Political discussions can become really eerie in light of bad circumstances.

At some point in your life you will find yourself throwing support with an institution or organization for the sake of preserving your ideals, goals and way of life. However, it is  okay to see the apparently poor judgment in organizations and institutions that share the same goal that you do. 

Sometimes in an attempt to be more “critical,” it becomes very tempting to support the most grotesquely pragmatic group, because you can rationalize why people sympathize with it. However, in times of conflict there is always a huge price for the grotesquely pragmatic, and the principles you laid aside for the sake of ridding yourself of an immediate evil may never be accessible again.

If you want change, a vacuum will have to exist at some point, but you’ll lose a lot in it. Nuance can sometimes explain the development of a situation or sentiment, but you don’t have to lose sight of apparent differences in principle. Where would this group place you in better times? Part of being critical isn’t fancying yourself more compatible whenever your goals align; its understanding what brought you to this impasse and what will become of your interests because of it.

This post has 11 notes.
  1. abustaif reblogged this from roxygen
  2. basednkrumah reblogged this from roxygen and added:
    This is speaking to me right now.
  3. asuperfluousman reblogged this from roxygen
  4. roxygen posted this