On Memorial Day, my wife and I attended a concert by the Sarasota Concert Band in Philippe Estate Park. I learned that the band had been conducting this concert for many years. In fact, it was the band leader/conductor’s 25^th year leading the Memorial Day concert. Some shade and a little breeze made the Florida weather, which had been hot, very accommodating.

Boy Scouts presented the flag, and we were treated to Souza marches, military anthems, and even a little Rodgers and Hammerstein and Irving Berlin. All in all, a very patriotic and pleasant experience.

In addition to the music, the band leader took the occasion to speak to us about compromise. He spoke at some length about the necessity and virtue of political compromise. One could see how strongly he felt about the matter, and he didn’t seem amenable to compromising on that view. He even returned to compromise in his closing remarks, exhorting us to contact our representatives and demand that they find ways to compromise on issues.

Of course, one’s thoughts turned to the issues we confront today to imagine how positions of opposing sides could be resolved by compromise. Consider the Israel-Hamas/Palestinian differences. The Hamas/Palestinian side wants to kill all the Israelis (and the rest of the Jews, among others); the Israelis don’t want to be killed. What is compromise? Kill only half?

But let’s bring our considerations closer to home, to issues that undoubtedly concern the band conductor and to issues that should be more manageable. The President swore an oath to defend the United States. He immediately violated his oath, encouraging, aiding, and abetting the invasion of the country. The invaders have been a net cost of tens of billions of dollars when the country already has a burdensome debt. The invaders have brought crime and disease. Most of the invaders are military-aged men, and many come from countries and areas that want to destroy America. The director of the FBI has warned that the invaders pose a serious threat of significant terrorist activity.

The Democrats offered a compromise solution to the invasion of our borders -- limit the invasion to 5,000 people a day. That is 1,825,000 invaders every year in addition to the more than 10,000,000 who have already breached our borders during their administration. (Set aside the Democrats’ compromise offer did not contain any effective mechanism to enforce the limitation.)

Is there a basis for a counteroffer, or compromise, in this situation? What do you think the men we were memorializing during the concert would think about a compromise that allows 5,000 (1,000? any?) people to invade America every day?

Compromise is virtuous sounding and seductive. It can make honest men think modest attenuation of their principles is necessary and acceptable. But compromise only works when both sides have the same basic objectives. It doesn’t work when the objective of one side is to kill the other or to “fundamentally change America.”

And that’s the problem in America today. Following the band conductor’s pollyannaish lecture won’t save Israel or America. One side will prevail. Will it be yours?

Image: Pixabay