

8. TOLERANCE: THE ENDANGERED VIRTUE The most immediate goal in proclaiming 1995 the International Year for Tolerance was to generate awareness among both policy-makers and the public of the dangers associated with contemporary forms of intolerance. Since the end of the cold war, there has been a steady increase in social, religious and cultural conflicts. Too many have quickly turned into full-scale armed conflicts; too many fundamental human rights have come under direct assault, too many lives have been lost. What does the revival of historical grudges and armed conflict in the Balkans have in common with the alarming increase in the number of racial assaults in Western Europe? What formal relationship, if any, exists between extremist or supremacist groups around the world? What does genocide in Rwanda have to do with wars led by extremist religious groups in other parts of the world? Is there any link between the violence that targets writers, journalists and artists in one country and discrimination against indigenous people in another country? The only immediately available answer is that intolerance is on the increase everywhere and that it is killing on a massive scale. Intolerance raises many moral questions. It always has. In the 1990s intolerance also raises political questions. Intolerance is increasingly seen as a major threat to democracy, peace and security. Understandably, the issue is alarming governments and the public. Yet, any talk of intolerance raises more questions than it answers.

9. TOLERANCE: THE ENDANGERED VIRTUE Intolerance has been ever present in human history. It has ignited most wars, fuelled religious persecutions and violent ideological confrontations. Is it inherent in human nature? Is it insurmountable? Can tolerance be learned? How can democracies deal with intolerance without infringing on individual freedoms? How can they foster individual codes of conduct, without laws and without policing their citizens' behavior? How can peaceful multiculturalism be achieved? To address these questions, debates in 1995 brought together governments, social scientists, lawyers, human rights experts, artists and many others. Some solutions have been proposed, a great deal of consensus has emerged. A lot more needs to be done. There is now a formal proposal to convene a world summit on reducing hate. How much time do we have before the next crisis? As the clock ticks we hear the echo of the words of Zlatko Dizdarevic, editor of Sarajevo's multi-ethnic newspaper Oslobodenje: "In Sarajevo the very concept of the multi-ethnic community is now on trial; our fate may well become your fate."

10. HOW CAN INTOLERANCE BE COUNTERED? 1. Fighting intolerance requires law: Each Government is responsible for enforcing human rights laws, for banning and punishing hate crimes and discrimination against minorities, whether these are committed by State officials, private organizations or individuals. The State must also ensure equal access to courts, human rights commissioners or ombudsmen, so that people do not take justice into their own hands and resort to violence to settle their disputes. 2. Fighting intolerance requires education: Laws are necessary but not sufficient for countering intolerance in individual attitudes. Intolerance is very often rooted in ignorance and fear: fear of the unknown, of the other, other cultures, nations, religions. Intolerance is also closely linked to an exaggerated sense of self-worth and pride, whether personal, national or religious. These notions are taught and learned at an early age. Therefore, greater emphasis needs to be placed on educating more and better. Greater efforts need to be made to teach children about tolerance and human rights, about other ways of life. Children should be encouraged at home and in school to be open-minded and curious.

11. Education is a life-long experience and does not begin or end in school. Endeavours to build tolerance through education will not succeed unless they reach all age groups, and take place everywhere: at home, in schools, in the workplace, in law-enforcement and legal training, and not least in entertainment and on the information highways. 3. Fighting intolerance requires access to information: Intolerance is most dangerous when it is exploited to fulfil the political and territorial ambitions of an individual or groups of individuals. Hatemongers often begin by identifying the public's tolerance threshold. They then develop fallacious arguments, lie with statistics and manipulate public opinion with misinformation and prejudice. The most efficient way to limit the influence of hatemongers is to develop policies that generate and promote press freedom and press pluralism, in order to allow the public to differentiate between facts and opinions.

12. 5. Fighting intolerance requires local solutions: Many people know that tomorrow's problems will be increasingly global but few realize that solutions to global problems are mainly local, even individual. When confronted with an escalation of intolerance around us, we must not wait for governments and institutions to act alone. We are all part of the solution. We should not feel powerless for we actually posses an enormous capacity to wield power. Nonviolent action is a way of using that power-the power of people. The tools of nonviolent action-putting a group together to confront a problem, to organize a grassroots network, to demonstrate solidarity with victims of intolerance, to discredit hateful propaganda-are available to all those who want to put an end to intolerance, violence and hatred. 4. Fighting intolerance requires individual awareness: Intolerance in a society is the sum-total of the intolerance of its individual members. Bigotry, stereotyping, stigmatizing, insults and racial jokes are examples of individual expressions of intolerance to which some people are subjected daily. Intolerance breeds intolerance. It leaves its victims in pursuit of revenge. In order to fight intolerance individuals should become aware of the link between their behavior and the vicious cycle of mistrust and violence in society. Each one of us should begin by asking: am I a tolerant person? Do I stereotype people? Do I reject those who are different from me? Do I blame my problems on 'them'?