AEMI

26 AEMI JOURNAL 2015
can be translated into hate speech and
discriminatory actions. All of these different
forms of xenophobia are expected
to be prevented by tolerance. In 1996,
the General Assembly of the United
Nations named November 16 as the
international day of tolerance. In Slovenian
schools, students are taught to be
tolerant of others (see e.g. Šlibar 2006;
Sardoč 2009). But pupils who are not
ethnic Slovenians do not want to be
tolerated by their teachers and schoolmates
for their supposed differences;
they want to be respected and liked (cf.
Žitnik 2005a). In this sense, the meaning
of tolerance in connection with
immigrants and minorities becomes
controversial. One must ask what in
fact tolerance is and whether a tolerant
attitude to the other really contributes
to equality, productive coexistence, and
intercultural awareness.
In addition to the many Slovenian
writers who have written about ethnic,
cultural, and religious tolerance (among
others Kuzmanič 1994; 2004; Kovačič
2005; Širec 1997; Leskošek, 2005;
Klepec 2007), many foreign authors,
among them Voltaire (1988), have
written on this subject. The most successful
Slovenian emigrant writer and
social critic, Louis Adamic, one of the
founding fathers of American multiculturalism,
wrote on many occasions that
the tolerance of the national majority to
immigrants is really only hidden contempt,
a subtler form of intolerance that
implies the superiority of the national
majority. Tolerance is ‘a veneer for intolerance,
which cracks easily’ (Adamic
1940: 297). On other occasions (for example
Adamic 1946: 7), he wrote that
those who are on the receiving end of
tolerance begin to feel ‘vaguely defensive’.
Consequently tolerance leads to
‘negative stands and attitudes which
preclude vital communication with others
… and there they are, there we all
are, separated from each other by invisible
chasms.’
A number of other social critics have
thought much the same thing. Graf
(2004: 16) wrote that: “No longer does
it suffice to assume an attitude of tolerance
that decides from a national superior
point of view how much of the
foreign may be accepted.” To tolerate is
to take the authority to decide whether
the legitimate rights of others may be respected
or not. As if it were only because
we allow others the colour of their skin,
their language, their faith, habits and
values, their way of life, that they can
keep them. They can still feel a bit guilty
about it, but we are generous enough to
allow it. Or in Goethe’s words (Goethe
1897: 221): “Dulden heißt beleidigen.” –
“To tolerate is to insult.” This is why I
prefer to use the word respect instead of
the noun tolerance or the verb tolerate.
Conclusion
Our perception of certain English terms
very often depends on the specific cultural
background and local circumstances
that are vividly reflected in the
vocabulary of our mother tongue. On
the other hand, it also depends on the
level of our intercultural awareness. As
Meta Grosman (2004:25) puts it,
… all encounters wIth other/foreign
cultures, whether or not we encounter
them in translation, which is to
say partially adapted to our own/
domestic culture, or in the original,