It recently dawned on me that the GOP is relying almost exclusively on Marxist dialectics.
Dialectics is a way of overcoming philosophical paradoxes:
thesis + antithesis = synthesis
In power politics, GOP dialectics dictates endless "compromise" where every disagreement drags the Dems to right. The GOP says Social Security is broke, the Dems say it’s OK for decades, and the truth must be in the middle. "Facts" are for rubes.
Unless you're Sam Seder:
Dialectics worked great for the Tea Party, because dialectics doesn't respond directly to questions.
Dialectics has been criticized as a rebellion against reason that puts itself above direct criticism. Since it refuses to provide answers, it's the perfect Trojan Horse for seizing power.
Marxists believe change is driven by class conflict, which constantly demolishes existing institutions (sounds Republican, yes?). And Marxist Dialectic Materialism says they understand the economic rules that will inexorably shape the future (materialism), and that we will inevitably fulfill their predictions, like it or not, so just compromise (dialectics). Meanwhile, all they have to do is tear things down to make us get there faster.
Dialectics provides a thin veneer of pseudo-intellectual respectability to what is essentially a strongly anti-intellectual movement. The GOP is very proud of its many "smart" people, like Newt. Apparently there are no stupid Republicans, and even Palin is considered wicked smart by her supporters. Libertarians are supposed to be gifted somehow, although they seem completely oblivious to ancient paradoxes like unlimited personal freedom swiftly leads entire nations into slavery. They even elevate people like Thomas Paine (a militant socialist) and Ayn Rand (a militant atheist) who they clearly know nothing about.
Lots of acutely stupid people like to toss off the line that Fascism and Communism have the same roots. This is true, but not in the way they understand. They have the same roots in that they both sprang from 19th century Continental (European) philosophy, but then they went to opposite corners of the political spectrum. Fascism is Hegelian dialectics, Communism is Marxist dialectics. Both Marx and Hitler insisted that everything was broken and rotten, and they moved the public debate to the point that people were willing to abandon society itself. We saw Reagan create the GOP's obsession focus on anecdotes and trivia, and this has morphed into an entire industry (Fox) ginning up fake outrage with the Tea Party today.
Dialectics is a good way to generate propaganda or undermine democratic movements. Dialectics is the perfect tool to take a clear cut case of right and wrong and turn it into a helpless muddle or even a hellish brew of propaganda and deception. Every movement carries the seeds of corruption, every charity can be turned into a criminal enterprise - "The road up is also the road down."
Dialectics is alien to American culture. It never caught on in US or England, because when we hear "Slavery is Freedom," we know it is George Orwell, and we feel fear and revulsion. Under the GOP, dialectics seems to have finally gotten a foothold in the US. "Pollution" becomes "Blue sky initiatives." The "Constitution Party" advocates a theocracy.
The GOP's use of dialectics explains the foreign, alien, irrational feel of the GOP arguments. It is literally a culture alien to the United States, recycled 19th century Continental German Idealism and its bastard offspring Marxism. America's "can do" attitude is found in a strict believe in cause and effect, right and wrong, and a Logical Positivism that fosters a bold if slightly naive belief in going from A -> B -> C -> D.
The GOP also seems to making good use of Marx's idea of class struggle. Their base seems to be Marx's proletariat. And while the Tea Party bosses are certainly the inner circle of America's elites, their political gains have come in the states with the highest rates of of poverty. The stereotype of affluent "liberals" seems to be Marx's bourgeoisie, as do retirees.
Let's just go to Brittanica:
According to Marx, the bourgeoisie plays a heroic role in history by revolutionizing industry and modernizing society; (retirees) however, it also seeks to monopolize the benefits of modernization and exploit the property-less proletariat, (Tea Party) thereby creating revolutionary tensions. The end result will be a final revolution in which the property of the bourgeoisie is expropriated and class conflict, exploitation, and the state are abolished.
Of course it's all bull****, beause it's an excuse for someone to stir up the population and shift to totalitarianism.
You want to read more about dialectics and who believes this crap? You'll quickly find yourself reading Lyndon LaRouche, and the LaRouchies are the guys with the Obama=Hitler posters.
http://www.laroucheplanet.info/...
The loudest and craziest dialectics fans are highly visible in the Tea Party. Check out Lyndon LaRounche, and you'll hear many familiar Tea Party themes.
Oh, and they were also some of the guys with the "Biush Hitler" posters. So while the media cite "Obama=Hitler" and "Bush=Hitler" as opposite ends of the political spectrum, in some cases it's the same damn people playing dialectics, pretending that which is broken is whole, and claiming things that are intact are in the process of disintegration.