#Paradoxoftolerance

One of the reasons I posted this graphic it's because I think this lesson is necessary in other ways. For example, in Buddhist precepts, the first precept deals with protecting or affirming life. However, when is it necessary to take a life in order to protect life?

To me, this happens if both the micro and the macro scale. At the micro-scale of our day-to-day life, we must kill in order to live. Even if one is a strict vegan, carbon-based life still has to die for us to continue functioning. That is a truth of our absurd universe.

Now of course, one can recognize this without justifying atrocities such as factory farming. But I think it's important to honor life, including the lives that are given up for our day today function. But this has a macro scale effect as well. What do you do when you do...

When someone is going to take a life or lives? What about the paradox I'm taking a life to protect life. This is why I do not mourn the woman who died at the Capitol. Fascist cult followers of a demagogue as we know from the Milgram experiment, will do all sorts of awful things.

So I can be sad that a life was taken, I am also aware of the fact that had it not been, more lives could have potentially been lost. The people there brought guns, pipe bombs, hanging rope, and all sorts of horrible things. Enlightenment values, precepts, and progress...

Are antithetical to the existence of these Cult of Personality who are willing to do anything for the rhetoric of their leader. One cannot have a good-faith conversation when one party wants the genocide of another. So what is a Buddhist or any other peace-loving person to do?

@Arbitrarymagi this thread may or may not be interesting to you.