October 31, 2013 ****

*The Hegelian Dialectic: the True Culprit*

*By* *Sam C. Holliday* <http://www.americanthinker.com/sam_c_holliday/>****

Most people have never heard of the Hegelian Dialectic, the esoteric
concept that currently shapes most policy decisions. Even those who closely
follow the debates within the political elite have no idea that they are
resolved according to the Hegelian Dialectic. Nor do they know that their
own expectations about compromise is rooted in the Hegelian Dialectic, or
that it also explains why those who stand firmly on principle are rejected
as "extremists." All of these attitudes are outcomes of the Hegelian
Dialectic; it also explains the ever-increasing centralization of political
power, large government bureaucracies, excessive taxation, and
dissatisfaction with government.****

For at least 5,000 years there has been no agreement on how best to resolve
disputes over who should get what, when, and how. Some favor the
adversarial approach that ends in a definitive outcome, but others are
willing to agree to disagree while living with diverse opinions. The
Hegelian Dialectic is a method of resolving disagreement in which some
proposition (thesis) is opposed by another proposition (antithesis) with a
resolution by a higher-level proposition (synthesis). This is how most
lawyers, politicians, and academics think disagreements should be resolved.
It is how those who favor authoritarian regimes think policy should be
determined.****

Yet those who favor the decentralization of political power oppose the
adversarial approach. They want individuals and groups to have the greatest
possible freedom and for decisions to be made in accordance with many
different customs and traditions. They reject the Hegelian Dialectic in
favor of an approach that is equally old: self-regulated equilibrium that
does not end in agreement. This allows those of firm principles to accept
and respect each other. This approach has many names: for the Chinese it is
Yin-Yang, for Aristotle it was the Golden Mean, for the Founders of the USA
it was checks and balances, in physics it is a stable state, and in
management science theory it is homeostatic equilibrium. Its most
descriptive name is Stability through Equilibrium (StE). ****

[image: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/assets/Hegel.png]Since the
1960s, Hegel's views have been the foundation of postmodern thought,
utilized by progressives in pursuit of a nonjudgmental, egalitarian,
nondiscriminatory Utopia, in which disagreements are resolved by
discussion, compromise, rules, and laws. Postmodernism has pushed aside
much of modernism as it evolved in Western Culture to replace chaos with a
climate of order and satisfaction. Postmodernism attempts to deconstruct
the concepts, institutions, roles, rules, and standards associated with
traditional Western Culture. It claims that objectivity is an illusion
(created by "dead, white men" since 1500) established to maintain
patriarchal societies and to oppress females, the disadvantaged, and
"others". Using the Hegelian Dialectic, postmodernism attempts to transform
Western Culture by modifying the roles, customs, traditions, and behaviors
that were accepted as proper, good, and right prior to the 1960s.****

The Affordable Care Act, popularly known as ObamaCare, was the cause of the
dispute regarding the $16.7 trillion debt ceiling that led to a partial
governmental shutdown. President Obama used congressional failure to raise
the debt ceiling as a way to demonize Republicans in general, and Senator
Cruz specifically, for failure to "set aside their partisan concerns in
order to do what's right for the country". With the votes in the Senate,
the use of his executive power, and a refusal to compromise, the president
was able to continue to march forward with ObamaCare even as problems were
increasingly obvious. The Hegelian Dialectic, and the political elite
protecting its own interests at the expense of national interests, made
Cruz's valiant effort unrealistic. He could only highlight the goal of the
postmodernists to centralize power and Obama's pettiness and dishonesty --
but Cruz and his allies did not have the votes to derail ObamaCare.****

The effort by Cruz and millions of Americans seeking smaller government,
less taxes, and financial responsibility were actually defeated by the
Republicans of the political elite who wanted decisions made in accordance
with elections and the Hegelian Dialectic. If all Republicans had stood
with Cruz the progressives would have had to make greater concessions.
However, when they started to attack Cruz's "tactics" it emboldened the
Democrats, since they knew that expectations of compromise, to achieve a
specific agreement, would give them a win. They knew that the media would
turn Cruz into an extremist, rather than a man standing up for the more
difficult right rather than the easier wrong. Why did the weak,
compromising Republicans attack Cruz? Perhaps they only understood the
adversarial approach. Perhaps, as members of the political elite, they
wanted to keep power centralized so they could participate in determining
who gets what, when, and how. Perhaps they wanted to retain control of the
Republican Party.****

Would the outcome have been different under the checks and balances of
Stability through Equilibrium (StE)? Yes, for there would have been no need
for a single definitive solution as the result of votes and compromising.
The question of how best to provide affordable health care could have been
decentralized at least to the states, and perhaps even down to individuals.
Alternative views would have been respected and accepted; freedom would
have been advanced; in time the most successful ways of providing
affordable health care would expand and the least successful would be
modified or dropped.****

Stability through Equilibrium (StE) is an approach to decision-making that
promotes the small, adaptive, fast, flexible, and self-reliant. It requires
freedom, personal responsibility, choice, civic virtue, and excellence. On
the other hand, the adversarial approach results in a specific solution, a
single standard, bureaucracy, dependency, and behavior controlled by rules,
regulations, and laws. ****

*Sam C. Holliday, PhD is a retired Army Colonel and Director, Armiger
Cromwell Center, LLC, Atlanta, GA.*****


*Page Printed from:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2013/10/hegelain_dialectic_lian.html
* at October 31, 2013 - 06:32:30 PM CDT****


__._,_.___






__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

<<image001.jpg>>

Reply via email to