The real issue is this: do we want to preserve American liberty and the constitutional machinery that maintains that liberty — or not?

Any two people who agreed that liberty is the central American good and worth preserving could argue productively. We could compromise on redistribution as long as we both acknowledged how essential private property is to freedom. We could make adjustments in gun control if we both understood that an armed populace is our last defense against tyranny. We could easily confirm Supreme Court justices if we acknowledged that their role was not to make law but to ensure laws are in keeping with the Constitution. We could debate anything as long as we both agreed to our right to speak.

But the moment I know I am talking to a socialist — who believes my work, my time, and thus my life belong to the state — the moment I know I am talking to a leftist — who will not concede my right to self-defense — the moment I know I am talking to a cheat willing to have our founding document rewritten from the bench — the moment I know I’m with a censor who thinks it’s fine to silence me whether on social media or in the news media or through the courts — I will not give one bloody inch. Because, in that case, each concession becomes another step to the eradication of the one political asset I hold most dear: my freedom.