Please allow me to add that this “dialectic” is logically bankrupt and fraudulent. The simple reason for my bold rebuke is this: there are many dimensions to the original “theses”, however guess who gets to choose the supposed “anti-theses”? The person wishing to put forward a particular synthesis. The failure is that no single “anti-theses” can have the mirror opposite dimensions of the “theses”. In short, the “anti-theses” cannot be honest, and neither is any resulting synthesis. It smacks of selection bias at the very least.
Except the synthesis is accepted precisely because it is seen as the moderating center. That center is temporary. It then shifts to the left or right depending on how the cultural and social norms play out in the larger body politic. There was a time when vulgar profanity and overt scenes of homosexuality were taboo on primetime television. Bedroom scenes were allowed so long as nudity was absent. That was the center, the Hegelian synthesis.
Today scenes of partial nudity and homosexuality are allowed. This again will change in time into more explicit forms of pornography until it is mainstreamed.
In short, the center is determined by what the “governed” think is the middle-ground. Compromise becomes virtue.