The idealism that characterised 19th and 20th century politics has largely disappeared. Modern politics has been likened to the management of a large business, good politicians should be good managers, rather than political idealists. Another characteristic of this is there is often only small differences between the policies of one party compared to another. Is this a good or bad thing? Note: There is obviously still religious idealism that often encroaches on politics but I think that has always been with us and is a different phenomona.
Personally, I don't think that there ever was "idealism" in politics. In fact, politics is actually a controlled system of compromise ...which surely isn't "idealism", is it? Politics is probably a vat of "idealism" strongly diluted with a heavy mixture of reality. And when reality is considered, "idealism" become nothing more than something like "religious faith" and living life as a religious figure ...mostly it can't be done. The other thing that's interesting about "idealism" is ......is your "idealism" the same as everyone else's "idealism"? Baron Max
Of course not ; you have left wing idealists, right wing ideaists, nazi idealists, communist ideaists, monarchist idealists. Idealism does not imply what the concept being idealised is. It simply means that there is one high (or perceived as high) ideal at the center of a political system, as opposed to taking a pragmatic approach which may vary greatly depending upon the situation at hand.
Why only one "high ideal"? Why not many different ones fighting it out on the floor of congress? As you've said: you have left wing idealists, right wing ideaists, nazi idealists, communist ideaists, monarchist idealists. But couldn't the "high ideal" simply change to another "high ideal" depending on the situation at hand? Take the "high ideal" of the early US ..."....all men are created equal." and even while those words were being written and approved, there were tens of thousands of black slaves in this nation. "High ideal"? Seems that they're just a bunch of words without any basis in fact or in reality. and if so, how are they to help anything? Baron Max
no idealism? how many political parties ran in the last american election? only two stood a chance, yet all the others went in anyway - idealism in aus. the socialist party has never won a seat. if idealism were truly dead, they would have joined the labour (of the two parties that stand a chance of getting in, labour is the most left wing)
What you say is true and the same exists in the UK. But that is sort of the point these idealitic parties; the green party or the far left or far right parties have been sidelined, they have no chance of winning and usually little effect on proceedings. This used to be the other way round though the idealists had centre stage and would be the winners and the pragmatists were on the sidelines - people voted for their principles more. You are right idealism has not disappeared but it has been sidelined. For better or worse I have not yet decided.
Perhaps Idealism is not the right word. I am here in the UK, and the sense that I get from reading older books about politics and suchlike is that "back then", many people had a larger sense of themselves in a world view. It was not that they were more idealistic, more that they were part of a larger, social viewpoint which helped give meaning to many peopels lives. Think socialist, or conservative. the impression I have is that these terms used to mean an all encompassing world view. What has happened now is that the world view is hidden/ destroyed/ no longer held in common, such that modern politicians lack an overarching sense of place and purpose. It is enough now to spout soundbites and address small problems such as hospital waiting times. Politics has turned more than ever into managing people and resources, rather than helping people create the world that they want to live in.
Theres plenty of revoutionaries, its just nobody sees them as such. You want an anarcho-capitalist country? No problem, so do these people over here. You want a socialist republic? So do these people here. You want an environmentally friendly earth first kind of place? So do people here. Essentially we have run through so many different permutations of gvt and society in the past 200 years that nothing is particularly revolutionary any more, its all mainstream. Meanwhile rampant globalisation continues its homogenising course.
Well, globalization might be occuring, but "homogenization" sure as hell ain't! The world's people are more at each other's throats now than ever before in history ....it seems that everyone has someone/some group that they hate with passion and anger. And worse, they seem to have the idea that they should be able to take the law into their own hands, too. "Homogenization"? No, I don't think so. It's actually leaning heavily toward segragation ...every group wants to be it's own authority and, worse, to have it's own nation. Baron Max
