Question

I'm beginning to understand Hegel's dialectic (and Marx's, to an extent) differently than I previously did. I'm beginning to understand it within complexity; rather than a status quo thesis, antithesis, synthesis, it's easier to picture as an infinite collection of overlapping and interacting theses. Hundreds or thousands of perceptional thesis, all intertwined, each with their own related and/or unrelated antitheses, with any syntheses developing in real time among ALL of this set, any number of the set of theses, antitheses, and currently developing syntheses can be spontaneously transformed into a whole new status quo.

An example is one that I'm not sure what to do with. Free-markets, capitalism, liberal democracy, and equality under law can SEEM at a glance from an American perspective to be all components of the SAME single thing. From outside, one might criticize free-markets as being chaotic and in need of regulation. Capitalism might be confronted with it's tendency to innovate disruptions into the societies in which its allowed. Communism and socialism are reactions to the forms of society that are fostered given the above mentioned set. Fascism is ALSO a criticism of the above set. Global economic and population homogeneity is an antithesis of the early 20th century thesis, but a synthesis of socialism and fascism.

I'm not quite sure what to do with it.

#population #capitalism #communism #Socialism #economic #equality #liberal #society

govols 8

Answer 1

You can spend a lifetime lost in the details, and end up breaking no new ground whatsoever.
I think the only manageable approach is to establish Principles and stick to them.

For example; if you're considering a policy that you think is "best" for everyone, or even necessary in your view... your first consideration should be whether you have the Right to impose that policy on your neighbors in the first place.
If you think you do, then you should be able to describe conclusively how and why it's your decision to make regarding their life.
In those cases, it is legitimate to establish the policy as Law that applies to everybody equally.

If you can't, then it simply doesn't matter how beneficial or even how "necessary" you think the policy is... it's not your call. And by extension, it's not the Government's call.
In those cases, you still have every right to try and convince your neighbors to cede to your will.
But, you have NO right to force them to by Law.

Any System that relies on such Force is illegitimate, and will eventually ignite under its own internal friction; it's just a matter of time.

Answer 2

Hello. If it is true that American society is so polarised that most Americans can only see things in black and white, i.e., left and right, They are not going to allow any room for socialistic ideas within a capitalist nation or vice versa. I don't know how many times I was laughed at, patronised or belittled by supporters of 100% capitalism when I mentioned national health services and free education, which we have in Britain which is a capitalist nation.

Answer 3

What is certain is that Leftist thinking is bereft of all foundational understanding of human nature and how the world works. It is the product of half-baked intellectual thinking. It is a "science" where all of the end results to a theory are contrived and made up just so they would fit in and match.

Answer 4

You can get a graduate degree in a humanities field.


Author	Author:
Type of abuse	I think this violates the community guidelines. Chat or rant, adult content, spam, insulting other members I think this is illegal. Harm to minors, violence or threats, harassment or privacy invasion, impersonation or misrepresentation, fraud or phishing, etc.
Additional Details If Needed

Chat room is open

Post a comment Author doesn't reply Reply Author doesn't reply Add Photo

Be part of the movement!

4 comments

Recent Visitors 14

Photos 11,798 More

Members 9,403Top

Moderators

Related GroupsMore