11-19-2018, 04:09 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-19-2018, 04:35 PM by Eric the Green.)
Without Classic Xer, and a few of his allies who might drop in like Just Passing Through, we liberals would have no-one to argue with here. So I actually look forward to his posts as an opportunity at least to make sure his ideas don't go unanswered. And a site consisting only of people I agree with and are always nice and positive gets boring. So I don't hang out as often on blissful new age sites. But on the other hand, although I might respect the fact that Galen is my enemy and I define myself as opposite to him, I don't care to engage with him much. Classic Xer doesn't like me and wants to separate from my kind and such, but at least he is fairly civilized; whereas Galen is not, so I don't directly engage with him much.
There is a process in history which Hegel and Marx described in which two antitheses are succeeded by a new synthesis, and we also have The Who who said the new boss ends up being like the old boss, and the revolution continues. The party on the left becomes the party on the right. And in the saeculum a crisis occurs in which a war happens which is followed by a new consensus. In our crisis or fourth turning the Democrats and Republicans, or as we call them since the year 2000 "the blue and the red," are in a cold civil war in which progress in our society can no longer occur until the red side is defeated. And the war could get out of hand and get hot. I don't see an alternative, unless the Republicans mellow out and realize the falsehood of their fanaticism, and start to work together with the good guys with some mutual respect.
If the conflict can be contained and be settled politically, perhaps due to demographic shifts, then a new consensus can be achieved without both sides trying to destroy each other. Or, what might happen, as in the 1860 era, the country could divide up, AND/OR the current party system could break down. In a democracy, one party rule is unhealthy, and could degenerate into a corrupt mess or an authoritarian regime. The party in power in a one party state won't be challenged enough to keep itself dedicated and not get spoiled, flabby, corrupt, arrogant, oppressive, incompetent, complacent and lazy. Just as we always need an enemy in a contained conflict to be healthy, in a democracy the party in power must be challenged by an out of power party that gives a voice to potential dissenters to keep it on track and dedicated and ready to fight politically for its real goals and values.
But today it might mean that the Democrats soon become the conservative party and the Greens become the progressive alternative out-party, until it too becomes the dominant party someday. The party on the left will become the party on the right, and the new boss will be like the old boss again. That may be optimistic, but I don't know what becomes of the Republican Party if it keeps on its current course. It not only contains every wrong idea, but is convinced that it is right, and does not respect the other party; and the Democrats increasingly don't respect them in turn. So far in our history we haven't been able to contain the 4T conflicts, at least not entirely.
There is a process in history which Hegel and Marx described in which two antitheses are succeeded by a new synthesis, and we also have The Who who said the new boss ends up being like the old boss, and the revolution continues. The party on the left becomes the party on the right. And in the saeculum a crisis occurs in which a war happens which is followed by a new consensus. In our crisis or fourth turning the Democrats and Republicans, or as we call them since the year 2000 "the blue and the red," are in a cold civil war in which progress in our society can no longer occur until the red side is defeated. And the war could get out of hand and get hot. I don't see an alternative, unless the Republicans mellow out and realize the falsehood of their fanaticism, and start to work together with the good guys with some mutual respect.
If the conflict can be contained and be settled politically, perhaps due to demographic shifts, then a new consensus can be achieved without both sides trying to destroy each other. Or, what might happen, as in the 1860 era, the country could divide up, AND/OR the current party system could break down. In a democracy, one party rule is unhealthy, and could degenerate into a corrupt mess or an authoritarian regime. The party in power in a one party state won't be challenged enough to keep itself dedicated and not get spoiled, flabby, corrupt, arrogant, oppressive, incompetent, complacent and lazy. Just as we always need an enemy in a contained conflict to be healthy, in a democracy the party in power must be challenged by an out of power party that gives a voice to potential dissenters to keep it on track and dedicated and ready to fight politically for its real goals and values.
But today it might mean that the Democrats soon become the conservative party and the Greens become the progressive alternative out-party, until it too becomes the dominant party someday. The party on the left will become the party on the right, and the new boss will be like the old boss again. That may be optimistic, but I don't know what becomes of the Republican Party if it keeps on its current course. It not only contains every wrong idea, but is convinced that it is right, and does not respect the other party; and the Democrats increasingly don't respect them in turn. So far in our history we haven't been able to contain the 4T conflicts, at least not entirely.