I've actually been thinking about this a lot lately. Like i see so many people debate for example the USSR. When they do it they almost exclusively talk about morals, and was this or that wrong or right. Which to me is so self defeating. You need to have the pragmatist strategy of Machiavelli, or Sun Tzu, and the Compassionate detachment of Buddha at the same time. You can't just hope good things happen and expect them to, and you can't just be purely strategic and not care about outcomes. It has to be a synthesis. Yet the ability to realize that synthesis seems very lacking in western discourse.

Like what is better a commune that perfectly fits your morals but lasts 6 months because it gets slaughtered by some brownshirts immediately, or a nation that fits 80% of your moral desires, and lasts a century because it ruthlessly defends itself from the forces of reactionary capital? One of those things can give an entire generation a fulfilling life, and one of them is a vacation that ends in disaster.