According to the Hegelian theory, (surprise surprise, I happen to be a 'Right Hegelian') history progresses in triads.
Hegel attributed the terminology to Kant, and rarely used it himself, (there's even some dispute over whether the Triad model can be called "Hegelian")
The first part of the triad is the Thesis of the idea in its interaction with the world.
That is to say; the ideas that start to change the world, or as Wikipedia says: "an intellectual proposition".
For Hegel, these ideas were able to be seen clearly in history as the axis that turned the world in that time whether for better or for worse.
For America, our thesis was Democracy, and contrary to Alt-Right signaling its not an idea that I disagree with.
The idea was so simple and so very aligned with honest virtue that no sane man could object to it.
"All men were created equal".
Aside from the straw men of this statement (see RamzPaul's speech on the subject at AmRen)
There's an honest thesis here, the worst Englishman should not be treated any better than the best Yankee.
A person who is blind might be wiser than a man who can see, insofar that the two are human, they are equal.
This was the thesis, and it found its antithesis in the 1960s.
The Antithesis is the evidence of the internal contradiction of the previously mentioned idea. It is when an idea goes so far as to negate the original intention of itself for example, that a "thesis" (e.g. the French Revolution) would cause the creation of its "antithesis" (e.g. the Reign of Terror that followed), similarly the demand for liberty and rights in our past has led to our rights today being stripped.
From freedom, to Nanny state and everything in between.
In the 1960s I argue, the second stage of Democracy came to be, it mutated from the equality of man, to the equality of man and his vices.
Now it was no longer enough for honest men to be considered equal, but for the dishonest as well.
Their ideas, their lifestyles, their absurd ideas about gender dimorphism. Everything had to be equal, because obviously the only way to appreciate something different than you is to consider it to be the exact same thing as yourself.
It sounds insane yes, but that is how your average feminist thinks, if women are not viewed as if they are the exact same thing as men, obviously they are being seen as less than men!
And if the roles we assign to POCs are not the same as the roles in society we assign to whites then obviously it is we who are misunderstanding the facts of the matter and not the egalitarians.
In their eyes, any such distinction is "discrimination" which is now an evil word in a language that still considers it synonymous with "discernment" - which is historically a fruit of wisdom.
And now today in the 21st century we have reached the final stage in this triad. We have reached the Synthesis of the idea.
The Synthesis is the contradiction within the idea causing its collapse.
The idea is dissolved, and a new theses taken up.
An important question to ask from the perspective of an American is: can we survive the Synthesis?
The Synthesis will come, but nations do not always survive this final stage.
America was founded upon democracy, it is the cornerstone of our country, it has made us the greatest country on earth and now it is tearing us apart.
I'm reminded of a quote from the physicist David Bohm, who said:
"What is the source of all this trouble? I'm saying that the source is basically in thought. Many people would think that such a statement is crazy, because thought is the one thing we have with which to solve our problems. That's part of our tradition. Yet it looks as if the thing we use to solve our problems with is the source of our problems. It's like going to the doctor and having him make you ill."
Is this not America's situation, not with thought, but with democracy?
I am sadly pessimistic about our future.