I like your approach here. You see in this the possibility of development or a possible evolution. At first there is the need for external proofs. But in time, as consciousness might develop, it is possible to withdraw these external “crutches”.

You say that “each political ideal ultimately serve the same agenda.”. If I understood it correctly, you refer to the false hopes and ideals to be followed there. It is a pity, but disillusionment follows when false hopes were made. And there might be another possible stage. Not a descriptive, factual perspective, as in Marcia’s theory, but a developmental perspective. And that’s what can get really interesting for the self developmental view. Don’t you think that it changes the perspective?

Sure, Marcia’s stages are all right. It was just fun to see how inadequately was used political conviction to express it. But there is also Erikson’s model (the stages of development) from which Marcia was inspired. Also, very plausible approach.

As you say, it is easy to affirm that politics is crap for the ones who never reached any level of commitment. Refusing to grow up is not a viable choice, but the option is there. On the other side, I think it is very much possible to get detached from politics and still not loose your identity or maturity. I am not saying that it should be considered as another level or stage, but you have to admit that it might show up at some people. Maybe being able to detach yourself instead of forming an opinion is not deficiency. You were quite strong on the necessity of forming opinions, so I would be curious to hear your opinion on this.

It would be equally possible to to say that those that identify strongly with politics have an identity issue. Simply because they feel the need to focus on something external to themselves with which to create their identity.

The process begins with the assumption that “identity” is something external to the individual. You aren’t your political alignment. Just as you aren’t your bank balance, or your job, or your shoes.

Of course politics has its purpose and is there for necessary, just as many other systems are. It’s true to say that people identify themselves with all types of systems.

Taking it further, I would say that those that spend their lives arguing over political possibilities and alignment have totally missed the point of life.

Stating that “Politics is Crap” isn’t necessarily being cynical. It could merely be an observational statement – claiming that the differing positions of each political ideal ultimately serve the same agenda. At least that is so in the real world.

Politics is idealistic – an obvious statement – but the real world isn’t idealistic. So in the end that comes as close as anything to explaining why people would want to associate their identity with politics. It’s nice to feel idealistic.

I think we can go even further: if someone has to do with some topic, and if he has no maturity problems, he forms a concrete idea about it. In case of he/she has no opinion about it, that suggests his level of maturity…