Politicians cannot be idealistic in today’s world; they have to be pragmatic. Discuss.

In today’s complex global landscape, politicians must prioritise pragmatism over idealism to address urgent issues effectively, though idealism can still inspire positive change.

I. Introduction

  • Hook: The balance between idealism and pragmatism defines political leadership. Politicians must prioritise pragmatism over idealism to bring its people and country forward instead of living in fantasy.
  • Background: Overview of the current political climate.
  • Thesis Statement: Politicians must prioritise pragmatism over idealism to address urgent issues effectively. On a limited basis, idealism can inspire some change.

II. Supporting View 1: Pragmatism Ensures Realistic Solutions

  • Topic Sentence: Politicians must prioritise pragmatism over idealism as only pragmatic politicians can implement feasible solutions.
  • Example 1: Germany’s pragmatic energy policies (2014-present) balance renewables and coal.
  • Example 2: Singapore’s pragmatic housing policies (2010-present) ensured affordability.
  • Example 3: India’s pragmatic economic reforms (2014-present) boosted growth.
  • Analysis: These examples show how pragmatism leads to effective, realistic policies.

III. Supporting View 2: Pragmatism Navigates Political Realities

  • Topic Sentence: Politicians must prioritise pragmatism over idealism, as pragmatism helps navigate complex political realities.
  • Example 1: UK’s pragmatic Brexit negotiations (2016-2022) aimed to mitigate disruption.
  • Example 2: Colombia’s pragmatic peace deal (2016) ended a long conflict.
  • Example 3: Japan’s pragmatic approach to North Korea (2010-present) maintains stability.
  • Analysis: These instances demonstrate how pragmatism helps manage political complexities.

IV. Supporting View 3: Pragmatism Addresses Immediate Needs

  • Topic Sentence: Pragmatic politicians focus on urgent, immediate needs.
  • Example 1: New Zealand’s pragmatic COVID-19 response (2020-present) saved lives.
  • Example 2: Canada’s pragmatic immigration policies (2015-present) addressed labour shortages.
  • Example 3: South Korea’s pragmatic tech policies (2010-present) drove innovation.
  • Analysis: These cases illustrate how pragmatism addresses urgent needs effectively.

V. Opposing View 1: Idealism Inspires Long-term Vision

  • Topic Sentence: Idealistic politicians inspire long-term visionary goals.
  • Example 1: Sweden’s climate-neutral goal (2017-present) promotes sustainability.
  • Example 2: France’s idealistic education reforms (2012-present) aimed at equality.
  • Example 3: Norway’s humanitarian policies (2015-present) support global peace.
  • Analysis: These examples highlight how idealism can drive significant long-term progress.

VI. Opposing View 2: Idealism Upholds Moral Integrity

  • Topic Sentence: Idealism maintains moral and ethical integrity.
  • Example 1: Finland’s idealistic stance on human rights (2010-present) sets global standards.
  • Example 2: Iceland’s idealistic environmental policies (2010-present) preserve nature.
  • Example 3: Switzerland’s idealistic neutrality (2010-present) promotes global diplomacy.
  • Analysis: These cases demonstrate how idealism preserves ethical and moral standards.

VII. Opposing View 3: Idealism Attracts Public Support

  • Topic Sentence: Idealistic politicians gain public trust and support.
  • Example 1: Jacinda Ardern’s idealistic leadership in New Zealand (2017-present) boosts popularity.
  • Example 2: Canada’s idealistic health care policies (2015-present) ensure public welfare.
  • Example 3: Bhutan’s idealistic Gross National Happiness policy (2010-present) inspires the nation.
  • Analysis: These examples show how idealism can attract and retain public support.

VIII. Conclusion

  • Restate Thesis: Politicians must prioritise pragmatism over idealism, though idealism can inspire positive change.
  • Summary of Key Points: Recap main supporting and opposing views.
  • Final Thought: Balancing pragmatism and idealism is key to effective political leadership.

Reading References:

  1. Fukuyama, Francis. Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2014.
  2. Mounk, Yascha. The People vs. Democracy: Why Our Freedom Is in Danger and How to Save It. Harvard University Press, 2018.