Everyone knows what the word "tolerance".And the translation, in fact, not necessary.Yes, it is Latin for "tolerance" and that?And just as all is clear.There is even a question: "And why is unnecessary to enter into a language the word?"Logically, when loan words fill the vacant niche.There is no concept - no word in the language.It appears a new phenomenon - there is a word, it determines.If the phenomenon has come from a different culture, it is logical that the definition is from the same place.But if a TV or computer in a Russian reality was not, because tolerance was!So why a new word?
tolerance - tolerance is not
fact that semantically the word "tolerance" and "tolerance" differ quite strongly."Hate" in the Russian language - is "to overcome any discomfort.""I do not like it, but suffer.Force yourself to ignore the trouble "- that's how you can convey the feeling of a man who is tolerant.
Tolerance - is quite another.This - not the overcoming of his own hostility and anger (though, of cours
tolerant person just makes myself to tolerate the existence of alien cultural norms, traditions of others, other people's way of life.Tolerant man perceives all this as the only possible order of things.The phrase "we are all equal, we - one" is erroneous.The truth is that we are all different - this is what is the norm.
Before we talk about what is tolerance in international relations, it is worth recalling that at a certain stage of development of each tribe called itself simply and simply - "the people."That is, here we are gathered here at a fire - people.And whoever wanders around, it is also necessary to understand.So what that the two legs, two arms and one head?Maybe it's such a bald monkey?You never know.He says it is not clear, does not honor our gods, our leaders do not like.Do not look like it on the person, oh, do not look like ...
Roman word "barbarians" - a mumbling sound transmission."Options Options Options Options."Lopochut not understand that.Here we are, the Romans - the people, the right people, speak clearly, in Latin.... And these barbarians, in a word.Either they will become normal people - speak in Latin and recognize the primacy of Rome, either ...
probably Huns and relevant evidence base was built on the same principle.
people - we and those who are like us.And all the others - strangers, which no ethical and legal rules do not apply.Here and formed the nation and international relations for many, many hundreds of years.Gradually the circle of "people" expanded.We and our neighbors.We and our allies.We - Christians, or we - Judaism.We - the white people.But were always those who are outside the circle, out of bounds.People of another nation, another faith, another color.Not so.Other.
On the one hand, it is still a positive trend.If the circle of "their" extended, so the culture of international relations slowly but grow.Extrapolating, we can conclude that once all become "his" and the bad place, and strangers take, say, aliens.Or intelligent dolphins - it does not matter.
On the other hand, it is very, very bad.Because trends clearly demonstrate that people need someone else's, just as the antithesis of his own.You need someone against whom you can be friends, forgetting about small differences for the larger ones.
That is tolerance in international relations, began to think not so long ago.Simply because in the XIX century slavery was very common phenomenon, and the Australian Aborigines until 1967 did not include in the census, thereby excluding from the number of citizens.With rare exceptions, the Jews in the Russian Empire had no right to leave the Pale of Settlement to 1917, and based largely on cultural and religious contradictions of the conflict in Ireland has been around for decades, it is flashing, then fading.Therefore, the international diplomacy of the past, of course, was quite tolerant in the framework of professionalism, that is diplomatic.But this does not mean that the task of the state to raise tolerant citizens.The absence of war - already the world, and is based on whether it is friendly feelings towards a neighbor or just awareness of the futility of armed conflict, are not so important.
why tolerance has become a necessity?
fairness it should be noted that it is in the twentieth century there was a need for tolerance.Prior to that, the residents of a single country for the most part is a cultural monolith.The British - a British, French - it is the French, the Japanese - a Japanese.Strangers - Gentiles, aliens, alien - of course, were everywhere, but they were few.Ethnic tolerance was not too relevant, simply because those to whom it was to be directed, is exceptionally small group.So, no one cares about cases of influenza so far, is not an epidemic breaks out.
only the twentieth century, with its active migration policy, the endless wars that led to mass migrations, forced people to think about tolerance.And, of course, World War II, all clearly demonstrate that a single dominant nation and international relations, built on this.More specifically, the twentieth century will look at the situation not from the burden of responsibility vested with the white man, and from the "second-rate copies" to be any improvement, or destruction.Visibility was exceptional.Fascism easily convinced everyone that the racial or religious prejudices - it is bad, and inter-ethnic tolerance - good.Because there is no guarantee that the person who has just been in the role of vested rights and the rule of the majority, suddenly would be a minority with all the ensuing consequences.
In the twentieth century dramatically reduced the number of people who do not understand what is tolerance in international relations.It has become an alternative to religion, race, ethnicity or any other tolerance.The ability to take someone else's culture, traditions of others for granted, adapt to them became, in a sense the key to survival.Because the twentieth century - not ten, replaced by the sword and dagger long ago came the automatic weapons and explosives.
the equality of which philosophers have asserted many centuries, was finally enshrined in law.The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, signed in 1948, for the first time made mutual respect is not voluntary and obligatory.The Preamble of the UN Charter and the Declaration of Principles on Tolerance UNESCO 1995 provides definitions, voiced the basic principles of tolerance.They boil down to a rather simple proposition: all the members of civil society have the right to be different, and the task of the state - to ensure that right.
lack of tolerance in action
As a consequence, all States that have signed these international instruments are obliged to legislate these standards of conduct.This applies both to the rules of criminal and administrative law, which must be spelled out liability for infringement of others' rights and freedoms, and to the requirements of the educational and cultural spheres.The state should not only punish those who seek to limit the other in their national, cultural or religious expression, but also to educate people in tolerance and respect, to plant them in the community by all available means.
