Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Tolerance

Tolerance is great, tolerance is good, tolerance is necessary to create a stable and peaceful existence for all. Tolerance says, “I don’t understand your ways, maybe I don’t even agree with them or like them, but I know what’s required of me to keep things ticking over. I know I need to be tolerant and let you go about doing whatever the Hell it is you’re doing and maybe, just maybe, I’ll start to understand as things progress”. And, truth be told, this is possibly the best we can hope for. It’s impossible to understand everything and everyone it’s all most of us can manage just to be tolerant and forgiving and not an arse. We live in a diverse and varied culture and are surrounded by people of all faiths, creeds and beliefs and are bombarded with new information of all kinds twenty-four hours a day. How could we possibly be expected to understand all that we would like to. We can’t. Hell, I can’t even understand my nearest and dearest. I can sympathise with them and even empathise with their situations but I would never say that I understand.
But here’s my dilemma, tolerance seems to have become our default setting and maybe this should be changed. Tolerance for a religious belief that’s trying to find it’s way integrating into a dominant society is a good thing but maybe tolerance for those who blatantly disregard important issues is bad. I’m not advocating mass lynchings or the death penalty for those who drop litter but maybe being less tolerant as a society in certain areas could help matters in some way.
To be frank I’m not entirely sure what I mean here, it’s just too big an issue. But I do know that we should stop being so tolerant of those who willfully disregard all the proven information given and, whilst the rest of society are running around breaking their backs trying to become more environmentally sound, (often at great inconvenience), they (Clarkson, O’Leary) carry on regardless and not only wear their disdain for the cause like some kind of badge of honour but delight in standing up against the rest of us and deriding our efforts (Clarkson, O’Leary).
Think of that story about the Mum’s who feed their children chips and pies through the school railings because ‘little Tyler’ and ‘ickle Jordan’ didn’t want to eat the healthy stuff that Jamie & the Government had decided they should eat for their health and wellbeing. "It's their choice not to." screeched the Mum's. No it's not, they're at school you stupid waste of skin! Since when has school been about choice. Well maybe it’s time we started saying to these people, sorry but you clearly don’t care as much for your children as you’d like to think or, as is often the case, as you’d like us to think (because, and let’s be honest here, these types always want to shout and scream about how much they love their kids whilst they drive the five minutes to McDonalds in their 4x4 to get their chubby little blob of a kid a quarter-pounder with cheese for their dinner) and you are, in actual fact, harming them in more ways than the obvious. Maybe it’s time we looked these people in the eyes and, instead of trying to reason with them, instead of trying to mollify them maybe we should just say, “Clarkson (& co), you are a cunt.”

1 comment:

Hostess with the Mostest said...

Ooh, I concur. (Liked that ever since I saw Pirates of the Caribbean and Captain Jack Sparrow said it!)

I'm glad someone's taken over the blog-rant mantle.

There is so much that riles me at the moment. I'll try a rant soon...

Word of the day. Crapsifruit.

1. a. - Alt. of Crapsifruit. ~ (Crap-see-frute) To be a bit crap and slightly fruity. (See John Inman.)