Tolerance as a Tool for Transformation
Intimidating the masses into socialist consensus
By Berit Kjos, January 29, 2007
Resources to aid your Understanding
"...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... suppressed.” 1965, Herbert Marcuse, an influential Marxist.
"The techniques of brainwashing developed in totalitarian countries are routinely used in psychological conditioning programs imposed on American school children. These include emotional shock and desensitization... stripping away defenses... and inducing acceptance of alternative values...." Thomas Sowell
"I cannot stand narrow minded idiots like yourselves. You are seriously sick." A visitor to our website
Throughout history, "tolerance" has meant different things to different people. A century ago, most Americans would have defined it as civility toward disagreeable persons, not as acceptance of contrary views. In contrast, today's "tolerance" demands acceptance of politically correct views but intolerance toward those who cling to "traditional" values. While media leaders feel free to mock Christians, believers are losing their freedom to state their convictions. After all, they might hurt someone's feelings.
This transformation didn't "just happen." During the 20th century, socialist visionaries redefined tolerance and began using it as an effective weapon against Biblical values. Trained facilitators (in schools, government, corporations and churches) began turning cultural norms upside down -- then held the masses accountable to the new cultural guidelines. NEA leader, Professor Raymond Houghton, summarized the deception in 1970,
"...absolute behavior control is imminent.... The critical point of behavior control, in effect, is sneaking up on mankind without his self-conscious realization that a crisis is at hand. Man will... never self-consciously know that it has happened."
Former Carnegie strategist Marc Tucker, a friend of Hillary Clinton and the master-mind behind America's "School-to-Work" agenda, shared that vision: "[Our objective] will require a change in the prevailing culture -- the attitudes, values, norms and accepted ways of doing things."
Tucker had followed the footsteps of mind-changing behavioral "scientists" such as Herbert Marcuse, a transformational Marxist trained in the "inner circle" at the revolutionary Frankfurt Institute for Social Research in pre-war Germany. With Hitler's rise to power, that "inner circle" fled to America. In 1934, Marcuse, called "the father of political correctness," joined other socialist change agents at Columbia University, where they built on the liberal foundation laid by John Dewey. Years later, Marcuse wrote the report, Repressive Tolerance, which exposed his oppressive Communist goals:
"The uncertainty of chance... necessitates tolerance. However, this tolerance cannot be indiscriminate and equal... it cannot protect false words and wrong deeds which demonstrate that they contradict and counteract the' possibilities of liberation.... Such indiscriminate tolerance is justified in harmless debates.... But society cannot be indiscriminate... where freedom and happiness themselves are at stake: here, certain things cannot be said, certain ideas cannot be expressed, certain policies cannot be proposed, certain behavior cannot be permitted without making tolerance an instrument for the continuation of servitude."
Marcuse became a hero to the revolutionary student movements during the chaotic sixties. Now, forty years later, we see the fruit of his labor: moral corruption and intolerance toward traditional values. Facing these painful consequences, Kevin, a young Christian, sent us this note:
"On my school bus kids would like to sing rap songs that includes a lot of profanity and perversion.... Liberals, gays and others say we Christians are intolerant when they are intolerant themselves. One time my seventh grade teacher said those who say God forbids or hates homosexuality are racists!"
Few of today's results-driven churches will take their stand with believers like Kevin. Inspired by "successful" leaders like Rick Warren, churches -- like the corporate world -- now wield their "tolerance" like a whip with which to intimidate resisters who still cling to Biblical certainties and intolerant-sounding truths. After all, such "lone rangers" hinder today's collective march toward the envisioned earthly kingdom of universal peace and solidarity.5]
"...to be truly inclusive, the kingdom must exclude exclusive people, to be truly reconciling, the kingdom must not reconcile with those who refuse reconciliation.... [T]he kingdom of God is open to all, except those who want to ruin it by dividing it against itself." [
The changeable nature of Tolerance
Tolerance is never neutral. Its boundaries keep changing, often through self-serving governments that mandate public values through state-controlled religious hierarchies. Using various forms of propaganda and discipline, powerful establishments have turned public intolerance against foes of the planned solidarity.
Take the British monarchy during the 16th and 17th centuries. The shameless Henry VIII replaced Catholicism with the Church of England (Anglican) when the Pope refused to approve his first divorce (Henry beheaded three of his six wives). After his death and the short reign of his sickly son, the throne went to his Catholic daughter (Bloody) Mary I. She restored the Papal hierarchy and showed her intolerance for dissenters by burning them on the stake. When she died in 1558, her Anglican sister, Elizabeth I, became queen.
