The 'ideological' or 'philosophical' or 'dialectic' division between the American Republican Party and the American Democratic Party is as old as the beginning of Western philosophy.
The term 'dialectic' is used here to denote any such 'dialectic or polar split' in human nature, human behavior, and/or in life in general.
There are literally thousands, probably millions, of such 'polar, dialectical splits'.
Any time you can think of two 'opposites', you can think of the potential for 'bi-polar, dialectic splits'.
DGB Philosophy focuses on these dialectic (polar) splits as the core or essence of its approach to philosophy. And because there are probably millions of such potential or actual 'dialectical splits', that is why DGB Philosophy calls itself a 'Multi-Bi-Polar' Philosophy.
In doing this, DGB Philosophy takes after 'Hegelian Philosophy' which is often called 'Hegelian Dialectic Philosophy'. Hegel's masterpiece philosophical book is called: 'The Phenomenology of Spirit' (or 'The Phenomenology of Mind', depending on the German translation).
Now Western Dialectic Philosophy runs much, much deeper into Western history than Hegel himself who was the philosopher who probably most clearly articulated the 'dynamics of the dialectic'. It is from Hegel, that the classic 'dialectic formula' of: 1. 'thesis', 2. 'anti-thesis', and 3. 'synthesis' -- grew and evolved.
Western Dialectic Philosophy can be traced at least as far back into Ancient Greece as Anaxamander (611BC to 547BC) -- and shortly afterwards, to one of the most esteemed (Pre-Socratic) Ancient Greek philosophers in Western history -- Heraclitus.
Indeed, Anaxamander and Heraclitus -- between the two of them -- created one of the most fascinating and important dialectics in Western history: what DGB Philosophy will call the polarity and paradox between 'Authoritarian, Power-Dialectics' (Anaxamander)and 'Democratic Balance Dialectics' (Heraclitus).
Anaxamander can be viewed as an ancient 'pre-Hegelian' and 'pre-Darwinian' philosopher. He partly articulated the idea of 'survival of the fittest' -- but with a very interesting 'un-Darwinian' twist to it.
Perhaps I am taking some 'creative liberties' here and giving a 21st century spin to an ancient Greek philosophy that was articulated some 2600 years ago. But I believe this 'DGB spin' to Anaxamander's dialectic philosophy captures the essence of what he was saying -- with some much newer 'dialectic terminology' attached to it.
For Anaxamander, the world starts essentially in Chaos. (I will look up his word for it in a minute. Found it! 'Apeiron' which translates as 'The Boundless') Then this 'chaotic world' -- the undifferentiated, unarticulated Universe if you will -- is 'differentiated into opposite pairs of twos' -- let us say for example, 'black' and 'white'.
In this example here, 'black and white', between the two of them, create both our first dialectical pair, and also our first 'dialectical split'. In essence, the two dialectical polarities start to 'compete' with each other for 'power'. It is in this interpretation of Anaxamander's ancient philosophy, that I give the name 'power-dialectics' to his philosophical outlook on things -- and essentially, in the way that the world works.
'Black' and 'white' compete for 'power' -- and this in essence is exactly the same thing that happens with every dialectic opposite, with every dialectic split. There is a 'competition for power' -- a 'survival of the fittest' in pre-Darwinian terms, or even a 'will to power' in Nietzschean terms -- but with one important 'twist' to this pre-Hegelian, pre-Darwinian, pre-Nietzschean, even pre-Freudian, pre-Jungian, and pre-Gestalt theory. Dialectic theory runs deep, deep, deep in the history and evolution of Western philosophy, psychology, politics, medicine, law, culture...The same is true in Eastern philosophy where the concepts of 'yin' and 'yang' may or may not be older than Anaxamander's philosophy. Indeed, Anaxamander's philosophy is a Western version of 'yin' and 'yang' philosophy -- with out the addition of the theory of 'dialectic balance' which in Western philosophy would be added by Heraclitus.
However, as I have now alluded to twice, there is a very interesting 'twist' to Anaxamander's ancient 'power-dialectic' theory that gives it a unique character all of its own, perhaps never to be better articulated -- or even fully articulated again at all -- in Western history. Actually, let me correct myself there. Derrida clearly articulated the idea in his philosophy of 'Deconstruction'. The idea -- first clearly stated by Anaxamander -- is that power comes and goes, it is never permanent, and what is 'up' today will be 'down' tomorrow. It is kind of a version of the old saying that 'what goes up, must come down'. But even better than this, it is the first clear articulation of the idea of 'cosmic justice': the idea that 'what goes around, comes around'.
