(Summary section)
I have been thinking about idealists, particularly types of idealists on a spectrum between diplomatic and demonstrative.
I am an idealist, my sibling is an idealist. We actually care about a lot of the same principles. However, the paths we follow and the way we look to live according to and even promote our ideals are very different.
Diplomatic idealists tend to come off more tactful and may take this approach to "play the long game" as they carefully play their cards to have their ideas permeate over time.
Conversely, a more demonstrative approach is more expressive, more visibly clear, and often effectively gains followers by building a momentum others who are like-minded but just needed to feel not alone or more validated in are already just about ready to join.
(I like to think I fall somewhere in between?)
Also, there are are people who are not generous, motivated, or courageous enough to act, but they do complain a lot. As a fundraiser, I called complainers who didn't want to do anything themsleves but just tell us our way of trying to help sucked "You-Shoulds". ("You should use this method, in a different place, to help different people... And for free..." while doing none of the above themselves.)
All these approaches apply both on a large scale in society, and on a smaller interpersonal scale between individuals.
~~
Why it sounds like this:
My original for this was long and kind of got a bit of an angsty tone later because thinking about the You-Shoulds gave me a headache. After editing most of the stuff about them out it once again feels better, but it did slow me down enough. This post is now instead a summary; So I think will stop today's post here for now and maybe edit this or make another one with more later.)
~~
Ah what the heck, here it is:
I have been thinking about idealists, particularly types of idealists on a spectrum between diplomatic and demonstrative.
I am an idealist, my sibling is an idealist. We actually care about a lot of the same principles. However, the paths we follow and the way we look to live according to and even promote our ideals are very different.
I consider myself middle leaning diplomatic. My sibling, I would say moderately demonstrative.
Diplomatic idealists in my mind tend to emphasize playing the long game; playing cards carefully, to communicate values and promote what is good according to what we feel is a timeline that makes it realistically effective. Highly contextual, this usually making a more visible appearance of compromise according to feelings such as "we aren't there yet but if I time this carefully we can get there," with more deliberate evaluation of "is this the hill I'm going to die on?"
Conversely, a more demonstrative approach is more full out, more radical, and tends to use more obvious visual cues to push for their ideals. This tends to come off more puritanical, and seeming driven by wanting to authentically live by one's own feelings. It focuses more on living the truth of the people who are already here with you rather than seeking really fresh converts so to speak.
While diplomats tend to quietly live out their ideals in a way that may be received more easily to the mainstream for now (draw not just any attention, but more positive attention than negative to their cause) as part of a larger and active scheme for the greater good, demonstrators tend to live out their ideals much more expressively, bluntly, less quietly, and in a way that prioritizes the raising of the issue however the chips fall.
Diplomats tend aim for controlled detonations of conflicts, while demonstrators tend to put more emphasis on passionate detonation.
Also, there are people dissatisfied enough to complain but not generous, motivated, or courageous enough to be diplomatic or demostrative, so they just kind of my complain. As a fundraiser, I called a certain type a person we'd meet "You-Shoulds". They didn't want to donate, didn't want to volunteer, but did want to us to stand there while they drone on and on us to about everything *they* think *we* *should* do instead of what we are doing ("use xyz better beyond I came up with, do this in a different place, help different people... And for free..." while doing none of the above themselves on a career or volunteer basis).
Realistically, neither diplomatic nor demonstrative idealists are perfect. Also, as controversial as this may be I do believe that no matter what side an idealist falls to, balance is called for. Regardless, though of where the idealist falls between diplomatic and demonstrative, the key is though that they do actually promote their ideals. They may take different approaches, but an argument can be made that there is a place for every idealist.
I don't really have a proper ending or know where I'm going with this, so I'm going to put my tilde lines to break up the thoughts.