——-辩证法的本义

　　在当代的环境里，辩证法已不仅仅是一种哲学思维方法，它更多被用作政治修辞的工具。表面上，它倡导全面看问题、动态看问题，实则在实际操作中，常常被用来掩盖矛盾、转移责任、压制质疑。辩证法的“变形与滥用”，不仅让人失去了解决问题的勇气，更使社会陷入了一种无解的困境。

1. 辩证法的本来面目

　　辩证法起源于古希腊，经由黑格尔、马克思发展，强调事物的普遍联系、矛盾运动和发展的过程。马克思主义辩证法尤重实践，主张透过现象看到本质，正视矛盾，推动社会变革。

　　按理说，辩证法的精神是批判性的，批判性是一种主动分析、评估所见事件的方法,强调质疑、推理和独立判断，是要帮助人们直面矛盾、推动解决。然而，辩证法在中国的实际运用，背离了这一初衷。

2. 权力运作下的辩证法

　　在现实中，辩证法常被改造成一种权力维护的工具，成为防止问题暴露与阻止民间质疑的“防火墙”。具体表现为：

• 掩盖问题：用“矛盾普遍性”来合理化社会问题，否认问题的严重性和紧迫性。
• 转移矛盾：通过“主要矛盾转移”来模糊焦点，把公众注意力从当前问题引开。
• 压制批评：用“片面性”来指责批评者，要求“辩证看待”，实则打压质疑，维护现状。
• 逃避责任：强调“发展中的问题”，将现有错误包装为“必经阶段”，从而推卸责任。

　　这种变形后的辩证法，不再是为了解决矛盾，而是为了驯化利益受损一方的争辩权，转嫁矛盾，粉饰利益侵害方的特权。

3. 社会现实中的“辩证法”操作实例

（1）疫情管理：动态清零的辩证法

　　疫情期间，官方提出“动态清零”，号称是“科学与精准防控”的体现。但现实中，辩证法被用来包装各种不合理政策：

• 当封控政策导致民生困难时，解释为“局部矛盾”，主流是安全保障。
• 当有人质疑长时间封控的副作用时，反驳说要“看到疫情防控的全局利益”，不能“以偏概全”。
• 当清零政策与经济崩溃、民众情绪恶化形成矛盾时，强调“在变化中寻求最优解”，却始终不愿承认政策失误。

　　最终，辩证法成了防止反思、拒绝调整的工具。

（2）食品安全：问题的“辩证合理性”

　　在食品安全领域，类似逻辑也屡见不鲜：

• 当毒奶粉、毒疫苗、地沟油事件频发，官方往往强调“食品安全是世界性难题”，“绝对安全不存在”，用辩证法打掉人们对基本保障的诉求。
• 当食品监管失职被曝光，回应是“要辩证看待发展中国家的问题”，仿佛社会发展阶段就可以为失职免责。
• 即便在舆论汹涌的时刻，也经常听到“主流是好的，问题是局部的”，转移焦点，淡化问题。

　　本质上，辩证法被用来抹平民众的不满情绪，把本该追责和改革的机会，消弭在空洞的理论话术中。

（3）社会分配不公：改革的“螺旋上升”

　　面对收入差距拉大、资源分配不均、民生困境加剧，官方常说：“改革是螺旋式上升的，要允许出现阶段性问题。”于是，贫富差距、教育资源失衡、医疗不公等问题，被包装成“螺旋式的正常波动”，被辩证地合理化。一旦有人质疑这种现象，便被告诫要“看到整体发展成果”，似乎批评不公就是不爱国，不辩证。

4. 被阉割的辩证法，走向何方？

　　被权力机关掌控的辩证法，失去了它本该有的批判锋芒，失去了探究问题实质辩论基础，变成了掩耳盗铃、自欺欺人的自我安慰和空洞标榜。

• 从矛盾解决工具，变成了矛盾掩盖工具。
• 从推动社会进步，变成了维护既得利益。
• 从揭露问题的武器，变成了粉饰太平的修辞。

　　一旦辩证法失去问题意识和实践精神，它便蜕变成了保守和压抑的帮凶，使社会的问题长期得不到解决，恶性循环加剧。

5. 结语：唤醒真正的辩证思维

　　真正的辩证法，应该是质疑权威、揭示矛盾、推动变革的力量。它不是为强权粉饰太平的工具，而是为人民寻求真理和自由的武器。如果辩证法沦为自欺欺人的语言游戏，那么，社会将失去真正面对问题、改良自我的机会。

在今天，面对种种社会病灶，我们更需要的是：

• 坚持问题导向；
• 保持质疑精神；
• 不因复杂而逃避，不因压力而沉默；
• 用真正的辩证思维，拨开迷雾，寻找出路。

《辩证法在当代社会的变形对比表》：

Dialectic’s Metamorphosis and Abuse in Our Case

——-The Original Purpose of Dialectics

　　In the contemporary environment, dialectics is no longer just a philosophical method of thinking; it is more often used as a tool of political rhetoric. On the surface, it advocates a comprehensive and dynamic view of problems, but in practice, it is often used to cover up contradictions, shift responsibility, and suppress questions. The “deformation and abuse” of dialectics not only makes people lose the courage to solve problems but also plunges society into an insoluble dilemma.

