At least Hegel saw the importance of the USA in his statement that, “America is the state of the future.”

I have been thinking about Kant and the later attempts to fix the perceived short-comings in his system, but I can not seem to get beyond two arch rivals that each one had some good points. It seems very confusing to me. Hegel and Fries had the same points that Reinhold and Fichte saw --you need to start from somewhere. Though it was Leonard Nelson that made that point rigorous. Yet, Hegel had some important points also; and ever since I encountered this debate on both sides, I have neve been able to get beyond it. I tend towards Leonard Nelson [Neo-Friesian] and the exposition of his ideas on the blog of Kelley Ross. But I still can not get beyond the point that Hegel also had some important ideas- that even Kelley Ross brings in his Ph.D. thesis. The question that is most important (on Fries and Hegel) is not the results of their ideas, but the core. And in each one of these thinkers, I find great value in the core, but I cannot get beyond the problems. Maybe just one is right, maybe two, maybe all three have some valuable ideas, or maybe all three are downright wrong? I guess, I have to admit my intellectual shortcomings (which are very great), and get back to learning Gemara (Talmud and Rav Shach). But when I get back from the sea and am totally exhausted, I have no more energy to learn Talmud or Physics or Math. I just have to wind down until I can sleep,------But then I start wondering: "Why did they all think that Rousseau was great?" Kant had the portrait of Rousseau hanging in his room?!!!, and Hegel was an early admirer until the devastation and guillotines of the French revolution got him to re-think his earlier position. At least Hegel saw the importance of the USA in his statement that, “America is the state of the future.” [Hegel saw that the subject and object are not two different things. They are two sides of the same coin.] Read Hegel with an awareness of the Greek idea of identity of opposites, and Plato’s permanent forms, and Aristotle’s, bringing the forms into the here and now -the individual substance, and Schelling's ideas of knowledge, and unite all these disparate ideas into a unity a seamless quilt. Then you can get an idea of what Hegel was getting at.