# It Progresses
Yes, the dialectic progresses. It progresses both in that we are continuously discovering the ways in which the dialectic is necessary to synthesize some new evolution for an idea for which we have discovered its sublation via negation/antitheses, and also through any discovery for formulation of a dialectic being itself something which moves history. Interesting to note that I myself have been regarded, if even only by myself, as a synthesizer, but that this was not thought of being as done through an antithesis.

Synthesizing seems to be a natural predisposition or propensity. Is it a path of least resistance? An Escape? It can sometimes be seen as a failure of a discipline with a failure to operate within the ranges of an imposed structure. This might very well be true, but I don't believe this is necessarily the only motivation.

An observer might remark that the structure is not being adhered to, but perhaps they fail to see that there is, indeed, a structure and that the hybrid being sought is out of a need to find that specific formulation for the characteristics or behaviours it yields.

# Pop Culture (is a sham)
It is through pop culture that even the most toxic ideas rae presented as the most common and accepted one. And though it is presented as the most popular idea, or way of thinking, the mind accepts it as though it were the most refined idea, worthy of being a piece of our shared identity. Something not only verfiied and synthesized by the specialists, but now even having been taken up by the cultural icons who exist as a special category themselves.

# Groomer Culture
And it keeps doing so with highly conclusive views. Look at how it presents teh most contentious aspects of educating children? It takes thos easpects and only presents them int he light in which there could be the least conflict, completely side-stepping the substance of disagreement and keeping its jaggedness embedded deep in teh matter - unable to be properly discussed, and continuously resonating confusion, dissonance, and distrust. The only side which enjoys promotion and assistance is that which destroys autonomy, and replaces the meaning of the very word with dependence.

Don't say Gay? Could the campaign have done any better to possibly misrepresent the issue? "We did look, and then asked experts". Experts, as in, activists. And only those who bury the voices of the real people. If one truly eblieves taht those concerned with Queer Pedagogy in curricula of young children act on this to champion  strategy of preventing children from knowing what homsoexuality is, then they must be one of:
- a) Naive, older generation
- b) Dishonest
- c) Incompetentence

The debasement of children is a step towards priming a revolutionary movement. Horkheimer and Marcuse were very clear about this, claiming that we haven't the means to recognize the dire state of affairs thus we must induce its recognition by all

But then there is the other, more recent attempt to induce collectivism at even the biological level. Yes, the jabs.

It was telling to hear the normies anticipate the vaccines. There were subvariants of focuses, each implying their rationale
- expected to do it/feed the crocodile because they were afraid
- doing it to facilitate being with loved ones
- doing it to protect some loved one
- doing so for the moral implement it bestows on one (by society)
- doing it to increase the rate of change

And no thi is even told to be concerned