Very, very sad news. Costa Rica's libertarians have been a beacon for all libertarians around the world, and it's terribly sad to know that meddling compromisers have sowed the seeds of dissent and destruction in a formerly principled party.

Very, very sad, and a lesson for libertarians everywhere. Commiserations, Jorge, from New Zealand, where unfortunately plenty of parellels exist with your own battles. As I say today on my own blog, " If politics has replaced principles, then how does ML fundamentally differ from any other bunch of power-lusters?"

As far as the need for compromise and the complaints about "frightening the horses," I've never found those arguments to hold any water, but they always do attract people who don't understand the real galvanising effect of genuinely powerful ideas.

How exactly should a minor party act when confronted by holding the balance of power? In my view, if they're principled and in favour of more freedom and less government, then they have no problem and they don't need to sell out: they can simply say "We will support every measure that advances freedom without introducing any new coercion." And then they would do so. Such support would be reliable (as long as freedom is advanced) and it would be consistent.

I've argued that New Zealand's Libertarianz follow this principle, and in this context I explain somewhat tongue-in-cheek here how the studious application of this principle would suggest that killing the entire front bench of Government in their beds would be unprincipled; and here (scroll down to 'We'll get our fair share of abuse') how this principle would rule out support for a flat tax, for educational vouchers, and for state welfare being a 'hand-up and not a hand-out.'

Anyway, commiserations Jorge, A sad day for libertarians everywhere.