Contradiction Theory（2）

The Unity and Struggle of Contradictory Aspects

After understanding the universality and specificity of contradictions, we must further study the unity and struggle of their various aspects.

Terms such as unity, uniformity, consistency, mutual infiltration, interconnection, interdependence, and cooperation all convey a similar idea, illustrating two situations: first, in the developmental process of things, each aspect of a contradiction exists in relation to its opposite aspect, and both coexist in a unified whole; second, during certain conditions, opposing aspects can transform into one another. This is what is referred to as unity.

Lenin stated, “Dialectics is such a doctrine that studies how opposites can be identical, how they can become identical, under what conditions they transform into each other, and why one should not regard these opposites as dead, crystallized entities, but rather as living, conditional, changeable, and mutually transformative entities.”

What does this mean?

In all processes, the opposing aspects of contradictions inherently repel and struggle against each other. Every process in the world and every thought contains such contradictory aspects, without exception. A simple process may involve only one pair of contradictions, while a complex process may involve more than one pair. Each pair of contradictions can also contradict one another, thereby forming the objective world and influencing human thoughts, propelling movement.

If this is the case, how can we say there is unity or oneness when the differences are so profound and the lack of unity so apparent?

The aspects of contradictions cannot exist in isolation. Without one conflicting aspect, the other loses its conditions for existence. Consider any contradictory entities or concepts within people’s minds. Can either aspect exist independently? Without life, there is no death; without death, there is no life. Without up, there is no down; without down, there is no up. Without disaster, there is no fortune; without fortune, there is no disaster. Without ease, there is no difficulty; without difficulty, there is no ease. Without landlords, there are no tenants; without tenants, there are no landlords. Without the bourgeoisie, there is no proletariat; without the proletariat, there is no bourgeoisie. Without the national oppression of imperialism, there are no colonies and semi-colonies; without colonies and semi-colonies, there is no national oppression by imperialism. All opposing elements exist in this manner; under certain conditions, one side opposes while simultaneously being interconnected, interpenetrating, and interdependent. This nature is called unity. All contradictory aspects possess differing identities due to certain conditions, thus being termed contradictions. Yet they also possess unity, which connects them. What Lenin referred to as dialectics studying "how opposites can be identical" speaks of this scenario. How can this occur? Because they exist as mutually conditional. This is the first meaning of unity.

However, is it sufficient to merely state that the two sides of a contradiction exist conditionally and thus share unity, allowing them to coexist in a unified whole? It is not enough. The matter extends beyond mere interdependence; it crucially involves the transformation of contradictory entities. This means the internally contradictory aspects of an entity, due to specific conditions, transform into their opposites. This is the second meaning of the unity of contradictions.

Why is there also unity in this transformation? Observe that the oppressed proletariat transforms into the rulers through revolution, while the previously ruling bourgeoisie transforms into the oppressed, reversing their previous positions. The Soviet Union has accomplished this, and the world will follow suit. Is there no connection and unity under certain conditions that enables such transformations to occur?

The Kuomintang, which played a certain positive role at various stages in modern Chinese history, transformed into a reactionary force after 1927 due to its inherent class nature and the temptations of imperialism (these are the conditions), yet it was compelled to support anti-Japanese efforts as a result of the intensification of conflicts with Japan and the Communist Party's united front policy (these are also the conditions). The transformation of contradictions reflects this inherent unity.

The land revolution we have undertaken exemplifies such processes, where the landlord class, once holding land, transforms into a landless class, while those who were once landless peasants transform into small private landowners. The presence or absence of land, gains and losses are interlinked through certain conditions, revealing their unity. Under socialist conditions, individual land ownership will transform into collective ownership in agricultural socialism; the Soviet Union has already done this, and the world will follow. There exists a bridge of unity between private and public property, philosophically referred to as unity or mutual transformation and interpenetration.

