Marxism Destroyed the Dialectic

While we do have to credit Marx with some wisdom for being able to recognize the importance of the dialectic, there are unfortunately some serious errors in his interpretation of the concept. 

With the addition of materialism to the dialectic for example, Marx and friends essentially told us that the way that we think is determined by the structure of our society.  In other words, we will be selfish and greedy if we live in a capitalist society, and kind-hearted and benevolent if we live in a communist society. 

Believing that our minds are currently corrupted by capitalism, therefore, and that as soon as capitalism is destroyed we will all want to move into mutually supportive communes together, this has led to the unfortunate tendency within socialist/communist circles to focus on revolution rather than on designing better systems of governance and economics.

Marxist thought has also largely lost Hegel's concept of the synthesis, whereby a resolution between two opposing conditions is found through taking something good from each of the two opposing conditions and blending these good things together.  Instead of looking for a synthesis, Marx believed that communism would rise up and destroy capitalism.

Even with these serious flaws in the Marxist interpretation, Marxism has managed to maintain something of a monopoly over the concept of the dialectic, with the controversial nature of Marxist philosophy tending to inhibit exploration of the dialectic in non-Marxist contexts, either for the purpose of analyzing human history or in other areas.

Looking toward the future therefore, while remembering not to throw the lovely dialectic baby out with the bathwater, let us try to move beyond the Marxist interpretation of the dialectic. 

Aiming for a more appropriate understanding; taking a look back over our global society over the last few centuries, I suggest that we can recognize two principle dialectic tensions playing themselves out. 

The first is the tension between spirituality and materialism.  Beginning perhaps in the early1600's, we saw the dominance of religiosity being undermined by the rise of science and the Enlightenment.  In more recent times, with modern physics aiding our understanding, and with the increasing influence of Eastern spirituality on the West, a synthesis of spirituality and materialism can be seen to be emerging in the form of a nature-based spirituality.

The second of these dialectic tensions is between what I like to call separatism and collectivism.  Separatism tells us that we are essentially separate from one another; that we are self-interested and that interactions between us are ultimately competitive.  Collectivism on the other hand, tells us that we exist as a community, and that we are benevolent, loving and cooperative.  The conflict between capitalism and communism can of course be understood to have occurred within this context.

A more balanced worldview, a synthesis of separatism and collectivism, will tend to tell us that we are paradoxically both separate and connected; both individuals and a community, both self-interested and benevolent, both competitive and cooperative. Thanks again to modern physics and the influence of Eastern philosophy, and to the work of people like GWF Hegel, paradox of this kind is coming in current times to be recognized as central to the nature of nature.

We can see that following the long struggle between capitalism and communism, and with the subsequent decline of communism, that our economic institutions remain skewed toward competition and capitalism.  Strong forces have been emerging however, that are advocates of a more balanced approach.  As testimony to this, we can witness for example the emergence of the human rights, civil rights and peace movements, the advances of feminism and environmentalism, and the increasing democracy within our systems of government over the last century.