ArcaMax

We all want consistency, clarity, and conviction from leaders and movements we support. But in practice, chasing ideological purity can become a trap, leaving no room for the ambiguity, complexity, and compassion a functioning society needs. Ideological purity assumes people and ideas are simple, that we can shove ourselves into neat boxes of "us" and "them" or "right" and "wrong" without losing important parts of who we are.

Consider any changes in your beliefs. Maybe you grew up with a particular stance on social issues, only to shift later based on life experiences. Growth, by nature, is an evolution. It's not an about-face but a series of forward, backward, and sideways steps. Demanding ideological purity from others -- whether they're politicians, activists, or everyday people -- denies the natural messiness of human thought and evolution. When we enforce purity, we imply that people should never change or reevaluate their beliefs, have their values sorted from day one, and never waver. But growth often comes from questioning old ideas, grappling with our inconsistencies, and learning from the world around us.

In politics, the pursuit of ideological purity is especially damaging. Today's hyperpartisan landscape feels like a strange combination of a rigid high school cafeteria and a battlefield, where you're either "with us or against us." Politicians are rewarded not for nuanced positions but for checking off a checklist of "correct" beliefs. It's all about staying "on brand," lest they face the wrath of purists who decry any sign of compromise as selling out. When we punish pragmatism and reward rigidity, we ultimately punish ourselves, settling for lawmakers without interest in compromise or cooperation. After all, to many ideologues, compromise is betrayal.

While commitment to one's principles can be admirable, ideological purity can also impede real, tangible progress. Real-world issues demand nuanced, adaptive strategies, not absolute loyalty to an inflexible dogma. Reducing complex social issues to simplistic binary options impedes effective solutions, because cultivating a culture of ideological rigidity narrows the conversation and disallows compromise, meaning that real progress -- a condition that requires negotiation -- is frequently unattainable.

And ideological purity doesn't just stifle progress; it also breeds hypocrisy. When everyone's focused on whether someone's views are 100% in line with the group, people become tempted to hide the parts of themselves that don't fit perfectly. Instead of honest dialogue, we get people pretending they're "pure" when in reality, they're just avoiding criticism. The result is a culture in which playing along is safer than speaking up. Instead of fostering a healthy exchange of ideas, it tells people that only certain voices are allowed and centered.

This fixation on purity also leads to the echo chamber effect, where individuals only engage with like-minded people, especially on algorithmic social media, which reinforces beliefs without exposure to alternate views.

Ideological purity erases compassion. As people, we're inherently flawed, and so are our beliefs. We hold contradictions. We can want things that don't make sense together. We can make mistakes and evolve. But when we judge people solely on their ideological consistency, we miss the bigger picture of who they are. We become less forgiving and more likely to dehumanize. Suddenly, we're not talking about people with complex stories and motivations but about labels and categories. This kind of reductionism is a breeding ground for cruelty and division, and we've seen the consequences all around us.

How many friendships have been shattered over political litmus tests? How many families have been divided because someone didn't pass a test of beliefs? When we approach people as an amalgamation of positions on issues, we devalue their humanity. A culture of ideological purity says, "I don't care about who you are or why you believe what you do -- if you're not 100% on my side, you're the enemy."

And, when people are expected to meet standards of ideological purity, it deters them from acknowledging when they might be wrong. This makes self-reflection nearly impossible. After all, admitting an error requires occasionally entertaining opposing viewpoints.

So, what's the alternative? We could start by acknowledging that nobody is ideologically pure, and that's OK. It doesn't make us weak to embrace complexity; it makes us human. Moving away from ideological purity means engaging with ideas critically and with an open mind. It's about seeing value in compromise, recognizing that compromise isn't about abandoning our values but finding common ground in a shared world.

========

Cassie McClure is a writer, millennial, and unapologetic fan of the Oxford comma. She can be contacted at cassie@mcclurepublications.com. To find out more about Cassie McClure and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

Copyright 2024 Creators Syndicate Inc.