While Mary had persecuted Protestants, Elizabeth persecuted those who refused to conform to the Church of England. After her death in 1603, King James I (already the reigning King of Scotland) gained the British throne and joined the two nations. James formalized the rituals of the Church of England and had no tolerance for protestant Separatists who sought a simpler form of worship. Seeking religious freedom, these Puritans fled to Holland. Pursued even there, they boarded the Mayflower for America in 1620.
King Charles I, son of James I, was executed for treason in 1649, and the throne stood empty for almost three decades. In 1662, the British Parliament passed the Act of Uniformity, mandating religious conformity with the ritual practices of the Church of England. Baptists, Presbyterians, and Puritans (like John Bunyan, author of Pilgrim's Progress) who followed their Bible-trained conscience, were labeled "non-conformists." Non-conforming pastors who continued preaching faced persecution.
In 1677, James' grandson, Charles II, was crowned king. The persecution of dissenters quickly intensified. Among those who faced torture and "death by hanging" was a young maidservant, Marion Harvie. As she prepared to climb the scaffold, her final words showed her faith in Jesus, her Lord:
"Because He lives, I shall live also.... How I bless Him that thoughts of death are not terrible to me. He hath made me as willing to lay down my life for Him as ever I was willing to live in this world.... Seek Him and ye shall find Him. I sought Him and found Him; I held Him and would not let Him go."
Relief came in 1689 when the British Parliament passed The Act of Toleration, granting limited freedom to dissenters.
The Christians who fled to America during this time had seen the dangers of government-controlled religion. A century later, the religious freedom they sought became a legal promise through the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
But that freedom is fading fast. Once again, the tool of "tolerance" and government mandates threaten our freedom. But today's leaders are far more subtle and sophisticated than British rulers were centuries ago. Armed with the latest psycho-social strategies, postmodern revolutionaries are facilitating a mass consensus aimed at silencing all opposition.
Today's public values show the results. Since I write reviews of popular entertainment (usually in response to questions from concerned parents), I get lots of angry letters. It matters little that I have tried to be kind and factual in my reviews -- or that I criticize the message rather than a person -- zealous defenders of popular entertainment have little tolerance for contrary views. Notice the emphasis on feelings rather than facts in the following comments:
Unfortunately people like you guys actually do exist... While reading one of your many articles on Harry Potter for a class on censorship, I came to realize that religious fundamentalism is dangerous and maniacal no matter what religion it is. You guys are on par with muslims....
Hate and fear peddlers is all you are. You're no worse than the KKK.
You are intolerant bumbling fools.... There is nothing wrong with pokemon.... Live a nice life and die.
...your opinions are every bit as dangerous as those expressed by so-called "hate" groups.... Star Wars is just a movie, Pokemon is just a card game, and Christianity is just a belief. ... The most disturbing part about your articles is the vast number of "weak minded" individuals who blindly follow your beliefs, accepting your irrational way of thinking.
I can't believe there are actually idiots like you on this planet! You people REALLY scare me....
I often ask such visitors if they would want to outlaw websites like ours. Many answer "Yes." They don't believe we have the right to share our offensive views on a public website. Instead, they claim the right not to be offended by inconvenient facts or logic.
Our response to an intolerant world
If we can't stop the transformation, how should we relate to this strange, new world? How can we love those who hate our beliefs?
There's a clue in Proverbs 15:1. It reminds us that "a soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger." It's true! When I replied with kindness, many would send back grateful -- even repentant -- responses. The subsequent correspondence didn't include Hegelian dialogue as a means to consensus. Instead, the angry expressions became opportunities to show God's love -- without compromise!
America's "traditional" values may be vanishing, but some things never change: human nature, God's timeless Truth, and His all-sufficient strength. Human nature may be driving this social and spiritual transformation. But God and His Word enable us to stand firm in the midst of the raging battle.
"Thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord...." 1 Corinthians 15:56
1. Herbert Marcuse, Repressive Tolerance, 1965 at http://www.marcuse.org/herbert/pubs/60spubs/65repressivetolerance.htm
2. Thomas Sowell, Ph.D., "Indoctrinating the Children," Forbes, February 1, 1993), 65.
3. Raymond Houghton, To Nurture Humaneness, ASCD (curriculum arm of the NEA), 1970
4. Marc Tucker, "How We Plan to Do It," Proposal to the New American School Development Corporation: National Center for Education and the Economy, July 9, 1992. See Tucker Plan Includes Cradle Control
5.Brian McLaren, The Secret Message of Jesus: Uncovering the Truth that Could Change Everything (Nashville: Thomas Nelson's W Publishing Group, 2006), pages 169-170. See also Who defines the Kingdom of God?
Provided by Berit Kjos
See our selection of wonderful books by Berit Kjos
Finally, we would love to hear from you.
You can contact us by mail or email.
God bless you.