Strengthening the proletarian dictatorship or the people's dictatorship prepares for the eventual abolition of this dictatorship and the transition to a higher stage of eliminating any state system. Establishing and developing the Communist Party is a preparation for abolishing the Communist Party and all party systems. Forming a revolutionary army under Communist leadership to engage in revolutionary warfare prepares for the permanent abolition of war. These many contradictory elements simultaneously coexist.

It is well-known that war and peace are mutually convertible. War may transform into peace, as seen after World War I, which transitioned into a post-war peace; currently, China's civil war has ceased, leading to domestic peace. Conversely, peace can also transform into war, as the cooperation between the Nationalists and the Communists in 1927 turned into conflict; the current state of world peace could potentially revert to another world war. Why is this so? Because in class societies, the contradictory elements of war and peace cohere under certain conditions, showcasing their unity.

All contradictory elements are interconnected, not only coexisting within a unified whole under certain conditions but also transforming into one another. This encapsulates the entire meaning of the unity of contradictions. Lenin’s statement about “how opposites become identical, under what conditions they transform into one” reflects this understanding.

Why should our minds not perceive these opposites as dead, crystallized entities but rather as living, conditional, changeable, and mutually transformative entities? Because objective phenomena are inherently so. The unity or sameness of the contradictory aspects in objective reality is not dead or frozen but rather dynamic, conditional, changeable, temporary, and relative. All contradictions, under certain conditions, transform into their opposites. This situation, reflected in human thought, becomes the cosmology of Marxist dialectical materialism. Only the currently and historically reactionary ruling classes, along with the metaphysics that serves them, fail to view opposing entities as living, conditional, changeable, and mutually transformative, instead perceiving them as dead and fixed. They perpetuate this erroneous perception widely to confuse the masses and maintain their rule. The task of Communists is to expose the erroneous ideas of reactionaries and metaphysics, promote the true dialectics of phenomena, facilitate transformations, and achieve revolutionary goals.

The so-called unity of contradictions under certain conditions means that the contradictions we discuss are actual, concrete contradictions, and their mutual transformations are likewise actual and concrete. Many mythical transformations, such as Kua Fu chasing the sun from the "Classic of Mountains and Seas," Yi shooting down nine suns from "Huainanzi," Sun Wukong's seventy-two transformations from "Journey to the West," and numerous stories of fox spirits transforming into humans from "Strange Stories from a Chinese Studio," represent a naive, imaginary, subjective fantasizing of change regarding complex real contradictions. They do not constitute the specific transformations manifested by concrete contradictions. Marx said, “Every myth is a manifestation of fancy and imagination to conquer and dominate natural forces; thus, as these natural forces become subject to control, myths also disappear.” Those numerous fantastical stories in myths (and fairy tales) engage the imagination and can be appealing due to envisioning human dominance over nature, and the best myths possess a "perennial charm." However, such myths do not arise from the specific conditions of actual contradictions, hence they do not reflect the scientific reality. This implies that the aspects forming contradictions in myths or fairy tales do not represent specific unity but rather a fantasized unity. The scientifically reflective unity of real changes is Marxist dialectics.

Why can an egg transform into a chick while a stone cannot? Why is there unity in war and peace but not between war and stone? Why can humans give birth to humans but not to other things? The reason is that the unity of contradictions manifests under necessary conditions. Absent these necessary conditions, no unity can exist.

Why were the bourgeois democratic revolution in Russia in February 1917 and the proletarian socialist revolution in October of the same year directly connected, whereas the French bourgeois revolution did not directly lead to socialism, culminating in the failure of the Paris Commune in 1871? Why does the nomadic system of Mongolia and Central Asia have a direct connection to socialism? Why can the Chinese revolution avoid the path of capitalism and link directly with socialism, without undergoing a period of bourgeois dictatorship? The answer lies solely in the specific conditions at the time. When certain necessary conditions are present, the developmental processes of things reflect certain contradictions, and these contradictions are interdependent and transform into one another; otherwise, nothing is possible.

