V. THE IDENTITY AND STRUGGLE OF THE ASPECTS OF A CONTRADICTION - 2
But is it enough to say merely that each of the contradictory aspects is the condition for the other's existence, that there is identity between them and that consequently they can coexist in a single entity? No, it is not. The matter does not end with their dependence on each other for their existence; what is more important is their transformation into each other. That is to say, in given conditions, each of the contradictory aspects within a thing transforms itself into its opposite, changes its position to that of its opposite. This is the second meaning of the identity of contradiction.
But is it enough to say merely that each of the contradictory aspects is the condition for the other's existence, that there is identity between them and that consequently they can coexist in a single entity? No, it is not. The matter does not end with their dependence on each other for their existence; what is more important is their transformation into each other. That is to say, in given conditions, each of the contradictory aspects within a thing transforms itself into its opposite, changes its position to that of its opposite. This is the second meaning of the identity of contradiction.
Why is there identity here, too? You see, by means of revolution the
proletariat, at one time the ruled, is transformed into the ruler, while the
bourgeoisie, the erstwhile ruler, is transformed into the ruled and changes its
position to that originally occupied by its opposite. This has already taken
place in the Soviet Union, as it will take place throughout the world. If there
were no interconnection and identity of opposites in given conditions, how
could such a change take place?
The Kuomintang, which played a certain positive role at a certain
stage in modern Chinese history, became a counter-revolutionary party after
1927 because of its inherent class nature and because of imperialist
blandishments (these being the conditions); but it has been compelled to agree
to resist Japan because of the sharpening of the contradiction between China
and Japan and because of the Communist Party's policy of the united front
(these being the conditions). Things in contradiction change into one another,
and herein lies a definite identity.
Our agrarian revolution has been a process in which the landlord
class owning the land is transformed into a class that has lost its land, while
the peasants who once lost their land are transformed into small holders who
have acquired land, and it will be such a process once again. In given
conditions having and not having, acquiring and losing, are interconnected;
there is identity of the two sides. Under socialism, private peasant ownership
is transformed into the public ownership of socialist agriculture; this has
already taken place in the Soviet Union, as it will take place everywhere else.
There is a bridge leading from private property to public property, which in
philosophy is called identity, or transformation into each other, or
interpenetration.
To consolidate the dictatorship of the proletariat or the
dictatorship of the people is in fact to prepare the conditions for abolishing
this dictatorship and advancing to the higher stage when all state systems are
eliminated. To establish and build the Communist Party is in fact to prepare
the conditions for the elimination of the Communist Party and all political
parties. To build a revolutionary army under the leadership of the Communist
Party and to carry on revolutionary war is in fact to prepare the conditions
for the permanent elimination of war. These opposites are at the same time
complementary.
No comments:
Post a Comment