data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/28bf7/28bf7a8268d2e72a69b7ddcc7f3e58d29d6a3270" alt=""
A certain class of American politicians insist that they cannot and will not compromise their principles even for the greater good. They will, for example, insist that raising taxes under any circumstances violates their principles, and they will not consider even the most modest increase. In the political environment we the electorate handed them with the November 2012 election, the tax raisers are in ascendence, and if we are to move forward as a nation the tax deniers (some, at least) are going to have to learn the art of compromising their principles.
Compromise, in this sense, means understanding that even our most deeply held principles are still human ones, not ultimate and sometimes downright wrong-headed. Compromise means accepting the fact that the contradictory principles of others, held with the same conviction we hold ours, are worth hearing, considering, and sometimes bowing to as we seek to keep the "ship of state" sailing in a good direction. Principles that cannot be compromised have become ideological and, theologically speaking, idolatrous. Those who insist that their principles are absolute should be immediately disqualified from holding political office in a democracy. A willingness to compromise one's principles, when pushed to the necessity of having to do so for the sake of the common good, is an indication that one's principles are truly principled. It is those who place their principles above the common good that are most likely to behave in unprincipled ways. In a democracy, government runs on compromise.