How far are you willing to compromise your principles for power?

[Rad]

I'm thinking of the Trump threads popping up and my issue with Rand on Iran deal and the over hyped threat of radical Islam. The whole compromising and playing the game shtick I disagree with but I want to know where the liberty movement wants to draw the line? Rank the issues from most important to least. I personally liked the line Ron drew and draws.

How far are you willing to compromise to socialist, warmongers, and various other statist types? I'd end the empire, I'd end the fed, I'd let the public decide if it wanted to spend money on welfare and public works. I'd rather it be local/state though. I also would get rid of the free trade agreements. I would not give up a single liberty, not one.

 

[oyarde]

I'm thinking of the Trump threads popping up and my issue with Rand on Iran deal and the over hyped threat of radical Islam. The whole compromising and playing the game shtick I disagree with but I want to know where the liberty movement wants to draw the line? Rank the issues from most important to least. I personally liked the line Ron drew and draws.

How far are you willing to compromise to socialist, warmongers, and various other statist types? I'd end the empire, I'd end the fed, I'd let the public decide if it wanted to spend money on welfare and public works. I'd rather it be local/state though. I also would get rid of the free trade agreements. I would not give up a single liberty, not one.

I could never support Fed tax monies being spent on welfare or giving up any Liberty.

 

[Suzanimal]

End the FED. No compromise.

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

I'm fine with an incrementalist approach. I just ask that when we obtain that sweet minarchy the ones who wish to keep it so attempt to do the tax collecting themselves.

 

[Cabal]

That which may be compromised was never a principle to begin with. Principles are either consistently applied, or they aren't principles at all.

 

[Ronin Truth]

"Any compromise between good and evil only works to detriment of the good and to the benefit of the evil."

 

[CaptUSA]

I can accept an incremental approach as long as we are heading in the right direction. This is not a compromise of principles. This is the rate of achieving our principles.

But that is not what's being asked. None of these candidates are even speaking about moving in the right direction. There are only differences in how fast and which issue on which they move in the wrong direction.

For example, I want the government to be really, really small. I can accept someone who only wants to shrink it a little, if that's my best option at any given moment. But I cannot compromise with the people who want to grow government, even just a little.

 

[presence]

I'm not here to compromise
I'm not here to vote for some statist fuck I think might win
I'm not here to come up with statist solutions to our statist problems

I'm here for the history of liberty
I'm here for the meaning of liberty
I'm here for the future of liberty
I'm here to support philosophically attuned liberty candidates


I'm IRATE. I'm TIRELESS.


and lately I'm on pretty strong diet of triple tap -40 rep burn

because if you're here to plug for the latest statist winner... or the latest statist solution to the latest statist problem

You'll do so with a red rep bar from now on.

I don't care who you are or how long you've been here.

 

[thoughtomator]

If we're talking the context of this forum, principles have disappeared completely now that some believe they have the opportunity to impose their will on others by force in lieu of being able to craft convincing arguments for a position.

I was right. There are very few genuine libertarians here, the vast majority are play-pretend-libertarians who, the moment they think they have power, move immediately to abuse it to the greatest extent possible.

That's right, "phil4paul", "presence" and others who have adopted their authoritarian approach to shutting down any reasonable discussion of Trump-related topics.

 

[Ronin Truth]

"If one takes care of the means, the end will take care of itself."

 

[bunklocoempire]

End the FED. No compromise.

This. No honest money = no honest policies = no reason for truth

 

[Rad]

I'm not talking about any particular politician. I am curious about the morality and principles of the liberty movement and compromising those things for power. Which is the chasm between Ron and Rand. I'm just curious how far people would go to get a policy here or there that they want. If liberty candidate politician A offered to remove x amount from your taxes based on the averaged daily kill rate of drones for that year would you do it? What is the range of acceptable policy positions that a politician can have and still have your support? What if they would end the FED but a few populated countries would have to be erased in exchange?

 

[Ronin Truth]

How about willing to sell your soul to Satan, in exchange for power?

 

[timosman]

It depends how much power you already have.

 

[fisharmor]

I'd compromise on every other point if I could completely and immediately eliminate public schooling in this country.

 

[hankrichter12]

I'm thinking of the Trump threads popping up and my issue with Rand on Iran deal and the over hyped threat of radical Islam. The whole compromising and playing the game shtick I disagree with but I want to know where the liberty movement wants to draw the line? Rank the issues from most important to least. I personally liked the line Ron drew and draws.

How far are you willing to compromise to socialist, warmongers, and various other statist types? I'd end the empire, I'd end the fed, I'd let the public decide if it wanted to spend money on welfare and public works. I'd rather it be local/state though. I also would get rid of the free trade agreements. I would not give up a single liberty, not one.

At this point in time I think there needs to be a realization that all issues are pretty much moot because we have a media and entrenched elitist class that will not allow any idea to see the light of day.

-Speak on welfare - you hate the poor

-Debunk the Gender Pay crap - you hate women

-No affirmative action - you're racist

-Non-Intervention - You Hate America

-Won't "Stand With Israel" - You're anti-semitic

-Cut waste from the Pentagon - You hate the Troops

We've all seen it. I don't care what your issues are, if you can't even speak them without becoming a pariah, you will never get anywhere. That to me is what so many are missing about Trump, he is busting down that barrier, whether he supports anyone's views or not, at least he is making it possible for you to now have a conversation about them.

 

[TheTexan]

How far are you willing to compromise your principles for power?

As far as needed

 

[presence]

I'd compromise on every other point if I could completely and immediately eliminate public schooling in this country.

That's pretty heavy, I hadn't considered that one as a point domino... but I could see it all fall from there.
If I had one shot to fire, I'd take end the fed.

indoctrination camps ~ debasement of the money supply

I can see the parity

 

[fisharmor]

That's pretty heavy, I hadn't considered that one as a point domino.

Yeah that's exactly my point.
They take everyone practically as soon as they're able to use the toilet, and then they control everything they learn, correct them when they're learning the "wrong" things, tell them for 13+ years that when they learn the stuff in the camp they're going to know everything they need to know, and then we all act surprised when people don't know anything about the Fed.

Everything you need to know about the Fed to turn against it can fit on a business card. But if you're brainwashed from youth to think knowledge only comes from certain officially sanctioned channels, that business card ends up getting thrown away before it's even read.

 

[The Gold Standard]

I'm not willing to compromise my principles for power. I don't want power.