Principals or Pragmatism

Which, in your opinion is more generally more important when deciding on an issue or political philosophy?

It depends on the issue. How important it is in particular.

I also think our leaders should be skilled enough to persuade us that their principals are the right ones. There are very few politicians who are eloquent enough to do that though so sometimes pragmatism needs to win out just so we can get things done...

S

Principals, in my opinion. I rather have a deadlock than compromise which typically makes said issue worse.

chevydriver1123 said:

Principals, in my opinion. I rather have a deadlock than compromise which typically makes said issue worse.

Click to expand...

Deadlock seems to be exactly what the US gets a lot. It doesn't seem to happen nearly as much in the UK. In the UK all that is needed for a particular piece of legislation to pass is a simple majority which means the party with the most seats in parliament tends to be able to get its agenda through. The opposition can still block legislation however if they can convince enough independents or majority party MPs that what the government is attempting to do is unwise.

The House of Lords can also effectively "fillibuster" a piece of legislation but they very rarely do as they don't want to be seen to be impeding the democratic will of the majority....

I think principles should be pursued through pragmatism.

Both, but the balance should tip a little more towards principles.

There are some principles I will not compromise on, what I call my "death before dishonor" issues.

But the thing about politics is that compromise is often necessary to advance your principles at all. Sometimes you have to settle for a piece of your agenda now, and you can work on the rest later. Some times you have to yield a minor point to the opposition in order to advance a more important point of your own. That's just the way it is.

Now I often see STUPID compromises made, where one side accepts a major defeat to their principles in order to win on some minor issue... one of those WTF Were They Thinking??? moments.

Anyway, as much as I personally would prefer to see principle win the day, I have to reluctantly admit that you have to have a certain level of pragmatism in pursuing them, if you expect your principles to have a snowball's chance in Death Valley of being advanced.

It depends. You can't stand firm on your principles for every single issue. If everyone did that, nothing would ever get accomplished. So it's up to you to choose which issues are the most important, and stand as firm as possible on those. Compromise on everything else.

Principals, as long as those principals include pragmatism when necessary...

Hold to your principals (unless proven conclusively wrong), but allow some pragmatism in your principals to allow you to actually progress towards them without having to completely eliminate the opposition.