This is the most powerful component of Anaxamander's ancient dialectic philosophy, and it comes down to us, only in 'fragments' of what he said, the most powerful fragment probably being this one below:
.........................................................................
From Anaximander, Wikipedia...
Anaximander maintains that all dying things are returning to the element from which they came (apeiron). The one surviving fragment of Anaximander's writing deals with this matter. Simplicius transmitted it as a quotation, which describes the balanced and mutual changes of the elements:[10]
Whence things have their origin,
Thence also their destruction happens,
According to necessity;
For they give to each other justice and recompense
For their injustice
In conformity with the ordinance of Time.
..............................................................................
From 'The Free Dictionary' on the internet...
Anaximander (ənăk'sĭmăn`dər), c.611–c.547 B.C., Greek philosopher, b. Miletus; pupil of Thales Thales (thā`lēz), c.636–c.546 B.C.
He (Anaximander) made the first attempt to offer a detailed explanation of all aspects of nature. Anaximander argued that since there are so many different sorts of things, they must all have originated from something less differentiated than water, and this primary source, the boundless or the indefinite (apeiron), had always existed, filled all space, and, by its constant motion, separated opposites out from itself, e.g., hot and cold, moist and dry. These opposites interact by encroaching on one another and thus repay one another's "injustice." The result is a plurality of worlds that successively decay and return to the indefinite. The notion of the indefinite and its processes prefigured the later conception of the indestructibility of matter. Anaximander also had a theory of the relation of earth to the heavenly bodies, important in the history of astronomy. His view that man achieved his physical state by adaptation to environment, that life had evolved from moisture, and that man developed from fish, anticipates the theory of evolution.
..............................................................................
Power-dialectics create the dynamics behind 'dictatorships', 'authoritarianism, 'imperialism', 'unilateralism', 'righteousness' vs. 'rebellion', 'domination' vs 'submission', and 'the master-slave relationship as first fully articulated by Hegel. Power-dialectics are all about 'conquering or overpowering the will of others in order to get one's own way'. This is the essence of 'unilateralism' and 'imperialism' as well. It can work -- but it usually ends in human tragedy, destruction, self-destruction, rebellion, anarchy, war, civil war, and the like -- because people's rights and wishes -- those who are not a part of the 'power-group' -- are being violated and suppressed.
This is always the achilles heal of 'power-dialetics' and the reason why there is always a push in the world towards 'freedom, equal rights, and democracy' -- what will be called 'democratic(-equal-rights-balanced)-dialectics'.
There is one further point that I would like to make about Anaximander that I almost forgot.
Specifically, Anaxamander, in his own way, without inventing the 'terminology', foreshadowed and anticipated Alfred Adler's theory of 'compensation'
Worded more concretely still, Anaxamander basically argued that 'the weaker opponent will always make adjustments -- or compensations -- that will make the weaker opponent stronger to the point where they will eventually usurp the stronger opponent which will then become the weaker opponent -- and this 'dialectic power-dance' (my terminology of course, not his) will continue through the ongoing course and evolution of history --
....................................................................
'For they give to each other justice and recompense
For their injustice
In conformity with the ordinance of Time.'
.........................................................................
There is 'evolutionary intelligence' in even the so-called 'simplest and/or dumbest of (God's/Nature's) creatures'.
Even the supposedly simplest of bacteria will eventually make 'evolutionary adjustments, or compensations, or 'mutations' -- that will eventually, if exposed often enough to 'anti-biotics' -- become 'immune' to, or 'stronger' than the anti-biotics.
And similarly, Republican 'dirty' campaign tactics which worked in previous elections (Bush vs. Kerry, the Florida voting scandal, robo-calls, negative stereotyping, fear-mongering...) the Democrats have made 'adjustments' or 'compensations' or 'mutations' for in this election...
Which is why McCain and The Republicans are this time going to go down in defeat to a smarter Obama-led Democratic Party.
Of course, I could be wrong.
But I don't think so.
We shall see.
We will move on, in a day or two, to a discussion of the more 'democratic-dialectics' of the ancient Greek philosopher -- Heraclitus.
How many days to the American election? 4 or 5? When is it? November 3rd or 4th? Sorry, I have to check with CNN. I don't have a vote. I'm Canadian. Who's counting? Who's watching?
The whole world is watching.
America, you need to get it 'right' this time.
Bush -- and 'Republican Unilateralism' (read 'imperialism') -- was not the answer.
America needs a more integrative, 'democratic-dialectic', and 'foreign friendly' President as opposed to a divisive, 'power-dialectic', and 'walk all over the world', President.
Otherwise, more and more war is America's future -- and the world's future.
It's the Republican way.
-- dgb, October 31st, 2008.
