The Error In Thinking

at the turn of the century, there was a realization that a lot of people had, well, that almost anyone i knew of had, me included. indeed, it is interesting that this sudden thought was so widespread. but what was this thought? it went along the following lines; in the history of mankind, man was fueled by great ideas; of social revolution; of cultural revolution; of better times, of a better society. this was in theory. but, in "praxis", these ideas never paved the way in which it was intended. the russian revolution, that ought to bring freedom and equality to everyone, brought more oppression and misery than before. didn't even the french revolution end in "the terror"? could not be the same said about every other revolution - and even if one could say, it did have, all parts accumulated, a positive outcome; was this not a mere nothingness compared to the ideals of utopia, on whose terms it was made on?
the same could be said about cultural movements and subcultures; the young punks screamed rebellion and anarchy - but in real life, didn't they join the "workforce" and a calm life after they had turned 30?
couldn't be the same said about the hippies, the ravers, all the others?
yes, of all the lofty ideals, in the end, judging realistically, not much was left in "praxis".
we, almost, all of mankind, realized that ideal and reality never met, not in the history of men, and probably never will. and on this followed another realization, that seemed so obvious and logical; to not follow these lofty dreams of change and anarchy anymore, and instead focus on - the real life, everyday experience.
to make something groundbreaking in "the actual", in existing genres, instead of clinging for dreams.
in practical results, this for example meaned that former radical electronic musicians dropped their "riot" and "anarchy" shouting and dived into other fields, usually under the guise of "pure art", "art for arts sake". their music and creativity suffered a lot by this.
but let us get back to our way of thinking. the "conclusion" was seemed so obvious, but it was not.
what we didn't realize was that there were two lines of thinking and the one didn't necessarily had to be concluded by the other. yes, that dream and reality do not meet - in principle, this thought was correct. and, it was supported by plenty of evidence. but what we thought then - there lies the problem. because if we can't have both - theory and praxis, dreams and actual results - then why choose the latter, instead of the former?
if we cannot ever put our dreams into "praxis", into an actual, substantial result - why do we have to give up our dreams? there is no logic behind it, well, there is actually no cause or evidence or anything behind it at all. it was just *obvious* to everyone. because "we" knew that pursuing dreams, that were bound to be without the chance of a direct, concrete consequence, was painful and useless. or so we thought.
because this is the big error in the line of thinking of almost all humans. most people, it seems, are unable to follow ideals or dreams, or utopian thoughts at all. but even those who are able to somewhat comprehend these things, still demand that dreams and ideals, have to be realized in some way, have to be put into effect.
and this is not the case at all. if you follow a dream, and it is a good dream, and you have no chance of ever putting it into something concrete, this can be most wonderful thing at all.
because, if dreams and ideals are still chained to the "actual", to a direct experience, they still lack vision, they still lack - what makes them ideal. ideals and dreams that are complete abstract, complete non-definitive, are those that are to be the most admired.
let us give some examples for this. a man might admire the ideal of anarchy, of revolution. this is good. but in the next step, he immediately wants that this idea is turned real. which, in itself is not bad at all. but, if he can't do it, or sees that others cannot do it aswell, he gives up this dream - because for him it is "just a dream". and this is where the error lies. if you cannot put it into something direct - this doesn't take anything of the dream and ideal away. the dream of anarchy stays grand - even if it is never realized! and it is worthy to fight for anarchy - even if it is never realized!
similiar, a life spent on fighting for social justice, is never wasted - even if you "reached" nothing with it, even if you did not manage to make the slightest change by your struggle - it is worthy. because the idea is grand. and the idea is great.
now, to most people this might seem like a depressing stand; to have an ideal and not being able to turn it direct. but it is not like that! the guy who fights for social justice, if he believes in it, even if he "fails", even if it amounts to seemingly "nothing", will live a much happier life than the richest men who is devoid of dreams and ideals - because this idea will give him happiness, too.
of course, this doesn't mean you should pursue ideas for selfgain - but you will gain a lot, gain everything - if you follow a dream or a great idea.
it doesn't matter if a dream cannot be put through - it was never the matter - strive for dreams - for the dreams sake!
this was the error in judgement and logic that we made - that the lack of "substance" of ideals and dreams would mean, that we should abandon dreams.
of course, in no way does that mean you should abandon the "everyday life", "real world" either - live in the real world. but also live in your dreams.
what should also be noted that if you pursue an ideal for an ideals sake, and it is a grand ideal, and you don't care if this ideal "can work" or not - *then* you will actually achieve a lot, in everyday life in the real world too. just like many (or all?) men who truly pursued an ideal and dream and dedicated themselves to it, went down in history. but, again, this should not be a prerequisite for taking this path, not at all.

so to end with our beginning, what would be the results for the subcultures, for anarchists and dreamers?
be a punk, be a hippie, be an anarchist, be a revolutionary, be a wonderful dreamer, or be something new - don't
let it bother you that the "actual" hippie scenes, punk scenes, anarchist scenes, men, women, actions and moves, might not be on par with those ideas and dreams - because this matters little. because the ideals are great. and this is what matters.