now that i've rambled on enough, i'll answer the title of the thread. the evil of hegel is that it is a misdirection. while he is describing the synthesis of two opposing ideas, he's actually pre-synthesizing two opposing ideas. hegel says it is a vs b, which produces x. in actuality, it is a vs b vs c which produces x, but you generally can't even produce x at all due to the inherent cognitive bias in dialectics. you will always choose a, b, or c depending upon your level of consciousness and thus the level of complexity that you can perceive a situation in. and unfortunately, it's not really possible to redpill all of society to the higher level reason and get them to see that it's all relative. that's why even the high society engages with a vaguely benevolent (yet corruptible) form of psyop over the lower part of society. and it goes without saying, that the middle part of society, in the form of the mediocre rationalists who run institutions like the cia, engage in psyops over the lower part of society too. it's really aristotle that fucked us up, if you want to be complete with this knowledge. the law of the excluded middle is the basic logical argument which opposes "third way thinking". in the case above, this third way would be c. so instead, in the hegelian paradigm, you always get a vs b. the middle is not "c" but a rationalist unhuman sludge of a and b that is riddled with logical inconsistencies. this _affront_ to human reason is the essence of what people have come to call "degeneracy", while at the same time held as the bastion of "progress" by others who believe that such a unification of ideology is in fact possible. (that is what progressivism is... the vain belief in a single ideology can rule them all. a weak form of this statement could be valid, but the strong form of it is what i've thoroughly disproven in this writing.) (5/6)
United States