From this perspective, to gain a foothold in the Russian media tradition of dubious use the term "person of Caucasian nationality" - a direct violation of international tolerance.Identify criminals based on their alleged national origin, in a situation where it has nothing to do with the actual composition of crime - is very ill.Especially if you never sounds "person of Slavic origin", "face the German-Romanesque nationality", "persons of Latin ethnicity."If all of the above definitions, even sound absurd, ridiculous and absurd, then why "person of Caucasian nationality" has become the norm?After all, in such a way in the minds of people just secured a stable association: from the Caucasus - a potential criminal.It does not matter that the Caucasus is a large and cosmopolitan, the population of this area is diverse and numerous.There, as elsewhere, there are criminals, but there is, as everywhere, decent people disproportionately.The stereotype is easy to create, but it is difficult to break.Interethnic relations in Russia are suffering from such rash statements of media persons.
fraternal peoples are not the same, and fraternal
It is with such manifestations of public opinion formation, and has to fight legislation of the countries that have ratified the international instruments in this field.Submission of information in the press and on television, the lessons in schools, various events dedicated to the promotion of tolerance and mutual respect - all these should be monitored by the state.The alternative, alas, sad.Civil disturbances conflicts, the growth of xenophobic attitudes in society - such manifestations to fight very hard.Simply keep them at once.The State must shape public opinion, and then there will be new traditions and norms of behavior that are behind the scenes to determine the actions of citizens.Yes, crimes motivated by ethnic or racial intolerance - the evil is almost inevitable.But if criminals are faced with universal condemnation and contempt - is one thing.But if you meet a tacit understanding and approval, or at least indifference - is quite another ...
Unfortunately, at present inter-ethnic relations in Russia are far from cloudless.Earlier, at the time of the multinational Soviet state propaganda mechanism was worked on education of mutual respect and emphasis on the fact that, regardless of the nationality of all - citizens of a great country.Now, unfortunately, the level of tolerance to representatives of other nations has fallen dramatically since this aspect of education has received little attention.But the cross-national differences in the media emphasized sharply enough.And one can only hope that the situation will soon change for the better.
not all so rosy
fairness it should be noted that the ideal of mutual respect and understanding towards which modern cultural community has a rather unpleasant side effects.Tolerance - this, of course, wonderful.As a Christian non-resistance.You can substitute the cheek to infinity if it complies with the principles and moral convictions.But there is no guarantee that non-resistant to remain alive.Because its system of moral values includes humanism and love of neighbor, and the belief in universal equality.But who said that these principles will share your opponent?Chances are that the first neprotivlentsu good will in the face, and then simply pushed away to the side.No one, he does not talk sense, and no re - simply because such behavior of the representatives of other cultures will be treated not as an exceptional beauty of the soul, as well as the weakness of the banal."Tolerance" - the term is not everywhere and not all perceived in a positive way.For many, this apathy, cowardice, lack of strict moral principles that are worth fighting.The result is a situation where the tolerance and patience showing only one side.But the second is actively enforces its own rules.
Tolerance and chauvinism
A similar problem faced by modern Europe.A large number of migrants from the Muslim East and Africa led to a significant cultural shift.Sami immigrants do not seek to assimilate, which is understandable.They live as accustomed, as they see it.A tolerant Europeans, of course, can not force them - because it violates the rights of the individual.It seems that the behavior is absolutely correct.But whether it is possible to harmonize inter-ethnic relations in situations where dialogue is, in fact, no?There is a monologue of one party, one that does not want to hear other people's arguments, nor understand them.
Already, many Europeans complain that the newcomers not only did not want to act "European".They demand that the indigenous people conform to the norms and traditions adopted in the old homeland.That is tolerant Europeans can not impose its rules and regulations, but intolerant visitors something they can!And imposes!Because their culture is just such behavior is only possible and correct.And the only way to change such traditions - a limitation of rights and freedoms, forced assimilation, which is incompatible with the philosophy of mutual respect and individual freedom.Here's a paradox.Examples of this kind of tolerance quite accurately describes the children's joke "eat your first, and then each his own."
Tolerance - not equal servility
Unfortunately, the consequence of this situation is the growing popularity of fascist movements.The desire to protect, to preserve their culture, to protect her from someone else's blatant interference makes some Europeans acutely aware their own national identity.And it is poured into molds that are far from civilized.
can say that the wave of inter-ethnic conflict that shook Europe in recent years - just in a sense a consequence of excess tolerance.Because at some point people forget what is tolerance in international relations and cease to distinguish it from servility.Mutual respect - it is mutual.Unilateral mutual respect does not exist.And if one of the nation does not want to reckon with the norms and traditions of the other, neither of which is tolerance and can be no question.If this fact is ignored, conflict is inevitable.And they will be much more serious - simply because that will arise out of the legal field.The revival of extremist fascist movements in Europe as a balanced response to the cultural imbalance caused by a large number of visitors, it clearly proves.Like everyone, even the most wonderful and humane measure that tolerance is good only within reasonable limits.Overdose transforms medication into poison.