Evolution of Political Ideology and its Hegemony

Human beings are born free yet they need to be progressive rather focused on the articulated features of a particular ideology, however, stick to the features may be the core principle of an ideology.

Robinson who lived in the far western civilization and spent his whole life on the far left of the hegemonic political ideology one day meets with Mariya from Asian who spent her life in the adventurous realm. Both of them meet when Mariya visit a well know Food Street where Robinson lives for so long. Both meet in a coffee shop unexpectedly by the means of adventure features. Robinson asks “Mariya, I think you are on an adventure, right?” “Mariaya; yeah but how do you know” “it’s obvious that a person having adventures tools means He/She is on a journey, Robison replied” “Mariaya; looks back to her bag and replies ohh of course, I thought so”

Robinson asks her for joining, can I set here, for sure, marayia replies.

How was your day, Robinson asks Marayia, yet she replies, Not that bad, everything evaluates with time.

Robinson asks about her interests, the way I see you, your interest might be Politics.

Yeah it is but I had never been into a particular ideology, Marayia replies.

He asks, how you see political ideology I would love to listen you.

Marayia says that my coffee is finished; if you want to join me on walk we can discuss this on the way.

Robinson agrees and asks her that “I know a very natural track it’s next to this street, well if you want to walk there, I asked because being adventures I think you might love it”

Yeah fine, I think that’s kinda a cool let’s move if you are done with your coffee as well.

“Alright, let me pay the bill, could you please spare a sec, Robinson replies”

Both talk to each other as they enter the Green track, Marayia come up with a kind of natural evolution, saying that everything evaluates in time yet political ideologies has the same way of evolution which changes in time.

Yet I see an ideology an articulated system or set of principle around which people of a particular cluster are built and activated, though I have been through that a social system to organize and educate people, motivating them to believe certain slogans and adopt certain attitudes and develop unique world views, maybe an ideology. As such, ideology tends to influence the direction and pace of sociopolitical change and development in society. And since cultures represent the glue that holds societies together, ideology has become the core of cultures.   

Yeah Marayia if I look into the scenery you described I may say that it’s a core principle and particular culture yet we may realize this that each culture is glue which holds society together.   

Well that’s quite peculiar about each ideology that it evolves with time, however, this evolution influence everything as revolutions since 500 years did, we may see that during these five centuries did something to the civilization somehow in the wrong direction. Yet, humans aren’t at the stage that it was in the wrong direction.

But progress cannot be made without new ideas and institutions, ideological precepts hinder rather than facilitate sociopolitical and sociocultural progress, Mr. Robinson asks amazingly.

I am not saying that I don’t believe in ideology but i don’t believe in any particular ideology, Mariaya reply back softly with a gentle sound.

Well to be frank its kind a confusing, and then what’s you approach towards an ideology? Miss Mariaya.

I believe that when a strong ideology prevails, change can only follow ideological principles and pursue prescribed goals that make change an ideological tool, not a process of social or economic, or political transformation. In such situations conflict is resolved by either restoring the old balance of relationships, in which, the circumstances had undermined or arresting the forces of change that caused the conflict to arise in the first place; ideologies do not usually accept compromise solutions.

Yet everything is normal but the only thing which isn’t “is humanity” humanity dies at a certain point during this phases we are the ones who are responsible for this demolishing, hence it has been proved that “human are born free but enemies”.

Ahh! I see, that’s quite interesting Miss Mariaya, but isn’t that so it lay in the circumstances of interest based on conflicts and though value based, however, both are different so as their influence.

Great take on, well, I will give you a simple example, on this track you can see those trees on the opposite side, right, look into those trees the one is well grown and another is not fully grown yet evolution is a reminder before the disaster as you can see the nest up there in the grown tree but yet time will show that they must flee this tree and adjust somewhere else. Let me clear it more, when the next tree evaluates the another one will be influenced however the influence might be a self-interest of the nature or self-values based change but before that, each of them must accept one day is coming in which they will face some great hazards. Nevertheless, many will not accept but change is necessary with another change without that, progress is not possible as you mentioned earlier.

the same is in the matter of fact that history since five centuries where ideological dominated societies were shaped by war and violence, regardless of time and place.

Mr. Robinson looks strangely towards Mariaya that makes sense, but yet I believe that man is free and individual in nature which must be constrained by some another means which may be considered an ideology of a particular place and time, however, some ideology may give freedom to men but some may not which influence each other and arise a well desired conflict by the means of man nature’s.

It may be seem an insane way of realization but we must realize that the whole world was democratic but at certain point evolution of a particular ideology turn the table over story.

