One of the downsides to idealism.
I've long thought the supporters behind the two candidates for the Democratic nomination fell into two distinct categories: the Sanders folks were idealists, and the Clinton folks were pragmatists.
First and foremost, I think both idealism and pragmatism are vital concepts. We need idealism because we need to set solid goals to stand for and reach for, even if we can't achieve them immediately. We also need pragmatism because we need measured action, and wisdom as to which battles to fight and when to fight them. A healthy mix of the two concepts is the best of both worlds.
The one downside to idealism that I see, though: While idealism is itself quite admirable, it's often susceptible to infiltrators and wolves in sheep's clothing. People will come, claiming to believe in the cause, and it's easy to take them at face value because you want to take them for face value. After all, it's idealism. And nine times out of ten, those people are genuine. But there's always the odd man out who seeks to exploit people's good will for their own game.
The problems at the opening of the convention (and to a far lesser extent during some of the later speeches), I believe, are neither attributable to Senator Sanders (I've always admired him, even though I didn't vote for him) nor his genuine supporters. I think the few troublemakers in the crowd were inflitrators who never had Senator Sanders' interests in their mind from the get-go. They either were closet Republicans or Trump supporters who wanted to cause chaos for the other side. Or they were nihilists who just want to see chaos and division, either to "bring on the revolution" or merely chaos for chaos sake.
The bottom line: Don't stop being idealists. Being an idealist is a great, wonderful thing. But perhaps it helps to be a little more pragmatic about your idealism.
= new reply since forum marked as read
And they certainly weren't "few." You can't write this away like that: they were the delegates approved by the Sanders campaign and elected by the voters. And they were led by the head of the Sanders delegates. They are huuuge (to borrow a Trumpism) Bernie supporters who drank the Kool-Aid and are now having their sugar tantrum. But they mostly are not and never have been Democrats.
I think it boils down to the choice Tim Kaine said his mother gave to him once: you can either BE right or DO right. I think these people are so entrenched in their certitude that they ARE right that they refuse to DO anything, much less anything right. They just want to shout displays of their rightness. The disrespect they showed to speakers of all ilks (including their own "heroes"
does not help to advance progressive causes but rather hinders them.
