Tolerance and even abstention also violate the Other’s freedom.

Evidence

It does not follow, however, that an ethics of “laisser-faire” and tolerance would respect the Other’s freedom any better. From the moment that I exist I establish a factual limit to the Other’s freedom. I am this limit, and each of my projects traces the outline of this limit around the Other. Charity, laisser-faire, tolerance—even an attitude of abstention—are each one a project of myself which engages me and which engages the Other in his acquiescence. To realize tolerance with respect to the Other is to cause the Other to be thrown forcefully into a tolerant world. It is to remove from him on principle those free possibilities of courageous resistance, of perseverance, of self-assertion which he would have had the opportunity to develop in a world of intolerance. This fact is made still more manifest if we consider the problem of education: a severe education treats the child as an instrument since it tries to bend him by force to values which he has not admitted, but a liberal education in order to make use of other methods nevertheless chooses a priori principles and values in the name of which the child will be trained. To train the child by persuasion and gentleness is no less to compel him. Thus respect for the Other’s freedom is an empty word; even if we could assume the project of respecting this freedom, each attitude which we adopted with respect to the Other would be a violation of that freedom which we claimed to respect. … Whatever our acts may be, in fact, we must accomplish them in a world where there are already others and where I am de trop in relation to others. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness, 1008

Categorization

• DEFINE: Establishes why I am always a factual limit on the Other’s freedom — every project, even abstention, engages the Other.
• XREF: Directly the systematic backdrop Beauvoir assumes: her ethics of ambiguity responds to precisely this ‘respect for freedom is an empty word’ problem. — connects to: One can act on the Other only once their freedom has collapsed. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 966; One person’s freedom often requires another person’s freedom to be curtailed. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Ethics of Ambiguity, 132; Acts that respect one person’s freedom can tyrannize another’s. — Simone de Beauvoir, The Ethics of Ambiguity, 132 (+4 more)
• SEED: Angle: liberal tolerance as covert coercion — how gentler methods of education and tolerance enforce values no less than force does.

Broader Connections

• Acts that respect one person’s freedom can tyrannize another’s. #corroborates (0.90) — Simone de Beauvoir, The Ethics of Ambiguity, 132
• One person’s freedom often requires another person’s freedom to be curtailed. #expands (0.85) — Simone de Beauvoir, The Ethics of Ambiguity, 132
• Individual freedom is achieved only through the freedom of others #contradicts (0.80) — Simone de Beauvoir, The Ethics of Ambiguity, 144
• Tolerance presupposes the tolerator’s power over the tolerated #contradicts (0.72) — David Theo Goldberg, The Threat of Race, 835
• Oppressors invoke their own freedom to justify oppressing others #complicates (0.72)
• Tolerance operates as a power-laden refusal of equality, not generosity. #complicates (0.72)