We’re all familiar with the Hegelian dialectic: create a crisis (or wait for one to happen), then swoop in with a “solution” that conveniently serves the interests of those offering the resolution. This approach seems to align closely with the agenda of Harvey’s group.
What does "save humanity" really mean? I've yet to hear a clear definition or concrete examples of what that would actually look like. Does it simply refer to regime change, or does it imply something more profound—such as humanity being freed from all forms of evil on Earth? If it's the latter, then saving humanity would entail universal access to free energy, the abolition of debt slavery, individual ownership of a nation's resources, liberation from oppressive governments, autonomy and self-determination for all, the opportunity for self-actualization, and the dismantling of the ruling class. In essence, it would mean true freedom for everyone.
Without knowing what their "resolution" looks like, I don't see a reason to trust Harvey's group.
'We’re all familiar with the Hegelian dialectic:"
We are????
@Shiningbrow
It's just "God's" way of saying "Do you even google bro?" :D
The Hegelian dialectic is a method of argument and interpretation that uses a contradictory process between opposing ideas to reach a higher level of truth. The method was developed by 19th century German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel.
Here are some key aspects of the Hegelian dialectic:
Opposing sides
The opposing sides in Hegel's dialectic depend on the subject matter being discussed. For example, in his work on logic, the opposing sides are different definitions of logical concepts.
Contradictory process
The contradictory process between opposing sides leads to a linear evolution of ideas from less sophisticated to more sophisticated.
Reconciling contradiction
The mutual contradiction between opposing ideas is reconciled on a higher level of truth by a third proposition, called the synthesis.
Establishing connections
Hegel's dialectic establishes logical connections between the categories that make up experience.
Human history
Hegel believed that human history is a series of constant philosophical conflicts that can only be resolved through ideological conflict and resolution.
@god
Although your statement about the Hegelian Dialectic doesn't seem to be the right idea as it's more of a problem reaction solution basis. In the dialectic you have two opposing sides arguing it out till they come to an agreement, but in reality the majority are dumb sheep and have no clue they're being played so they don't know they're an unwitting participant in this game.
Problem-reaction-solution (PRS) is a theory that the social elite use to manipulate public opinion and gain approval for societal controls. The theory is also known as "order out of chaos".
According to Icke, the theory involves three phases:
Engineer a problem: Dominant groups or individuals exploit a problem to justify new laws, rules, or restrictions.
Amplify the issue: The media broadcasts and popularizes the issue to gain public attention.
Create a social demand: The public's attention to the issue creates a demand for action, which leads to acceptance of a predetermined solution.
Icke claims that PRS legitimizes centralized power, increases hegemonic authority, and instigates social change. Many conspiracy theorists view PRS as a propaganda technique and a form of mind manipulation.
@Jon Smith
Rest-Assured, I can guarantee you that he already knows what a Hegelian-Dialectic is and means and entails (probably), but, the «hidden-context» here is that he is using the «We are????» not-so-much in the «we» as in we the ones who bother to do our research & home-work type of we ourselves, but, more as a kind of facetious tongue-in-cheek (metaphorically) manner for the human-species as a general-whole...
@Aeius
It would still be the wrong term though whether it includes us or them or both. That would imply two sides in conflict but in all fairness the only ones in conflict are the ones in power with the rest of us then they divide the rest of the populace to fight amongst itself through a divide and conquer strategy.