[cia-drugs] Hegelian Dialectic: Vanilla or Choclolate?

norgesen Tue, 10 Jan 2006 07:18:11 -0800

Hegelian Dialectic

By: David Deschesne

Editor, Fort Fairfield Journal

VANILLA OR CHOCOLATE?

I like chocolate ice cream. On hot days, I’d rather have vanilla, though. Chocolate seems to make me thirsty and nothing “hits the spot” on a hot day like a nice vanilla milk shake.

Now, let’s say my son and I are walking along Main street on a hot day and decide it would be nice to have a milk shake, but there isn’t enough money between the two of us to buy two. We stop at Harvest Market for our shake and I order, “One small vanilla shake, please.” He says, “No, no, I hate vanilla. I want chocolate.”

Now we have a problem. I want vanilla, he wants chocolate. What to do?

We’ve been taught by our school teachers “When we compromise, everyone wins.” But is that true? Suppose my son and I “compromise” and choose a coffee milk shake, or a bottle of soda pop. Did either of us “win” - that is, get what we really wanted? No. When you compromise, both sides lose.

This is a very cursory example of the Hegelian Dialectic, theorized by German philosopher, George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel in the early 1800s. His dialectic consisted of three phases: Thesis, Antithesis and Synthesis.

In the above example, the “Thesis” would be the original thought - vanilla, the “Antithesis” would be the opposite - chocolate. The synthesis, Hegel postulated, would be arrived at by a combination of the two thoughts - a “compromise” in order to find the real truth of the matter - what my son and I really wanted to drink. It may be true, because if we bought the soda pop, we must have wanted it, or we wouldn’t have bought it. However, there is a flaw in the argument, the original items are what we really, truthfully wanted.

Governments and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) use the Hegelian dialectic on a daily basis to sway unwitting populations who would otherwise resist, into going along with government tyranny.

A beautiful example is the gun control issue. First, the thesis is offered: “Ban all the guns.” That will generate the antithesis by the majority of Americans, “No, we don’t want any of our guns banned.” Then comes the synthesis - the compromise - “O-k, then we’ll just ban the ’assault weapons’.” Society concurs that’s reasonable and moves on without assault weapons. The thesis then is presented again, “Ban all guns.” Society says “No” and a compromise is again reached, banning all .50 caliber weapons. Soon, through enough cycles of the Hegelian dialectic, all guns are eventually banned. The government finally gets what it wants and society has acquiesced its right to defend itself away through compromise without even knowing it.

Governments have adapted the Hegelian Dialectic to steering societies by a method originally dubbed by radio talk show host and researcher, Alex Jones, Problem - Reaction - Solution (PRS).

Here are a few examples of how governments and bureaucracies use the PRS dialectic to get societies to do what government wants, but society doesn’t.:

WWI: President Wilson campaigned on keeping America out of the war (World War I). He was elected by a vast majority of Americans who had no interest in entering that war. However, money mogul, JP Morgan, who was selling war bonds for England here in the U.S. and using that money to purchase war materials from his own companies (at a profit) to send back to England, got himself into a bit of a quandary. England looked like she was about to lose the war with Germany. That meant all those bonds he sold would never be paid back, plus sales of material and equipment he was selling would end. America had to enter the war to ensure an English victory and a continuation of profits, but the American people didn’t want war. Enter the Lusitania. The Lusitania was a war ship disguised as a passenger ship. The Germans would not sink a ship unless it was known to have war materials on it. The Lusitania was loaded with passengers and, unbeknownst to them, also with war cargo. The Lusitania was directed to travel through known enemy waters without a naval escort and subsequently blown up by the German navy. (see Creature from Jekyll Island, ©1994 G. Edward Griffin, pp. 235-262)

The PROBLEM was that the Lusitania was blown up with civilian passengers, the REACTION was a violent uprising of the American people against Germany, the SOLUTION was war. The Americans then endorsed a war they never would have otherwise. Profits soared.

WWII: The same thing seemed to happened in World War II when the federal government knew the Japanese were coming to attack Pearl Harbor and allowed them to do it as a pretext for the U.S. to enter the war. (see U.S. Congress’ H.R. 4205, Sec. 576, July 13, 2000, pp. 227-235)

9-11: History is replete with examples of state-sponsored terrorism in order to bring about a desired outcome. Hitler had his agents burn the Reichstag to blame it on his political enemies and Nero burned Rome to blame it on the Christians. There is an increasing body of evidence that the PRS paradigm was potentially exercised once again on September 11, 2001 where it is alleged that factions inside the US government, either orchestrated, or willingly allowed the World Trade Centers to be imploded by a couple of passenger jets slamming into them. (see 9-11: The Great Illusion, by George Humphrey and 911: The Road to Tyranny by Alex Jones)

After the recent London bombings, New York police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly unwittingly admitted using the Hegelian dialectic in light of his decision to use Soviet-style, random, warrantless checks of passengers’ bags in the city’s mass transit system.

“The reality is, you need an event such as London for people to realize this is a procedure put in place for their safety,” Mr. Kelly said during an hour-long interview in his office at 1 Police Plaza. “Searches are intrusive. The issue is what the public will accept. You still need an event to get public support.” (see New York Times, July 24, 2005, p. 22)

Historically, governments have used “events” - either real or fabricated - as Problems to generate a Reaction of fear, in order to offer their Solution of dictatorial, unconstitutional, police-state tyranny.

http://mainemediaresources.com/ffj_fte.htm#hegel

ACL: What is the Hegelian Dialectic?

http://nord.twu.net/acl/dialectic.html

http://nord.twu.net/acl/news.html

Understanding how the Heglelian Dialectic is transforming the world:

http://www.womensgroup.org/998NEWLT.html

FORT FAIRFIELD JOURNAL

http://mainemediaresources.com/ffj.htm

Maine Patriot Library

http://mainemediaresources.com/usaac_library.htm

http://mainemediaresources.com/mpl_bible.htm

Citizen Reporter