This is the issue of unity. So, what is struggle, and what is the relationship between unity and struggle?

Lenin said, “The unity of opposites (consistency, sameness, oneness) is conditional, temporary, momentary, and relative. The struggle of mutually exclusive opposites is absolute, just as development and motion are absolute.”

What does this mean?

Every process has a beginning and an end, and all processes transform into their opposites. The permanence of every process is relative, whereas the capacity for one process to transform into another is absolute.

The movement of any entity takes on two states: a relatively static state and a visibly dynamic state. The motion of both states arises from the struggle between the two contradictory factors contained within the entity. When the motion of the entity is in its first state, it exhibits only quantitative changes without any qualitative shifts, thus appearing static. Conversely, when in its second state, the motion has reached a certain peak from the quantitative changes in the first state, leading to a disintegration of unity and a change in nature, thereby manifesting significant change. In everyday life, we observe unity, cohesion, conjunction, harmony, equilibrium, stalemate, stillness, constancy, balance, cohesion, attraction, etc., all reflecting the appearance of entities in a state of quantitative change. The disintegration of unity, destruction of cohesion, harmony, equilibrium, stalemate, stillness, constancy, balance, cohesion, attraction, etc., reveals the transition of entities in the qualitative change state, indicating a transformation from one process to another. Entities continuously transition from the first to the second state, and the struggle of contradictions exists in both states, ultimately resolving contradictions through the second state. Hence, the unity of opposites is conditional, temporary, and relative, while the struggle of mutually exclusive opposites is absolute.

We previously mentioned that there is unity between two opposing entities, allowing them to coexist within a unified whole and transform into one another. This reflects conditionality—in other words, that under certain conditions, contradictory entities can unify and mutually transform; without these specific conditions, contradictions cannot exist, coexist, or transform. Therefore, because the unity of contradictions is established under certain conditions, it is said to be conditional and relative.

On the other hand, we say that the struggle of contradictions runs through the entirety of a process and facilitates the transformation of one process into another, asserting that the struggle of contradictions is omnipresent; thus, the struggle of contradictions is unconditioned and absolute.

The combination of conditional relative unity and unconditional absolute struggle constitutes the contradictory movement of all things.

As we Chinese often say, “Opposites complement each other.” This means that opposites possess unity. This statement embodies dialectics and contradicts metaphysics. “Opposites” refer to the mutual exclusion or struggle between two contradictory aspects. “Complement” indicates that, under certain conditions, these contradictory aspects connect with each other, achieving unity. The element of struggle inherently exists within unity; without struggle, there is no unity.

Struggle exists within unity, specificity contains universality, and individuality encompasses commonality. In Lenin's words, it is described as “the absolute within the relative.”

The Position of Confrontation in Contradictions

In discussing the struggle of contradictions, we must also consider the nature of confrontation. We answer that confrontation is a form of contradiction struggle, but not the only form.

In human history, there exists class confrontation, which is a specific manifestation of the struggle of contradictions. The contradictions between the exploiting class and the exploited class, whether in slave society, feudal society, or capitalist society, are present. These opposing classes coexist in society for a long time, engaging in mutual struggle; however, only when the contradictions between the two classes develop to a certain stage do they take on the external form of confrontation and develop into revolution. The transition from peace to war in class societies also follows this pattern.

When a bomb is not detonated, it symbolizes a state where contradictory elements coexist in a unified whole under specific conditions. Once new conditions (ignition) are introduced, an explosion occurs. In nature, phenomena that ultimately necessitate external conflict to resolve old contradictions and produce new entities reflect similar situations.

Understanding this scenario is crucial. It teaches us that in class societies, revolutions and revolutionary wars are inevitable. Without them, the leap in social development cannot be achieved, nor can the reactionary ruling class be overthrown, allowing the people to gain power. Communists must expose the reactionary propaganda claiming that social revolution is unnecessary and impossible, maintaining the Marxist-Leninist theory of social revolution. The people must understand that such revolutions are not only wholly necessary but also entirely possible, as evidenced by the entirety of human history and the victories of the Soviet Union, which demonstrate this scientific truth.

