Tolerance Vs. "Tolerance"
Frederick Hess writes at Newsweek about how "tolerance" has been hijacked:

I've too often seen my progressive friends try to silence ideas they dislike in the name of "tolerance." For instance, the agents of "tolerance" have made clear that the wrong kinds of thoughts regarding school discipline or history instruction can be deemed "problematic." In doing so, they've reserved for themselves the right to determine just what the boundaries of tolerance entail. And I'm no longer even surprised when I see self-professed paragons of open-mindedness in academe who want a scholar investigated or sanctioned for having the "wrong" views on Title IX enforcement, gender identity or the causes of poverty.

Tolerance can't be a matter of creating safe spaces for those who hold certain views. Robust debate is fundamental to democratic government, and civics instruction must prepare students accordingly. Tolerance means accepting that we may disagree with our fellow citizens on all manner of issues, and that they have as much right to their views and values as we do to ours.

Heck, Thomas Jefferson regarded it as a badge of honor that the young nation was willing to tolerate royalists in its midst. As Jefferson would argue in his First Inaugural Address, even those who wanted to dissolve the new Union should be allowed to "stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated, where reason is left free to combat it." That's part of the American creed.

But today, in a disquieting twist, Jefferson--along with other undesirables, like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and even Senator Dianne Feinstein--are among those whose names the school board in famously "tolerant" San Francisco has sought to strip from the city's schools for various alleged misdeeds. Whatever that kind of Stalinist purge may be, it's surely not tolerant. But we see similar efforts underway on purportedly "tolerant" college campuses and communities across the land.

...I should say that I suspect one reason the incidences of "racism" and "white supremacy" appear to be growing is that advocates have developed a troubling habit of wantonly labeling any view they find objectionable as "racist" and "white supremacist," and therefore not to be tolerated.

It can seem that this kind of labeling is designed not to facilitate crucial conversations, but to stifle those who might push back or raise inconvenient questions. This fall, for instance, the American Educational Research Association and the National Academy of Education issued a "Joint Statement in Support of Anti-Racist Education," endorsed by 16 scientific societies, which instructed that researchers "must stand against the notion that systemic racism does not exist." Issue settled, discussion over. Rather than envision higher education as a refuge for inquiry and debate, these organizations appear more interested in arguing that debate should be shut down.

At the end of the day, "tolerance" shouldn't serve as an excuse to coddle a student's sensibilities, or to stymie the exploration of complicated truths. Rather, it should fortify our commitment to a civics education that asks students to wrestle with hard questions, whether that involves the legacy of slavery, attempts to circumscribe religious freedom or the evidence for Republican claims that the 2020 presidential election was "stolen" (or similar Democratic claims about 2016).

...Tolerance rooted in listening, curiosity and a search for understanding is an essential part of that endeavor.

But tolerance can't be a one-way street. Schools must help all students feel welcome, valued and heard, but "tolerance" must not become a convenient vehicle for ideological crusades or silencing nonbelievers. Unfortunately, in 2021, I fear we must not work solely to better infuse the true spirit of tolerance into civics education, but to also keep a wary eye on those who would hijack tolerance for more troubling, politicized ends.

I think we're long past eye time and parents should start pulling their children out of any school that pushes racism and indoctrination on kids and calls it "tolerance."

Markets will arise. There are still enough decent, thinking people who have kids to want out of the current increasingly ugly system. Kids might even get an education if they aren't spending half the day obsessing over skin color. (Unprogress.)