Dialecticts

A man was set on the chair at middle room, he turns around and looked some book on the table, he got up and red titles: Change, then he took this book and opened it, and he was very interested; a woman set on other chair in front of man, and she asked: “What do you are reading?”, and he without astonishment for this new presence, answered: “Do you know how much I was waiting you?” and woman: “No and I don’t give damn”, and man with a smile: “In conformity with rules  of politeness a man must wait woman! I made it”, a woman: “In fact I am here now, but what do you are reading?”, and man showed title on the spine and woman: “Well but lacks my name”, and man: “What’s your name?” and woman: “Dialectics”, and man: “What is inherence between you and change?”, and woman: “Change is possible with dialectics alone!”, and man: “Why?”, and woman: “Because the dialectics is fight and contrast and in conformity with opinion of Hegel, the war is between two principles, and fight and contrast are two essential motives for change!”, and man, much interested to this philosophical argument, asked: “Some examples, please”, and woman: “Two political revolutions, the first French and second American; with first in France has born democracy with people decides trough election day” and man: “Yes but was took power Napoleon he become like king, and…”, and woman: “Well, you said, like; therefore Napoleone not was king never, and in Italy he leaded democracy”, and man: “He conquered alone Italy, although he created republics, that formally were republics, but alone formally”, and woman: “Yes certainly, but this change was present, and popes and kings were dethroned”, and man: ”Yes but nobility class rested”, and woman: “Yes, because it was present centuries before Napoleon, and it changed very much during Napoleon time; in fact much nobilities men were with Napoleon, and this is change”, and man: “Yes, but they become Napoleonic for interest and no certainly because they convinced by Napoleon ideals”, and woman: “Certainly, but I want consider that change was, and this change was motive after in Europe for other changes”, and man: “The king in France turned with name of Louis 18^th, therefore where is this change?”, and woman: “Time after when Louis 19^th was king of France for twenty minutes, and he was son of Charles X last king, and he abdicated during revolution at 1830 in France, and after Henry 5^th, that not was king never”, and man: “Yes, but Louis Philipp I was king!”, and woman: “Yes but with other principles, in fact he was called by people as Philippe Equality, or Égalités fils; in fact he given constitution to France people that was approved by two chambers; in fact in conformity with opinion of Adolphe Thiers: “He reigns but doesn’t governs”; he was very much democratic because also Parliament could to decreed laws; therefore was present very much change, and these are possible alone for dialectics fight and revolution, therefore where is dialectics are changes, also radical changes”. And man: “Yes and in USA what were changes?”, and woman: “In USA very little, because revolution USA was independence war, and monarchies or king or political systems with centuries historical not were, therefore revolution was and very little change; we can certainly to say that dialectics was to changes by original model, this is from European monarchy, that in USA never was present, and therefore USA didn’t fight against somebody for take liberty, because rights were present always; but change was through difference from European political, then changes were, but dramatic less than France, because dialectics is also change without blood, but change is always present”.

Alessandro Lusana