Hacker News Reader

Comment by Alupis | Hacker News Reader

The issue is, modernly, people equate not getting what they want with the system being broken.

The idea of compromise rarely survives the day. It's a 100% or zero game, lest we look like we actually agree with some of the other side... oh the horror.

View on HN

I think the idea of compromise rarely survives actual scrutiny when it comes to specific values. I don't know what a compromise on the death penalty is to an anti-death penalty stance. I don't know what a compromise on abortion is to an "abortion is murder" stance. Even if I fully understand with and sympathize with someone I disagree with, I may not be at all willing to budge from specific positions I've taken because I believe there is no acceptable compromise. (e.g. I don't think I could budge from being against sex trafficking.)

And even where it does survive scrutiny based on the values of the factions involved in the compromise, it may not for other people in different contexts. I mean, we’re in an age where slavers are, like pirates and torturers, recognized as hostis humani generis, but many of the compromises in the Constitution are between two major factions, one of which thought slavery should be legally tolerated but not especially protected and favored, and the other of which thought that slavery should be specially protected and slavers should be rewarded with full extra votes for each slave – and the compromises all throughout the Constitution between those two factions tended to favor the latter faction. Sure, where it explicitly concerns slavery, those have been mostly reversed (outside of the open door for penal slavery), but the substructures agreed in compromises between those factions whose underlying purpose related to slavery but which did not reference it have been in many cases preserved, and even there defenders often can come up with little beyond “It’s working as designed”.

> The issue is, modernly, people equate not getting what they want with the system being broken

Since value is subjective, there is literally no other viable definition of broken, and if you think this is a modern idea, you haven't seen much of history.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com