Huh?
February 17, 2011 (Thursday)
Somewhere along the way I was exposed to a way of thinking known as the “Hegelian Dialectic.” Simply put, it says that a belief may be proposed as a thesis. Someone may oppose that belief, and his position is known as an antithesis. The two have a dialogue in which they seek to understand each other and hopefully as a result derive a synthesis.
It seems to me that this is a valid way of looking at history. At some point, a country develops a government that seems to function well and the populace is generally satisfied. Over time, however, a new generation emerges, with new ideas and dissatisfaction with the status quo. Their new ideas are the antithesis of the established thesis. When conditions finally reach a point of frustration so great that the new generation craves change, it demands to be heard. That’s what happened in Egypt, and seems to be happening in surrounding nations of the Middle East. If the process follows its natural course, a synthesis should result in a government that takes into account the issues raised by the demands of the people.
However, it’s never that simple. There are complicating factors. When enough frustration develops, conflicts take place. Given enough frustration over a period of time, the conflicts can become bloody, and can even develop into a civil war. If that happens, “winner takes all,” and the dialogue ceases. The result can be a new type of dictatorship.
What is amazing to me is that those old dismal classrooms with their moldy books and ivory-towered philosophers and teachers have had influence beyond the classrooms, and their views have shaken the world as idealists have seized their notions and put them into the real world of action. Decisions are made that affect the fate of millions of people. Never underestimate the power of an idea.