Philosophical positions on politics and economics are just that, personal opinions on how to effectively administer governments and economies, and it is expected that there is going to be wide differences in how individuals feel about these things. They are about as arbitrary as differences in how to manage a ball club or run a business, and should only be judged on how effective they are at achieving mutually agreed-upon results.

But when ideology steps in and decisions are based on what is right and wrong, or virtuous and evil, things start falling apart. When sound practice starts being replaced by alleged "principles", a vicious meme is unleashed that serves to justify someone's opinion as a moral imperative, and any valid criticism is dismissed as simple evil.

The fact is that right and wrong are much more subjective than whether or not it works, and the moment one starts hearing moral justifications for what are essentially management policies, then it's time to put the burden of proof on those who insist on doing so. Morality, ethics and principles are pretty words, but too often they are just the means to push a self-serving policy for a mercenary minority.

In politics this manifests itself as partisanship, factionalism and ideology. In the population at large, it often expresses itself as violence. After all, once you've convinced yourself your opponent is the Devil, then clearly, ANY action taken to defeat him must be not only acceptable, but required.

Yes, I do believe in right and wrong. I do have principles, but I don't like someone else telling me I need to adopt theirs or I am morally flawed.