‘That is bad, and thus this is good. That is wrong and thus this is right. It is the only solution.’ Also, visa versa.
And what about the countless other things that could exist independent from those two, but they don’t, while somebody gets fixated between two opposing poles and their ramifications?
I could mention nearly countless examples of such logic, and how people get entangled within it, like they were objects between the two opposing poles of a magnet. The right and left political wings and their ramifications, feminism and phallocratism, theism and atheism…
And if you just discarded ideas taken from those two poles, you might find yourself being free from such fixations. And that would be a terrible thing. Freedom is terrible, because it starts with nothing (but anything can be created).
You could then create your own ideas, starting from nothing, being influenced by nothing but yourself.
But we couldn’t possibly narrow down people’s thoughts and control them like that.
They know how to do it. They don’t ask you to support an idea. They ask you to fight an idea, and thus support the exact opposite, and limit your potential to think for yourself. Conflict makes things sticky. It creates fanatics. It limits imagination to thinking of just those two opposing things.
You can keep fluidity, instead of fixation, by not opposing what you don’t want, by not doing anything against it. Just create what you yourself want, instead. Don’t create something so you wont have something else, either. Let your motive be what you want, and not what you don’t want.
If we want a nice, beautiful world, we wont have it by fighting against what we don’t want. We can only have ruins like that. Nor do we have the right to limit the right of the other to create what he wants for himself. And those who attempt it, limit themselves, so they wont be able to limit others. That is the trap of the opposing poles.
We could create understanding between people though, but that wouldn’t be fighting. And that wouldn’t mean that they would agree from now on, either. It would be that they could let each other and things be. They all have the right to be.
And the power of dictators (literal or figurative) to dominate others, stems from others trying to limit each other, winding up limiting themselves. They call him, and he does what he is called for –he limits them. Political freedom and tolerance are not irrelevant at all.