Political dialectics

Expulsions, suspensions and dogmatic approaches in politics are a sign of intellectual shallowness and failure to appreciate that divergence and political dialectic constitute the basis of progress and development.

There is a very strong temptation for politicians to assume very extreme and absolute positions as if they held the absolute truth.

Unlike religion there is no absolute truth in politics. If anything, successful politics is the result of dialectic, a careful and informed management of divergent thought and argumentation which ultimately relies on synthesizing contradictory positions to arrive at an acceptable formulation of what should pass and constitute truth and reality.

It is only in religion where faith and absolute dogma exist. Religion does not entertain argumentation, thought and compromise. It presents absolutes.

No politician is omniscient and omnipotent although some want to carry themselves as such, vested by the ever ephemeral powers of state. Infact politicians it has been argue are not saints therefore political discourse has no absolutes; it is designed to serve political causes which are no always for the common good.

That is why it is disturbing that some of our politicians present themselves as messiahs, indeed as the bearers of the absolute truth on whose every word our nation depends for survival.

These people take themselves too seriously for their own good.

As Mathew would say; they tie up heavy loads and put them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. They crush people with unbearable demands and never lift a finger to ease the burden.

Indeed when political view predominates it creates tyranny, dictatorship and intolerance. Every human institution survives on an internal tension of ideas.  Our modern political worldview is a kaleidoscope of political ideas and ideal which subsist in a tension that provides a framework from which trade, economics, social discourse and indeed progress will occur.

Politics as we have said before emanates and thrives on diversity, in the existence of a range of ideas, competing needs interests and opinions. Successful party politics must provide for the expression of the widest range of opinions, rival goals and sometimes entertainment of what might appear to be irreconcilable pursuits.

It is through the exchange of divergence that progress is achieved, that harmony based on reconciled differences is archived.

The alternative is totalitarianism. This is where one set of ideas is allowed to predominate. Invariably such predominance can only be maintained to by forceful adherence to a new norm.

Accepting difference is strength and not a weakness, whereas intolerance is a sign of shallowness and lack of understanding political dialectic.

Politics should not be about fear and retribution. It should be about mutuality, common interest and co-existence.

Shallow people do not understand the duality of politics, they can not understand that conflict and tension within an organizational is acceptable that divergence of view is the norm and that not all people will agree on a common approach.

Mature politicians thrive because they welcome divergence and are able to pick the greatest value from the wide range of opinions from which they craft a policy direction, a vision and common purpose.

Expulsions, suspensions are a sign of immaturity and shallowness.