1. The original face of dialectics

　　Dialectics originated in ancient Greece, developed by Hegel and Marx, emphasizing the universal connection of things, contradictory movements, and the process of development. Marxist dialectics emphasizes practice in particular, and advocates seeing the essence through the phenomenon, confronting contradictions, and promoting social change.

　　It is reasonable to say that the spirit of dialectics is critical, which is an active way of analyzing and evaluating events, emphasizing questioning, reasoning, and independent judgment, and helping people to face contradictions and promote solutions. However, the practical application of dialectics in China has deviated from this original intention.

2. Dialectics under the operation of power

　　In reality, dialectics is often transformed into a tool of power maintenance, becoming a “firewall” to prevent problems from being exposed and to stop people from questioning. Specifically manifested as:

Covering up the problem: using the “universality of contradiction” to rationalize social problems, denying the seriousness and urgency of the problem.

Diverting conflicts: Blurring the focus by “shifting the main contradiction” to divert the public’s attention away from the current problem.

Suppressing criticism: Blaming critics with “one-sidedness” and asking for a “dialectical view”, but suppressing doubts and defending the status quo.

Evasion of responsibility: Emphasizing “problems in development” and packaging existing mistakes as “necessary stages”, thus shirking responsibility.

　　This deformed dialectic is no longer for solving conflicts, but for domesticating the right to argue of the party whose interests have been damaged, shifting conflicts, and whitewashing the privileges of the party whose interests have been violated.

3. Examples of the operation of the dialectic in social reality

(1) Epidemic Management: The Dialectic of Dynamic Clearance

　　During the epidemic, the official government put forward the idea of “dynamic zeroing”, which was claimed to be the embodiment of “scientific and precise prevention and control”. In reality, however, the dialectic has been used to package a variety of irrational policies:

When the closure and control policy led to difficulties in people’s livelihood, it was explained as a “localized contradiction”, and the mainstream was safety and security.

When some people questioned the side effects of prolonged closure and control, it was countered that it was necessary to “see the overall interests of epidemic prevention and control” and not to “generalize the whole picture”.

When the zero-zero policy is in conflict with the economic collapse and the deterioration of public sentiments, the Government emphasizes the need to “seek the optimal solution in the midst of changes”, but is still unwilling to admit policy blunders.

　　In the end, dialectics became a tool to prevent reflection and refuse adjustment.

(2) Food safety: the “dialectical rationality” of the problem

　　In the field of food safety, similar logic is not uncommon:

When incidents of tainted milk powder, tainted vaccines, and gutter oil occur frequently, officials tend to emphasize that “food safety is a worldwide problem” and that “absolute safety does not exist”, and use dialectics to knock down people’s demands for basic protection.

When food regulatory failures are exposed, the response is “to look at the problems of developing countries in a dialectical manner”, as if the stage of development of a society can be exempted from responsibility for dereliction of duty.

Even amid a public outcry, it is not uncommon to hear the phrase “the mainstream is good, but the problems are localized”, which deflects the focus and downplays the problem.

　　In essence, the dialectic is used to erase the discontent of the masses, eliminating the opportunity for accountability and reform in empty theoretical discourse.

(3) Inequitable social distribution: the “spiral” of reforms

　　In the face of widening income disparity, uneven distribution of resources, and intensifying livelihood difficulties, officials often say, “Reform is a spiral, and we must allow for the emergence of phased problems.” As a result, problems such as the wealth gap, the imbalance in education resources, and healthcare inequality are packaged as “normal fluctuations in a spiral” and are dialectically rationalized. Once someone questions this phenomenon, he or she is admonished to “see the fruits of overall development,” as if criticizing injustice is unpatriotic and undialectical.

4. Where is the emasculated dialectic headed?

　　Controlled by the power organs, dialectics has lost the critical edge it should have, lost the basis for debating the essence of the problem, and turned into self-congratulation and empty boasts that cover up the ears and deceive others.

From a tool for conflict resolution, it has become a tool for conflict cover-up.

From a tool for promoting social progress, it has become a tool for safeguarding vested interests.

From a weapon to expose the problem, into a rhetoric of whitewash.

　　Once the dialectic loses the sense of problem and the spirit of practice, it becomes an accomplice to conservatism and repression, leaving the problems of society unresolved for a long time and intensifying the vicious circle.

5. Conclusion: awakening true dialectical thinking

　　A true dialectic should be a force that questions authority, reveals contradictions, and promotes change. It is not a tool to whitewash for the powerful, but a weapon to seek truth and freedom for the people. If dialectics is reduced to a language game of self-deception, then society will lose the opportunity to truly face the problems and improve itself.

Today, in the face of all kinds of social foci, what we need more is:

Adhere to the problem orientation;

Maintain the spirit of questioning;

Not to escape due to complexity, not to be silent due to pressure;

Use true dialectical thinking to clear the fog and find a way out.

A Comparative Table of the Metamorphoses of Dialectics in Contemporary Society:

Category	Due function	After abuse
Dialectical essence	Confronting contradictions	Covering up contradictions
Realism	questioning authority	whitewashing
Supposed function	Promoting progress	Preserving the status quo
Actual results	Solving problems	Suppressing reflection