PC and diversity

diversity is the condition of being diverse.

for the idea of diversity to make sense, it needs to be defended across the spectrum. diversity means that no argument should be rejected solely on the grounds that it's offensive.

here are some examples:

Hitler's Mein Kempf, (in the 1920s, still offensive to Jews in the 2000s)
Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses, (1990s, offensive to Muslims, particularly during Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini's tenure)
Ginsberg's Howl (offensive to 1960s sexual mores)
Nabokov's Lolita (1950s, still offensive for its pedophilic content)
Burroughs' Naked Lunch (offensive to 1960s sexual mores)
Serranos' Piss Christ (offensive to Christians in the late 1980s)
Hebdo's caricatures of Mohamed (2010s, offensive to Muslims)
Mapplethorpe's Black Book (erotic depictions of black men became offensive to some in the black community during the late 1980s)
Prodigy's Smack My Bi*** Up (offensive to some Feminists during the 2000s)
Passolini's SALÒ (banned for a long time, due to its pornographic content)
Spasojevic's A Serbian Film,  (banned in many countries because of its pedophilic content)
... etc,
that's a pretty diverse list (if you are ready to defend it).

clearly, diversity, as such, cannot check itself. we need a system of checks and balances to give diversity a proper space among the different factions pulling it apart. this is called tolerance.

tolerance doesn't require you to accept -or reject- something; only that you allow it to exist.

for the sake of diversity, that something has a right to be there.

are you? better ask yourself this question,  am I ready to defend such-and-such even if it insults me, disgusts me?

depending your answer, you're ready -or not- to defend the tolerance of diversity.

(as it turns out, these efforts contradict the idea of diversity -and the purported idea of PC as arbiter of such protection).

what true diversity requires is tolerance.