If we rewind the 500 years, back in each century, we will find that since human civilization man is in the progress of something which back in 16C and 17C was religious approach and then the integrated philosophy of each religious factor proved that yet religion also evaluates with time but some consider it morally right and some wrong. However, it’s a theological perspective but in political scenarios we may see Nationalism as same as to religion. One subdues their self-interest in particular vision either for the sake of God or Nation. In political ideologies nationalism is an ideology which explains a particular country with particular culture, interest of nation and value of state. However, with time being this evaluated and we may see after centuries during the race of civilization the “Word; Patriotism” which almost worked on the vision of EMANCIPATION, nonetheless, idea exert force.

So if I am not wrong, you may be seemed, that an ideology, being rigid and dogmatic, is incapable of practicing the art of politics. And since we live in a dynamic world where reality is changing every day in front of our eyes, thinking in purely abstract terms causes politics to lose touch with reality; a position it can only maintain at the expense of openness, freedom, and increased contact with the world, Mr. Robinson replies. 

 Of course, in fact, all social systems, regardless of their ideological nature and sociopolitical objectives, are creatures of social processes that are themselves products and forces of change. Along with this however, every social system has a life of its own that can be short, long, stagnant, dynamic, dull, or interesting, but never perpetual, Miss. Maraiya improvise his statement and deliberately conveys the message.

My final statement might seem so unclear but yet I have been invited somewhere else so we can exchange our contacts to discuss this further, however, when it comes to evolution I believe that what are the contents of the overarching culture? By tracing in broad outline the evolution of art, science, religion, philosophy, and social thought during the last 500 years, I hope to show that during this span the peoples of the West offered the world a set of ideas and institutions not found earlier or elsewhere. As already remarked, it has been a unity combined with enormous diversity. Borrowing widely from other lands, thriving on dissent and originality, the West has been the mongrel civilization par excellence. But in spite of patchwork and conflict it has pursued characteristic purposes—that is its unity—and now these purposes, carried out to their utmost possibility, are bringing about its demise. This ending is shown by the deadlocks of our time: for and against nationalism, for and against individualism, for and against the high arts, for and against strict morals and religious belief, Mr. with the last statement appealed to lets end the session for today if possible.

Yeah, I think it doesn’t needed to be more cleared but yet if you insist we can of course exchange our contacts, but I would say that this universal independence, achieved after many battles, is a distinctive feature of the West. EMANCIPATION is one of the cultural themes of the era, perhaps the most characteristic of all. And of course it requires more and more limitations in order to prevent my right from infringing yours.

Our five centuries present some ten or twelve such themes. They are not historical “forces” or “causes,” but names for the desires, attitudes, purposes behind the events or movements, some embodied in lasting institutions. Pointing out this thematic unity and continuity is not to propose a new philosophy of history in the tradition of Marx, Spengler, or Toynbee. They saw history as moved by a single force toward a single goal. I remain an historian, that is, a storyteller who tries to unfold the intricate plot woven by the actions of men, women, and teenagers (these last must not be forgotten), whose desires are the motive power of history. Material conditions interfere, results are unexpected, and there can be no single outcome.

Both of them finally say Good bye to each other and exchange their contacts so that if in future there might be in any interaction which would be a great meeting once again.

However, what I learned was that social and culture change may lead man to progressive and adaptive way meanwhile intellectual and philosophical developments must be consider before any change. Nevertheless, Power Dynamics and Political institution are the main pawns in this game but adaptation of hybridized and synthesis ideology can react with the counter movements and dominate on another one which may led a free man to misuse of power and its hegemony. In some case evolution of political ideology is seem to be peaceful but in another it may seem to be tragic and worse than ever likewise the dominance of war and violence can lead to a disturbed life. Yet I realized that Evolution is the time spin where injustice is unjustified, however, we may accept that a particular evaluated belief is not oppression to another but it’s a change which may takes time but we must adjust to the new time spin.

In this reflective conversation between two strangers from different civilizations, the story examines how political ideologies evolve, dominate societies, and impact human freedom. Mariya challenges Robinson’s perspective on rigid ideologies, emphasizing that social and cultural changes must precede true progress. As they walk through nature, their philosophical exchange mirrors humanity’s own complex journey through centuries of political thought, power dynamics, and cultural transformation. This narrative explores whether ideologies are tools of freedom or subtle chains limiting human growth.

5

This philosophical narrative follows Robinson, a westerner rooted in political ideology, and Mariya, an Asian adventurer, as they engage in a deep conversation about political systems, cultural evolution, and ideological change. Meeting by chance in a coffee shop, their discussion unfolds along a forest trail, where they explore how ideologies shape societies over centuries, sometimes acting as forces of unity, and at other times as barriers to progress. Through their dialogue, the story highlights that while humans are born free, they often become trapped within ideological structures that evolve yet continue to influence power, culture, and humanity itself.