Fair enough. It is worth mentioning that his definition is far more nuanced than simply "any intolerance must not be tolerated," which contradicts itself. >...I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force... In other words, we can't ban people from having certain opinions, but we should still draw the line somewhere and not allow unlimited intolerance if it can lead to violence. The question then becomes how a society determines that line. And that's a whole can of worms.

[wrong](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance)