meanwhile the dialectic marches ever onward.
As polarization increases, the dialectic has to slow down to rebuild momentum, like a big tent swaying worse and worse in a strengthening gale. Thats the premise.
Two outcomes: Civil war/general collapse, or we push through the crisis into its opposite, unification against a common enemy - the federal government.
To get there people have to become so tired of polarization that they make hard decisions.
This disturbs the dialectic because the sliding window is a lot like a river, and society is like a kayak. The regime relies on society's reactions being slower than the regimes plans. When society is moving faster in its reactions and decision-making than the regimes plans, the regime loses control of what happens.
In the same way a kayak must move faster than a river, so that its not taken by the river.
I think thats an understandable-enough metaphor.
I can see your logic. But it seems to be based on the premise that all of this is organic, in which case a natural swing back toward reality would be expected. But I disagree that it's organic in any way.
I can see your logic. But it seems to be based on the premise that all of this is organic
It doesn't have to be. It can all be playbook. But the underlying psychology that the playbook exploits, can itself be exploited.
If the state is incompetent enough, it will accomplish much of this on its own by not sufficiently controlling the mass psychology of the various ideological camps. Eventually all systems fail.
I disagree that a system based on undermining positions based on objective truth and logically held positions can be used for good in the long run. The principle itself is evil.
(post is archived)