Question:
Compromise seems to have become a dirty word recently. Some candidates for public office - especially in primary elections - promise not to compromise if elected, and their supporters seem to demand that. Furthermore some officeholders are punished for reaching across the aisle and working with political opponents.
This is curious since multiple compromises were made in the constitutional convention, and a willingness to make adjustments in one's demands has historically been considered to be a virtue. But there are arguments made that compromise reflects a lack of moral principle or the existence of some fundamental value system that gives voters a sense of who a candidate is and what they stand for.
Then again, that can lead to governmental dysfunction.
So what to do about this?
I want you to consider this - as a matter of personable responsibility - and consider when compromise in political matters is and is not acceptable. What types of things should people compromise on? What types of things should they hold firm on? Why? You can use your personal points of view in this assignment.
I think this quote from 2305's slides on "Why Do I Have to Take This Class?" might be helpful:
In his essay on Representative Government, John Stuart Mill identified three fundamental conditions. . . . These are: "One, that the people should be willing to receive it [representative government]; two, that they should be willing and able to do what is necessary for its preservation; three, that they should be willing and able to fulfill the duties and discharge the functions which it imposes on them.
Fulfilling the duties and discharging the functions of representative government make heavy demands on leaders and citizens, demands for participation and restraint, for consensus and compromise. It is not necessary for all citizens to be avidly interested in politics or well-informed about public affairs–although far more widespread interest and mobilization are needed than in autocracies. What is necessary is that a substantial number of citizens think of themselves as participants in society’s decision-making and not simply as subjects bound by its laws. Moreover, leaders of all major sectors of the society must agree to pursue power only by legal means, must eschew (at least in principle) violence, theft, and fraud, and must accept defeat when necessary. They must also be skilled at finding and creating common ground among diverse points of view and interests, and correlatively willing to compromise on all but the most basic values.
