Human society has always NEEDED social classes to validate its members' self-consciousness. Which means, there can be no Ruling Class without a compliant class for it to rule over. Similarly, the recently-evolved Middle Class cannot exist without the Lower Class below it and the Ruling Class above. There is no 'rich' without the 'poor' - and the label 'Third World' has no meaning till someone defines the 'First World'.
It's called relativism. And it's about how we humans need 'frames of reference' to comprehend most concepts.
If the frames don't exist, they have to be created! For example, after 10-12 years of schooling, it becomes easier for us to comprehend (or is it, accept) our own place in society. (Within this new 'frame of reference', isn't it easier to see why parents scramble to get children into the "right" schools?)
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) is considered to be among the most important European philosophers, and this video explains one of his most influential concepts: the Hegelian Master-Slave Dialectic.
I disagree with the 'revolution' conclusion of the cycle... I think that the Ruling Class is trying hard this time to play the Lower Class against the Middle Class. (Perhaps because a well-defined Middle Class did not exist during Hegel's time.)
Whether the current 'notional' money system of the world implodes suddenly, or deflates slowly - the Middle Class will suffer the biggest drop in living standards. The Ruling Class will continue to live well off the accumulated (savings) assests of the Middle Class - as they has so far lived off the exploitation (cheap labour) of Lower Class.
I no longer understand. - I am fast coming to the conclusion that I no-longer share a language with many of the people around me. In fact, in many meetings I take a sheet of paper (...
18 hours ago