Continued from Deathtrap Ban. Read it first.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Click here for the continuation comic.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

We often confuse expediency with pragmatism. You can make a choice that provides immediate return and seems the pragmatic choice only to pay a higher price later. A person who commits a crime is getting some immediate reward but has an ever-increasing risk of being caught each time. He’s gambling. He’s also shitting where he eats by destroying the sense of trust in his community. Lying is similar. When you get caught in a lie, which is likely just a matter of time depending on how often you attempt it, you seriously undermine your reputation. Worse yet, if you lie now expecting some immediate gain from it, even if you correct yourself in the future, anything you say thereafter will be suspect. Even when you get away with it, every lie you tell for some immediate benefit undermines your veracity because you know you’re a liar. Conversely, knowing in your heart that you are consistently honest and sincere shows through in the power of your convictions. It’s a rare talent to be able to lie convincingly.

If you claim I’m hiding behind my principles, I wonder if you have a completely different notion of what principles even mean. It makes me wonder how in the world you derive your own so-called principles if you see being principled and being pragmatic as opposing paths. In fact, I think this is at the core of the failure of liberty movements. More importantly, it’s at the core of my views of why politics and statism are such dismal failures and have created the destructive beasts of governments that spread misery to this day. If you frequently sacrifice principles for expediency, then you’re constantly taking one step forward and three steps back, and I say it that way only because that’s the familiar expression. It’s probably conservative compared to the reality, a much more discouraging ratio.

I’ve also been referred to as a purist which I’ve denied. I do make some concessions to tyrants like paying taxes and registering my car. Am I being unprincipled then? Aren’t these things a crucial part of what keep tyrants in power? Of course they are! If everyone stopped doing these at once, the tyrannical State would wither almost immediately. But the reality is I, like all liberty activists, have two different goals. I have a longer-term goal of advancing liberty by reducing the violence in my community. The other goal is my own personal liberty. They’re both good goals. I pick my battles because I have to balance the two. Both goals are actually selfish. I want to live in a peaceful and prosperous community and so I work for that and decide what risks and sacrifices I’m willing to make. But when I do make those concessions to tyrants out of a totally selfish and yet reasonable desire to remain out of jail, I would never make the ridiculous claim that they advance the long-term goal of reducing the violence of governments! And of course, I would never try to decide for someone else what personal risks they should take or sacrifices they should make for the long-term goal of shrinking violent governments. We all have to maintain our own balance. How could I call myself a lover of liberty if I said otherwise?

Examples of large political goals achieved through incremental progress are often referenced as examples of the counter-intuitive notion that expediency at the cost of principle is ultimately pragmatic, but that’s a case of severe tunnel vision. I’ve seen plenty of special interest groups getting government attention for their pet projects by making deals with politicians, at the cost of the liberty of many others. Always, government expands. Occasionally one bubble is pushed down and several others bulge. Yes, you can tediously grind away devoting tremendous time, money, and effort, lobbying for a specific special interest, but at what price? What other liberties are being sacrificed to their power lust while you wheel and deal with politicians, criminals who see nothing wrong with controlling others with threats of violence, who stay in office by selling violence to their constituents in exchange for campaign help and contributions. Their job is violence and they don’t stay in office by offering to do less. Imagine going to a job interview and telling your potential employer that you promise not to do very much. When multiple special interest groups are all pulling in different directions, government expands in all directions, according to its nature, and no one seems to understand how they each played a part in that expansion, or they simply don’t care. To be clear, I don’t doubt that progress toward liberty will be gradual, but I don’t see incremental progress in pet projects as evidence that it will happen by making deals with the devil.

If I’ve failed to persuade you to my point of view, I can accept that. What I find hard to believe is the idea that you could be paying any attention and still doubt my sincerity. If you continue to say I’m hiding behind my principles, that’s intellectually dishonest. If you still believe you can use politics to achieve liberty, I will not doubt that your intentions are good. You obviously have faith in it. I encourage you to follow your own heart and do what you feel is right. All I ask is that you extend to me the same courtesy. I have no faith in that game. Don’t drag me into it.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites