Once again, opposition to Holt's proposed bill for elections in 2009 is described by some as "absolutist" or "idealist." I'm delighted, in this context of our rights to vote and
rights in democracy, to be called or identified with these terms. It puts me in decent company (see quotes below).
But I've got far bigger things to discusss in this OP, believe it or not. I'd prefer to avoid the Holt bill, in deference to the larger issues/ideals/principles I'd like to be informed of BY YOU in the replies to this thread.
A little background on why it's so important not to compromise on one's HIGHEST ideals (as opposed to lesser subjects):Ideals are but principles. One example of an ideal is to be honest.
We may never fully achieve that ideal of honestly constantly through
our whole life but, on the other hand, to abandon honesty as a
goal-ideal is to steer directly to disaster. Not to be an
"absolutist" about the ideal (even if we often fail in its
achievement) is to abandon the ideal. In the case of honesty that
means one becomes an INTENTIONAL LIAR, the worst kind. So it's a good
thing to be an "absolutist" about ideals, the question is which one's
are the most important such that they ought to be protected or
identified with in an absolute way?
There's been a clear distinction made by all great American thinkers,
leaders and politicians between compromise on smaller legislative
matters, and compromise on important principles. I'll leave it to
each reader to decide if the right that protects all other rights
(voting) is an important principle, or not. Again, this post is intended
to be "bigger" than even the sacred right to vote.
But, in any event, and on any subject, to make fun of, or to diminish in any way "idealists"
or "purists" and such,
specifically in the area of core principles, is to
establish a position outside the mainstream of thought about
Anglo-American democracy in my opinion. As examples, let's try Thomas Paine, Lincoln,
Patrick Henry, Barry Goldwater, and these various others below on for size,
for it seems there's a great tension between compromise on usual legislation and compromise on high principle:
1. Thomas Paine: The architect of the American revolution and the
author of "Common Sense" wrote: "A thing moderately good is not so
good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but
moderation in principle is always a vice."
2. Abraham Lincoln: "Important principles may and must be inflexible."
3. {At the time of the Constitution} it was the application of
{compromise} to a question of fundamental morals that cost us our
Civil War. –James Russell Lowell
4. Patrick Henry: "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be
purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almight God!
I know not what course others may take, but as for me: Give me
liberty, or give me death!"
5. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (as to voting specifically): ""This is
no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the
tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the
promises of democracy."
6. John Adams: I agree with you that in politics the middle way is
none at all.
7. "I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no
vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of
justice is no virtue!" --Barry Goldwater, conservative
8. Lord Hailsham: "In a confrontation with the politics of power, the
soft centre has always melted away."
9. Jim Hightower: "There's nothing in the middle of the road but
yellow stripes and dead armadillos."
10. Shakespeare: "Compromise? "The damned use that word in hell."
11. Mark E. Smith: "If you don't consider yourself a leader, why
write? And if you do consider yourself a leader, capable of having an
impact on public opinion, why not aim for the best possible outcome?
Setting your sights lower than optimum, from the negativist standpoint
that we couldn't do better, isn't my idea of what good leaders do."
12. Robert Frost, poet: "The middle of the road is where the white
line is - and that's the worst place to drive."
13. "One should always remember that this freedom depends upon the
genuine, enduring, deep, and uncompromising commitment to one's country." Zbigniew
Brzezinski, National Security advisor
14. Mahatma Gandhi: ""The things that will destroy us are: politics
without principle…{mentioning three others as well, google the quote if you like}"
The above quotes are from both people I agree with and disagree with on other, lesser
subjects. But on the issue of compromising high ideals, we all agree. Shakespeare is perhaps a bit harsh when he says the damned use that defense of "compromise" and "non-absolutism" in Hell, but he does have a point when the issue is applied to high ideals.
I don't at the moment have the funds to send any one a Valentine heart via DU, but if I won the Lotto I'd send all of you one.
In lieu of that, and not asking anyone to send me one (though one anonymous benefactor already did prior to this post) I'd ask you to take some action toward your highest principle or ideal, and (whether you want me to, or not!) I'll consider THAT to be sending me a Valentine heart.
"Whatever you do unto the least of these, you do unto me."
Explaining one interpretation of the above biblical phrase, the link below says:
"By "me" Jesus did not mean the historical figure. He meant the Christ Energy, which is inherent in all people and all things and is another name for the Mystery."
http://www.mayyoubehappy.com/uleofth.html
"Whatever you do unto the least of these, you do unto me."
That's such a beautiful saying. Because everything is a part of the whole, is the Whole itself in some mysterious way. Thus when we perform a kind or generous act toward any being whatsoever, we are doing it towards the Whole itself.
So, may I ask you to state your most important ideals/principles in response to this post? I promise that I will read/listen to them, and if you can also mention some action you are taking or will take toward that ideal or principle, even if imperfect, that would be a great way to send a Heart to someone else, to the whole World, and, I'm happy to report, that includes me (and You). One example: Donating to DU and spreading hearts of appreciation. But I'm sure DU as a whole has many other incredible principles and ideas and I'd love to hear some of them. I've indirectly indicated some of my own, but again, if you're a practicing atheist or don't consider Love a highest principle, I'd rather have you Teach me what is, than to tell me what Isn't.
In return for the respect of not quibbling with any minor points, I'll closely listen to what YOU have to say, and consider it seriously. Listening is certainly a form of respect, and some would say, Love.
With love,
Paul Lehto
Juris Doctor