Warranted Intolerance

In 'The Open Society and It's Enemies', Karl Popper asserted that we are warranted in refusing to tolerate intolerance. Just think about it. What if a society was 100% tolerant? The intolerant would be tolerated. They would act accordingly, marginalizing others and accruing power, until, finally, tolerance itself would be obliterated under their reign. Justice itself relies on intolerance: murder is illegal, because we are not tolerant of it, for good reason. It is only when we pass the threshold of clear, negative externalities (i.e. one person's actions causing material harm to another person) that the question of tolerance vs warranted intolerance becomes more difficult, and I can see how large the struggle looms in the minds of Americans, as we seek to embrace fellow Americans whose beliefs have been erroneously conflated with evil, with a seemingly endless supply of recruits willing to reinforce this bias by committing acts of evil. Aside from exacting huge, asymmetric financial costs on the U.S. economy, I think that part of the goal of terrorism is to skew our collective minds towards unwarranted intolerance and drive a wedge between us. That is what we have to counter at every turn, or else play right into this goal.