Conviction as a Way of Life - On Political Idealism at the Left and Right Margins

In an age marked by pragmatism, opportunism, and image-conscious politics, those who live by unwavering conviction - often at great personal cost - stand out as anomalies. These individuals are rarely found in the center of political life. Instead, they dwell at the ideological fringes: left or right, radical or revolutionary, utopian or reactionary. What unites them is not their worldview, but their relentless adherence to it, often to the point of personal ruin.

Figures like Christian Worch on the far right, or Ulrike Meinhof and Rudi Dutschke on the far left, exemplify this archetype. They represent not just political movements, but a certain existential attitude: that truth is not negotiable, even in the face of failure, ridicule, or poverty. These are not career politicians or tacticians. They are, for better or worse, ideological purists.

Christian Worch is a controversial example. He publicly aligns himself with the National Socialist vision of Ernst Röhm, rejecting the opportunism and pragmatism of figures like Himmler. Despite the moral and historical repugnance of the ideology he defends, Worch’s life choices - forsaking a sizable inheritance, accepting societal exile, and maintaining his course without compromise - indicate a level of principle rarely seen in today’s political discourse. His marginal role, even within the far right, suggests that he is too ideologically rigid to be useful as a populist agitator. Whether or not one finds his views abhorrent (and most rightly do), there is a strange authenticity to his persona.

On the other end of the spectrum, Ulrike Meinhof serves as a mirror image. A respected journalist with a promising career, she chose to go underground and engage in armed struggle with the Red Army Faction. Her descent into radicalism was not driven by personal gain but by a sense of moral urgency and a commitment to anti-capitalist revolution. Like Worch, she forfeited comfort, status, and safety - convinced that the prevailing order was fundamentally unjust.

Rudi Dutschke, perhaps less extreme than Meinhof, lived with equal conviction. He advocated for a “long march through the institutions,” a decades-long transformation of society from within. After surviving an assassination attempt, he remained committed to a democratic form of socialism grounded in ethical idealism, even as the world moved on from the revolutionary optimism of 1968.

What makes such individuals fascinating is not the content of their beliefs, but the way in which they live their ideology. They do not adapt it to the times, nor dilute it for acceptability. Their lives become a statement - often tragic, sometimes delusional, occasionally inspiring.

This phenomenon cuts across ideologies and centuries. Gustav Landauer, the anarchist mystic, spoke of spiritual community and communal life in an era of militarism and imperialism. He died for his beliefs during the suppression of the Munich Soviet Republic in 1919. Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht, both devout Marxists, refused to compromise with war or reformism. They were murdered for holding on to their vision.

What all these figures share is a willingness to stand alone. They are not political realists; they are moral absolutists. Their lives function like secular pilgrimages, sometimes ending in martyrdom, always isolated from the mainstream. In this sense, they belong to a different moral tradition - one that values integrity over influence, and truth over victory.

Of course, such conviction can be dangerous. It can lead to terrorism, authoritarianism, or moral blindness. But its very existence reminds us of something that modern democracies often forget: politics is not only about negotiation and compromise. It is also about belief, identity, and the human desire to live authentically.

We do not need to admire the content of radical convictions to be struck by their force. Whether in a fascist, communist, or anarchist, ideological purity often comes with a cost that few are willing to pay. In a world dominated by image, branding, and political convenience, those who live and die by their beliefs - however flawed - offer a disturbing kind of clarity.

They force us to ask: What do we believe? And how far would we go to live by it?