In this paper, I offer a contemporary spin on a theory of free will that originates with the Stoics, which I call _unfettered compatibilism_. The freedom associated with this view is _self-rule_. It is inspired by a quote from Mahatma Gandhi: _Man is the maker of his own destiny in the sense that he has freedom of choice as to the manner in which he uses his freedom. But he is no controller of results (1971: 16)._ Philosophers often support incompatibilism by showing that if determinism is true, then we lack regulative control over worldly events – where having regulative control requires having the _specific ability to do otherwise_. The belief is that if the “results” are fixed, our lack of freedom of choice immediately follows. Given determinism, there is no leeway free will and we are left with a source view or no free will at all. In the above passage, Gandhi seems to deny this inference, for we have the power of choice without having the specific ability to do otherwise. Putting this all together provides a new addition to the current scene, a view of compatibilism logically situated between _classical compatibilism_ – which maintains the compatibility between determinism and the specific ability to do otherwise – and the _source view_ – which denies choice is essential to free will. I show that self-rule is worthy as a kind of free will for it is a fundamental power that is absolute. I show that unfettered compatibilism earns its name since it is immune from worries and criticisms that plague classical compatibilism, such as the _basic argument_ and _Frankfurt cases_.