However, we must study the situations of various contradiction struggles concretely and not improperly apply the aforementioned formula to all matters. While contradictions and struggles are universal and absolute, the methods for resolving contradictions—i.e., forms of struggle—differ according to the nature of the contradictions. Some contradictions exhibit overt confrontational characteristics, while others do not. Depending on the specific development of matters, certain contradictions may evolve from non-confrontational to confrontational; conversely, some may shift from confrontational to non-confrontational.

The contradiction between correct and incorrect thoughts within the Communist Party reflects class contradictions in class existence. Initially, or in specific issues, this contradiction may not immediately manifest as confrontational. However, with the development of class struggle, it may evolve into a confrontational situation. The history of the Soviet Communist Party illustrates how the contradictions between the correct thoughts of Lenin and Stalin and the incorrect thoughts of Trotsky and Bukharin did not initially appear confrontational, but eventually developed into confrontation. The history of the Chinese Communist Party also shows similar incidents, where contradictions between the correct thoughts of many comrades and the incorrect thoughts of Chen Duxiu and Zhang Guotao did not initially manifest as confrontational but later escalated to confrontation. Currently, the contradictions between correct and incorrect thoughts in our Party do not present as confrontational. If comrades who have made errors can correct their mistakes, such contradictions will not develop into confrontational issues. Therefore, the Party must engage in serious struggle against incorrect thoughts while also fully allowing comrades who have erred the opportunity for self-awareness. In such circumstances, excessive struggle is clearly inappropriate. However, if those who err persist in their mistakes and amplify them, there exists the potential for these contradictions to develop into confrontation.

The contradictions between urban and rural economies in capitalist societies (where the bourgeoisie cruelly exploits the countryside) or in the areas under the rule of the Kuomintang in China (where foreign imperialists and local comprador bourgeoisie viciously plunder the countryside) are inherently confrontational. However, in socialist countries and our revolutionary bases, these confrontational contradictions transform into non-confrontational contradictions, and as we reach communist society, these contradictions will vanish.

Lenin stated, “Confrontation and contradiction are fundamentally different. Under socialism, confrontation is eliminated, while contradictions exist.” This means that confrontation is merely one form of the struggle of contradictions and not its sole form; this formula cannot be applied universally.

Conclusion

At this point, we can summarize a few key points. The law of contradictions in things, or the law of the unity of opposites, is a fundamental law of nature and society, and thus also a foundational law of thought. It stands in stark contrast to metaphysical views of the universe. This perspective marks a significant revolution in the history of human understanding.

From the standpoint of dialectical materialism, contradictions exist in all objective phenomena and subjective thought processes, permeating the entirety of all processes; this exemplifies the universality and absoluteness of contradictions. Contradictory entities, along with each of their aspects, possess unique characteristics, illustrating the specificity and relativity of contradictions. These contradictory entities share unity under certain conditions, allowing them to coexist within a unified whole and to transform into opposite aspects; this again reflects the specificity and relativity of contradictions.

However, the struggle of contradictions is constant. Whether in their coexistence or during their transformation, conflict is always present, and particularly during transformations, the struggle is more pronounced, highlighting the universality and absoluteness of contradictions. While studying the specificity and relativity of contradictions, we should pay attention to the distinction between major and minor contradictions and their aspects. When examining the universality and struggle of contradictions, we must differentiate between the various forms of struggle. Failure to do so could lead to mistakes.

If we genuinely understand these points through study, we can dismantle dogmatic thoughts that violate the fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism and are detrimental to our revolutionary cause. We would also help experienced comrades organize their experiences in a principled way, thereby avoiding the repetition of empiricist errors. These are some simple conclusions derived from our study of the law of contradictions.