Argyreia Nervosa wrote:Actually yes, its part of the Hegelian dialectical system US two party politics runs on.

Certainly intellectually and morally but definitely not in the same way the other candidates are 'elite'. Knob gobblers.

Bill Hicks wrote:“I'll show you politics in America. Here it is, right here. 'I think the puppet on the right shares my beliefs.' 'I think the puppet on the left is more to my liking.' 'Hey, wait a minute, there's one guy holding out both puppets!'”

big_dave wrote:My point was that both sides were indistinguishable to outside observers, which doesn't apply to the Republicans and Democrats.

big_dave wrote:Not good form to respond to a question of dichotomies with a homophobic bon mot.

Skronk wrote:

My point was that both sides were indistinguishable to outside observers, which doesn't apply to the Republicans and Democrats.

How doesn't that apply to these two parties?

big_dave wrote:The homophobia thing was just a joke, guys.

Skronk wrote:

My point was that both sides were indistinguishable to outside observers, which doesn't apply to the Republicans and Democrats.

How doesn't that apply to these two parties?

Because most people in the UK could easily distinguish them?

And to Argyreia Nervosa: if you think both are the same why bring up Hegelian Dialectics?

The dialectic process is at the core of all political and social manipulation. 1 Fascism against communism; capitalism against communism; democrats against republicans; conservatives against liberals; Christians against Muslims; environmentalists versus property owners; greens against libertarians; pro-choice pitted against pro-life; antiwar activists versus the neocons. The control of the conflict and resolution leads everyone into a new cycle of conflicts. 2 The right-left political dichotomy of western politics is carefully orchestrated: a classic divide and conquer Hegelian trap. Whichever side of any particular ideology we happen to adhere, our beliefs and convictions fulfills a necessary role in the grand scheme. A perpetual recursion of constant change, becoming, ceasing, contradictory aspects of tension/conflict and eventual transformation.

Argyreia Nervosa wrote:

The dialectic process is at the core of all political and social manipulation. 1 Fascism against communism; capitalism against communism; democrats against republicans; conservatives against liberals; Christians against Muslims; environmentalists versus property owners; greens against libertarians; pro-choice pitted against pro-life; antiwar activists versus the neocons. The control of the conflict and resolution leads everyone into a new cycle of conflicts. 2 The right-left political dichotomy of western politics is carefully orchestrated: a classic divide and conquer Hegelian trap. Whichever side of any particular ideology we happen to adhere, our beliefs and convictions fulfills a necessary role in the grand scheme. A perpetual recursion of constant change, becoming, ceasing, contradictory aspects of tension/conflict and eventual transformation.

The aim of the dialectical method, often known as dialectic or dialectics, is to try to resolve the disagreement through rational discussion, and ultimately, the search for truth. One way to proceed — the Socratic method — is to show that a given hypothesis (with other admissions) leads to a contradiction; thus, forcing the withdrawal of the hypothesis as a candidate for truth (see also reductio ad absurdum). Another way of trying to resolve a disagreement is by denying some presupposition of both the contending thesis and antithesis; thereby moving to a third (syn)thesis or "sublation".

The most successful method to manipulate and control society is the Hegelian Dialectic, named after its originator Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831). It has been used by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels to support their theory of communism. The dialectic process as described by Hegel can be reduced to three parts: a recursive pattern of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. The thesis (each idea) is opposed by its antithesis and reconciled with the thesis in a synthesis (consensus), which in turn becomes a new thesis opposed by antithesis. Hegel said that history was nothing but the expression of this flux of conflicting and resolving ideas. Since every synthesis is the thesis of a new dialectic, social change is guaranteed. The process continues until society reaches the Absolute Idea: the ultimate synthesis, giving rise to no antithesis. In the context of this document, the "Absolute Idea" is world government.

...


If the Hegelian Dialectic is the modus operandi of elite control and the drive toward a New World Order, then Humanism is the magnum opus, or masterstroke. The moral degeneration of the youth is a direct result of a socialistic/humanistic experiment. The facilitators of the plan understood from the beginning that to change society an educational revolution will need to take place. H. J. Blackham, father of modern British Humanism, said that humanists "are more revolutionary than any conspiracy to overthrow the government."

...

The Illuminati's "Absolute Idea" of the Hegelian Dialectic is for the ultimate synthesis to encompass a One-World Government, a One-World economic system, and a One-World Religion. The economic and political infrastructure is far enough ahead with the only missing piece being the creation of this "New World Religion." Many attempts have surfaced in the 20th century, but besides interfaith agreements and cooperation, no definitive framework is complex and thorough enough to claim that potential prize. I have come to believe that the Bahá'í Faith fits the requirements perfectly.

The Hegelian Dialectic is being used and is part of Goals 2000 and Outcome Based Education. It is being used by corporations, churches, seminaries, Christian groups, our government, environmental and pro-abortion non- governmental organizations, the military, and the media. Where does it come from? It originated in the Garden of Eden

Cranius wrote:Yeah, that and the recourse to the historical intention of the Constitution.

Rick Reuben wrote:Dave smells the scent of 'elitism' on Ron Paul who worked driving a milk truck and became a country obstetrician, but doesn't smell it on John Edwards or Hillary?? Typical of his trollish hypocrisy.

Rick Reuben wrote:

o_d_m wrote:Joe Biden D $93,000

Jesus, Biden ranks 99 out of 100 senators in personal wealth. He's been collecting a senator's salary for 35 years. He must either not invest, invest badly, give it all away, or put it in his wife's name.

Paul/Biden 2008.