Newman, Sandra2024-12-132024-12-131992-06https://hdl.handle.net/1794/30251144 pagesAttempts to justify toleration usually utilize moral arguments based on respecting the agency of, or preventing harm to, an individual. These arguments provide a sufficient but not a necessary reason for powerful states to tolerate a diverse and dissenting populous. Provided a state is interested in promoting non-violence, I claim that, because political controversy increases tolerance and decreases violence, toleration of all non-violent diversity and dissent is incumbent upon a state. This argument also justifies state intolerance of violent dissent, where violence is either threatened or manifest.en-USCreative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0-USUO theses and dissertations are provided for research and educational purposes and may be under copyright by the author or the author’s heirs. Please contact us <mailto:scholars@uoregon.edu> with any questions or comments. In your email, please be sure to include the URL and title of the specific items of your inquiry.philosophy, toleration, autonomy-based justification, state intolerance, internal connection, unified peace, political tolerationThesis / Dissertation