"The democratic idealist is prone to make light of the whole question of standards and leadership because of his unbounded faith in the plain people"

Irving Babbitt's statement provides a crucial perspective on the democratic idealist's technique to governance and social company. Babbitt suggests that democratic idealists, with their profound belief in the wisdom and virtue of the typical individuals, frequently minimize or neglect the intricacies associated with establishing and preserving standards and management within a society.

The expression "make light of the entire question of standards and leadership" indicates that democratic idealists might trivialize or underestimate the value of having clear, extensive requirements and effective leadership. Standards are vital in guaranteeing consistency, quality, and fairness throughout different societal domains, whether in education, governance, or principles. Also, strong management is important for assisting society through difficulties, making hard decisions, and inspiring collective action towards common goals.

Babbitt associates this oversight to the democratic idealist's "unbounded faith in the plain people", suggesting that their faith in the fundamental goodness and capability of ordinary individuals leads them to assume that left to their own gadgets, the people will naturally come to the very best outcomes. This belief in the virtue and knowledge of the 'commoner' is an important tenet of democratic thought, showing the idea that power and governance ought to be grounded in the will and approval of the governed.

However, Babbitt appears to argue that this idealistic view can cause a naïve or excessively simplified understanding of how efficient societies operate. Without acknowledging the need for recognized standards and visionary management, societies may struggle with governance concerns, social cohesion, and the pursuit of long-term goals. Standards assist to navigate complex moral and practical problems, while leadership is needed to activate and harmonize varied individual interests into a cohesive societal effort.

In essence, Babbitt's critique invites reflection on the balance between faith in specific autonomy and the structured governance needed to harness collective societal potential. It raises concerns about how to finest understand democratic perfects in practice, acknowledging both the strengths and possible shortcomings of relying too greatly on the intrinsic virtues of the people.