Nice piece. Who precisely might you mean by the dissident right? And if it comes to it (Considering the nature of state power it likely will) would you have someone compromise their principles for what we might call 'the greater good'. Surely that would make us no better than Utilitarians?
The people that most come to mind are Academic Agent, Auron MacIntyre, Curtis Yarvin, and the politicians and figures that they work with.
And I'd ask if getting Ron Paul into power would've been a 'compromise' on libertarian principles. Talking about using politicians for greater liberty causes all kinds of tantrums until you remind someone that he exists.
And if not 'compromising' (quotes because I don't think it is) brings about greater bad, then the person who didn't is not neutral, they are partly responsible for things getting worse and suffering greater losses of freedom. If their principles make the situation worse then they're not principles at all.
Nice piece. Who precisely might you mean by the dissident right? And if it comes to it (Considering the nature of state power it likely will) would you have someone compromise their principles for what we might call 'the greater good'. Surely that would make us no better than Utilitarians?
The people that most come to mind are Academic Agent, Auron MacIntyre, Curtis Yarvin, and the politicians and figures that they work with.
And I'd ask if getting Ron Paul into power would've been a 'compromise' on libertarian principles. Talking about using politicians for greater liberty causes all kinds of tantrums until you remind someone that he exists.
And if not 'compromising' (quotes because I don't think it is) brings about greater bad, then the person who didn't is not neutral, they are partly responsible for things getting worse and suffering greater losses of freedom. If their principles make the situation worse then they're not principles at all.