Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals.

There is an old belief that we often hear about while growing up, stating that in the power search, almost anything is justified. It is not uncommon to see politicians using this as a way out to acquire what he or she wants, adopting elusive ideals to seal the path to what could be an extended career in the political world. The prompt recommends that politicians find a mutual understanding rather than principles that can be ambiguous. In my opinion, I strongly agree with this suggestion and argue that politicians should maintain a base ground when deciding the prospect of a society for two reasons. Firstly, when opting to enter political life, it shall be basic knowledge that he or she will be working in order to advocate for the population's wishes. Thus, to commit oneself to the political environment, he or she needs to develop concrete ideas and actions. For instance, in the 2003s through the 2011s, Brazil experienced one of the most complete administrations in its history, led by Luis Inácio Lula da Silva. The ex-president concentrated efforts in the economic field, beginning relations with emerging international markets; social programs, founding the Bolsa-Familia, an initiative where families from a low-income background can apply to receive a stipend per month; better education, expanding the university access to the bottom percentage of the population. Consequently, Lula received amazing support from his people and leaders around the world, due to the fact that he put their interests and demands above any other subject, engaging with different political figures to explore the best way to accomplish his agenda. The above example illustrates that common ground or basic consensuses are highly imperative in the system's smoothness. However, did this pacific and prosperous administration last? Sadly, it lastly not. Subsequently, even if we know that disagreements and divergent ideals can happen among politicians, the necessity for a mutual understanding still is a priority. The elusive ideal, in this scenario, will only show how the relations can be difficult without a front path. For instance, Brazil now experiences one of the most chaotic moments in its history, where, led by Jair Bolsonaro, the animosity is constantly present in every relationship, be it between the politicians or the population. The president does not hold good relations with other leaders around the world, frequently saying abhorred things about them and their country. Bolsonaro also does not has good relations with the politicians in his administration, thereupon being in disaccord with everything he or she tries to say or explain. He is a strong propagator of elusive ideals, often putting his ideas as the only true available, however, does not know how to explain them and the veracity he claims existent. Thus, on a macro scale, the need to achieve a common ground or reasonable consensus is due to the mutual desire to work for better conditions in a country, being a concept that should be encouraged among politicians to ensure developments and to prevent regress. Of course, some may argue that elusive ideals might be beneficial for future progress. However, should not be the principal goal in a political environment to adjust the many ideas to set a mutual understanding capable to gratify the administration and the population? If we do so, the relations could be more pacific and organized, leading to better achievements and fewer problems upon a society.