Skip to main content

A negotiated platform between conservatives and progressives, based on libertarian principles?

Can conservatives and progressives agree on a negotiated platform based on a common commitment to some libertarian ideas? An attempt follows, in which I first identify the common core and then discuss the contentious issues and how we may negotiate toward a compromise.

I. Common Ground -- The Core

On all these issues, left-leaning and right-leaning libertarians have policy proposals that are the same or similar enough and may be palatable to both wings.

  • Criminal Justice Reform
    • decriminalize all drugs (including recreational)
    • decriminalize prostitution
    • decriminalize gambling
    • reprieve all prisoners currently in for the above crimes
  • Economic Policy
    • NO to Corporatism, Cronyism, Corporate Subsidies, special interest kickbacks, pork, etc. -- the federal budget will not be used to subsidize any particular corporation or industry (aerospace, defense, ethanol, sugar, solar, wind, etc.)
    • no bailouts for banks or corporations -- no more too big to fail
    • audit the Fed
    • reduce bureaucratic bloat -- waste, fraud, abuse in government departments and programs
  • Civil Liberties
    • privacy from warrantless surveillance
    • no indefinite detention without jury trial
    • no extraordinary rendition (e.g. Snowden)
    • no extrajudicial killings (end the CIA drone wars)
    • demilitarize the police
    • stop civil asset forfeiture
  • Foreign Policy 
    • diplomacy NOT nation building
    • reduce the size of the military
    • no aid to dictators -- no aid, period.
  • Environment
    • Jerry Taylor's grand bargain : in exchange for the elimination of EPA carbon regulations and state renewable energy mandates, Congress would adopt a substantial and rising economy-wide carbon emissions tax, made "revenue-neutral" by reducing other taxes

II. Contentious Issues -- The Compromise

It is assumed that on all of the following issues, there are deep and signifiant philosophical divides, necessitating a give-and-take, with conservatives getting their way on some issues and progressives, on others:
  • taxes
  • regulations
  • health care
  • education
  • welfare
  • immigration
  • trade
  • guns
  • entitlements
  • social
    • abortion
    • marriage
There is yet another way to look at forming the compromise. There are four powerful issues on which the levers of power can be turned to influence the country to either greater collectivism or greater individual liberty. They are : 
  1. Executive fiat
  2. Balance of the Supreme Court (5-4 b/w Constitutional originalists vs. "living document")
  3. income : taxes + debt
  4. spending : regulations, health + education + other programs, welfare, entitlements, military, domestic statutes (civil rights, social issues, etc.)
Typically, the President controls the first two levers and Congress controls the last two. In a negotiated platform, one side would be allowed to choose between (1) & (2) and again between (3) & (4). So, for e.g. progressives might get executive fiat and Congressional spending powers, while conservatives get to balance the Supreme court their way and control total revenue (taxes + debt).

Popular posts from this blog

Migrating from MS SQL Server to MongoDB

The following contains notes from various attempts at migrating 2.5GB of MS SQL Server data to MongoDB, on an 8 GB, quad-core, 64-bit Windows 7 Enterprise machine.
[TERMINATED] : Simple to use. Exponential slowdown observed in migration. For a total of the 50 million records spanning two tables, the following migration times were observed: 1 second for the first 100,000 records,  30 minutes for 1,000,000, 20 hours for 16 million (after which I terminated the process).[DID NOT WORK] : A ruby-based approach. Use Ruby 1.9.3 (tiny_tds dependency causes problems with Ruby 2.0). Install DevKit before installing the mongify gem. Also, use 'sqlserver' as the adapter in the .config file. Then, before running 'mongify check <config-file>', install the gems activerecord-sqlserver-adapter and tiny_tds. At this stage, it fails. 'mongify translation <config-file>' fails as well.[MODIFIED/WORKED!!]…

Prohibition of envy in Judaism, Christianity and Islam

"One of the sanest, surest, and most generous joys of life comes from being happy over the good fortune of others." (attributed variously to Robert Heinlein & Archibald Rutledge).

The idea of envy (or, covetousness) is an important subject in the Abrahamic faith traditions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

The prohibition against covetousness rounds out the Mosaic moral code, codified as the 10th and final commandment in the Ten Commandments -- the injunction against coveting one's neighbor's property. The rationale behind this is the acknowledgement that all blessings arise from God's sovereign providence and it is not for his creation to question whom and how and when he chooses to bless.

Merriam-Webster's dictionary defines covetousness as :

1. "feeling or showing a very strong desire for something that you do not have and especially for something that belongs to someone else", or
2. "marked by inordinate desire for wealth or possessi…

Diversity in politics

There are so many strains of thought and ideology in secular democracies around the world, exemplified, perhaps best, in contemporary American political life. Some of these strains of thought are compatible with others and may even be subsets of others. Many of them are violently opposed to others. In the American context, we see, at least, the following :  environmentalismcultural progressivismeconomic socialismprogressive-lite Keynesian welfare + neocon warfare hawks = the establishment / moderates / centristscivil libertarianismnon-interventionismsocial conservatismConstitutional conservatismfree-market libertarianismpopulism, protectionism & nativism, anti-progressivism, anti-establishment
A neat left-right divide no longer makes sense. Most people find themselves on a spectrum between very different political philosophies and emphases.
The two major political parties represent uneasy marriages that exist because for historical reasons or current tactical alliances. The fragil…