Exploring the Ideological Divide: Democracy and Communism through Dialectical Philosophy

-

Human history has been shaped by the ebb and flow of ideas, and perhaps nothing exemplifies this more than the ideological chasm between Communism and Democracy. From the dawn of civilization, societies have evolved through various stages – from Feudalism to Capitalism – all while grappling with the quest for governance and order. These pursuits have often led to conflicts and wars, and the most prominent instance in the recent past was the Cold War, a clash of Democratic-Capitalism and Communism.

To gain deeper insights into this ideological schism, let's turn our attention to Dialectical Philosophy, a framework that illuminates the dynamics of change and interaction.

The Essence of Dialectical Philosophy

"Dialectic is a process of interacting between two or more things each of which is causally influencing the other in such a way that each develops through such interaction. That is, each while retaining its own integrity, changes not only as a consequence of being influenced by the other but also as a consequence of its own influences on the other that in turn influence it." - Archie Bahm, "Epistemology".

This dialectical process is not confined to abstract philosophy; it operates within natural organisms, phenomena, and social entities. Humanity, as a natural organism endowed with reasoning capabilities, has constructed intricate social organizations through the process of inferential thinking. This unique mode of thinking involves apprehension, judgment, and reasoning, ultimately leading to inference, argument, and dialogue. This cognitive ability, is universal across cultures, transcending geographical and historical divides. Without inferential thinking, characterized by dialogue and argumentation, human progress and the accumulation of new knowledge would stagnate.

Interestingly, dialectical thinking was hindered in societies steeped in faith and superstition. The ancient Greeks, with luminaries like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, marked a turning point by embracing dialectical reasoning, which blossomed into scientific thinking and modernity. They replaced explanations rooted in divine intervention with those based on empirical evidence.

Diagram taken from William Ferea's History and Ideas lecture notes in 2004, University of PNG
 

Human Ideas: Foundations of Complex Civilizations

Human ideas have acted as the bedrock for building intricate civilizations. The Hegelian-Marxist Dialectics of Harmonization posits that within these civilizations lie dialectical processes that foster inevitable change. When ideas are introduced, the dialectical phenomenon unfolds as fallible human minds produce them. The clash of old and new ideas engenders evolution.

This dialectical premise serves as the foundation for explaining the great ideological divide. Consider the iconic example of Democracy versus Communism, the cornerstone of Western philosophical thought. Democracy stands as the thesis, while Communism opposes as the antithesis. The Cold War, despite its limited physical violence, propelled change, culminating in the synthesis of Capitalism.

Exploring Democracy: From Ancient Athens to Liberalism

Democracy, as an ideology, traces its roots back to ancient times, specifically to the city-state of Athens where direct democracy allowed citizens to represent themselves in the People's Assembly. This form, prevalent from around 500 BC to 330 BC, excluded women, slaves, non-residents, and children from citizenship. Modern Democracy, however, emphasizes government by the entire population through elected representatives, constituting Representative Democracy.

Central to Democracy is the doctrine of Separation of Powers, pivotal in liberal democratic systems. This doctrine splits governance into executive, legislative, and judicial branches, preventing despotism. Furthermore, decentralization, an offshoot of this doctrine, empowers provincial and local governments, safeguarding against tyranny.

Democracy and its associated values also align with Liberalism, which champions individual rights and freedom of choice. Emerging from the Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution, and political revolutions, Liberalism advocates limited government intervention and emphasizes progress, reform, and individual liberty.

Industrial Capitalism: Changing the Socioeconomic Landscape

The Industrial Revolution ushered in profound societal changes, shifting the focus from agrarian to urban and transforming manufacturing through machinery and artificial power sources. Factories emerged, reshaping the economy and the workforce. The production process evolved from individual artisans to centralized factories, altering labor dynamics. The market economy emerged, driven by free markets and supply-demand principles. However, monopolies and government regulations tempered the idea of a truly free market.

Communism: A Reaction to Capitalist Exploitation

Communism, epitomized by Marx's theories, reacted to the exploitation inherent in Capitalism, particularly the bourgeoisie's enrichment at the expense of the proletariat. Marx's "Communist Manifesto" (1848) envisioned a society without classes, advocating state ownership of means of production to achieve wealth equality. Marx's doctrines underwent modification by Lenin, who orchestrated the Russian Revolution and introduced a single-party dictatorship.

Conclusion: A Divergent Journey

In the great ideological divide, Democracy and Communism stand as distinct poles. Democracy's evolution spans from ancient Athens to modern representative systems, embodying values of liberty and separation of powers. Capitalism, intertwined with Democracy, fueled the Industrial Revolution and led to the dominance of the bourgeoisie.

In contrast, Communism emerged as a reaction to Capitalist exploitation, aiming to dismantle class hierarchies through state control. Marx's theories were manifested in Lenin's Russia, leading to the establishment of a single-party Communist system.

These ideologies, rooted in dialectical thinking, continue to shape our world. The clash of these philosophies encapsulates the complexity of human history and the enduring pursuit of systems that provide governance, equality, and progress.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FPA: Organizational Process Model

-
This model centers on the fact that different bureaucracies have different standard operating procedures. These procedures are made in order to allow day to day operations to be carried out. Thus, a foreign policy decision is made based on these standard operating procedures. It is hard for a bureaucracy to make a decision or let alone function out of character or contrary to their standard operating procedure. The reading Chapter 4: Foreign policy shares a straight forward explanation of the OPM: "An alternative to the rational model of decision making is the organizational process model. In this model, foreign policy decision makers generally skip the labor-intensive process of identifying goals and alternative actions, relying instead for most decisions on standardized responses or standard operating procedures. For example, the U.S. State Department everyday receives more than a thousand reports or inquiries from its embassies around the world and sends out more than a
Read more

Commercial liberalism and the six norms

-
Image
Liberal internationalism is defined by Griffiths, O'Callaghan and Roach (2008, p.190) as a project to transform international relations so that they conform to models of peace, freedom, and prosperity allegedly enjoyed within constitutional liberal democracies. The same scholars go further by dividing liberalism into three distinct groups. They say these are the three ways to implement the project. The way they present liberal internationalism as a project makes their work interesting. Three distinct groups Firstly, commercial liberalism is about free trade between states. States bilaterally or multilaterally via a platform like APEC pursue the goal of trade liberalization. Griffiths, O'Callagahan and Roach (ibid.) argued that economic interdependence would decrease the likelihood of going to war. Republican liberalism is about democratic peace. The scholars argued that the spread of democracy among states so that governments will be accountable to their citizens makes it di
Read more

Rise and fall realism

-
Image
By Colin Elman and Michael A. Jensen Source: Williams, P. D. (Ed.). (2008). Security studies: an introduction . London: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group. What is rise and fall realism? Rise and fall realism remerge as a powerful alternative to the balance of power theories that predominated international relations scholarship during the 1950’s. Central theme Hegemony is the foundation for peace while balance is often associated with war (Organski). Dynamics Rise and fall realism emphasizes that war between major powers is least likely when the international system is dominated by a single state and when there are no rising challengers vying for system leadership. Given its privileged position, a dominant state is capable of shaping the rules and practices of the international system in such a way as to satisfy its selfish interest. Stability is a product of this hegemonic order, as states which are dissatisfied with the status quo lack the capabilities to change it.
Read more