Most Pragmatic is Being Most Ideological

Whenever politicians and their cohorts publicly claim that they are just really or simply pragmatists at heart, they are actually signaling, whether unconsciously or not, that they are truly ideological in their firm beliefs and, one sees, consequently related actions. It has been convincingly argued, furthermore, that pragmatism is, in fact, the most ideological of all the assorted ideologies of modernity in that it seeks to supposedly surpass or, better yet, simply bypass all the (other) ideologies combined. In that illustrative sense, pragmatism is, thus, manifestly the most ideological, most prone to quickly seek action from ideas, of all such ideologies.
Whenever Communists, Nazis, Fascists, Socialists, Liberals, Conservatives, Feminists, etc. claim, moreover, to just speak off the record or “in confidence” or “in private,” they will also usually claim to do what they do in pragmatic terms or to be just acting out of proclaimed pragmatism; this is without then supposedly consulting, as assumed, their particular ideology; thus, this empirically demonstrates that ideologists, therefore, usually prefer to cloak (or conveniently excuse) their actions in convenient claims that they really are just basic pragmatists at heart concerning their, to them, various “practical” decisions.
Really now, Machiavelli, for instance, being the supreme advocate of cruel power politics, would have laughingly scoffed at anyone being so naïve enough to sincerely believe protestations of the cognitive innocence of purposes, held by power players, within the real world of men and events. Pragmatism is an assertion of a kind of proposed innocence in that the actor is supposed to be actually guileless and free from the taint of having a fairly directive self-interest (read: ideology), which is then contained in a definite point of view beyond mere happenstance or, perhaps, dealing with matters haphazardly.
Of course, the American people are being propagandistically presented with what the above-cited Devil’s Disciple or Advocate would have so easily recognized, as just a rather silly political fairy tale, that the Anointed One, Obama the Great, is merely, when all is supposedly said and done, just a pure or basic pragmatist. Much of politics is, therefore, the irregular public reception of creative perceptions and illusions that do dance around popular pronouncements of supposed pragmatism.
But, his pragmatism is solidly referenced, in its essence, nonetheless, by mainstream Fabian Socialism; this is, in addition, regardless of possible and observed variations upon diverse political themes that need not all be absolutely reconciled every moment of every possible day; as the instance of yet another man of the Left, V. I. Lenin himself had said, insightfully, of Communism that it works by incorporating contradictions; this was said by him, in reply to those critics who had accused him of often contradicting himself, in his various attempts to be, of course, pragmatic.
Seemingly pragmatic decisions, moreover, can still be done in the, e.g., Leninist spirit of two steps forward and one step back as strategically needed, even if to practically fool his opponents when so tactically required. Obama, if he skillfully practices his collectivist-oriented tactics strategically, can be an effective Machiavellian filled mightily with supremely cunning desires and superbly masterful plots and subplots to carefully divert the attention of his then many befuddled opponents.
So, when His Magnificence (AKA the Great One) seems to be or, one guesses, mainly purports to be doing things simply out of a plain or “objective” need for just making needed, moderate, or pragmatic decisions, he then is so being most ideological; this is, therefore, in definitely trying to achieve success and accomplish his intentions within the hardened realm of acknowledged power politics (at its worst), as was known to Machiavelli.
The Devil’s Advocate would, indeed, be very proud of Herr Obama if he could convince many useful political idiots of his honest, “sincerely held” pragmatism or moderation, as to his “practical” method of governing this nation. Hopefully, however, the aforementioned, silly political fairy tale will not evilly morph into a demagogic nightmare aided and abetted by statist, interventionist, appeals made to a (supposed) pragmatic necessity for adopting forms of tyranny.