Table Of ContentAlso by C. L. R. James
NOTES ON DIALECTICS,
The Future in the Present
Spheres oj Existence
HEGEL, MARX, LENIN
Nkrumah and the Ghana Revolution
The Black Jacobins
C.L.R. JAMES
Lawrence Hill & Co.
Westport, Connecticut
Also by C. L. R. James
NOTES ON DIALECTICS,
The Future in the Present
Spheres oj Existence
HEGEL, MARX, LENIN
Nkrumah and the Ghana Revolution
The Black Jacobins
C.L.R. JAMES
Lawrence Hill & Co.
Westport, Connecticut
. .
Trotskyism: Synthetic Cognition 157 ,I, {�{" (
The Absolute Idea 162 'fn""�" . r'i�'� ·
TheLeap 171
Dialectic in Action
What We Propose to Do 181
The French Revolution in Historical Logic 184
Form and Content 210 )
The identity of opposites (it would be more correct to say their '--
Cause and Effect 211 "unity" -although the difference between the terms identity and
Practice 223 unity is not particularly important here. In a certain sense both are
Notes 228 correct) is the recognition (discovery) of the contradictory, mutually
exclusive, opposite tendencies in all phenomena and processes of
nature (including mind and society). The condition for the
knowledge of all processes of the world in their "self-movement", \
in their spontaneous development, in their real life, is �eic�ge (
of them as a unity of opposites. 'peveloPJDent..�\"'jt1,!t �..iQL _
.2Rpoilies..T.. he two basic (or two possible? or two hisfmtcauy ob
servable?) conceptions of development (evolution) are: development
as decrease and increase, as repetition, and development as a unity
of opposites (the division of a unity into mutually exclusive op
posites and their reciprocal relation).
The above is a reproduction of a paragraph from Lenin's 1915
article On the Question of Dialectics, which I had been familiar
with for nearly fifteen years. We· had broken with Trotsky's
analysis of the nature of the Russian state since the death of
Lenin and I had at my disposal translations by one collaborator
of all that Lenin had written on Capital, on philosophy and on
the Russian state; and in translations by another collaborator all
of Hegel and Marx in German on philosophy and political
economy. Marx had not been able to write the small treatise that
he had intended on the Hegelian dialectic. We came to the con
clusion that a fundamental investigation still remained to be
done, on Hegel's Science of Logic (with that of course had to be
associated the smaller Logic, a section of Hegel's Encyclopedia).
In the midst of his studies on the Logic Lenin had come to the
conclusion that you could not understand Capital without an
understanding of the Hegelian Logic and had stated semi
humorously:
·The Johnson-Forest Tendency of the Fourth International. (For a
description of this tendency, see W. Jerome and A. Buick, "Soviet
State Capitalism? The History of an ldea", in Survey no. January
62,
1967.)
7
. .
Trotskyism: Synthetic Cognition 157 ,I, {�{" (
The Absolute Idea 162 'fn""�" . r'i�'� ·
TheLeap 171
Dialectic in Action
What We Propose to Do 181
The French Revolution in Historical Logic 184
Form and Content 210 )
The identity of opposites (it would be more correct to say their '--
Cause and Effect 211 "unity" -although the difference between the terms identity and
Practice 223 unity is not particularly important here. In a certain sense both are
Notes 228 correct) is the recognition (discovery) of the contradictory, mutually
exclusive, opposite tendencies in all phenomena and processes of
nature (including mind and society). The condition for the
knowledge of all processes of the world in their "self-movement", \
in their spontaneous development, in their real life, is �eic�ge (
of them as a unity of opposites. 'peveloPJDent..�\"'jt1,!t �..iQL _
.2Rpoilies..T.. he two basic (or two possible? or two hisfmtcauy ob
servable?) conceptions of development (evolution) are: development
as decrease and increase, as repetition, and development as a unity
of opposites (the division of a unity into mutually exclusive op
posites and their reciprocal relation).
The above is a reproduction of a paragraph from Lenin's 1915
article On the Question of Dialectics, which I had been familiar
with for nearly fifteen years. We· had broken with Trotsky's
analysis of the nature of the Russian state since the death of
Lenin and I had at my disposal translations by one collaborator
of all that Lenin had written on Capital, on philosophy and on
the Russian state; and in translations by another collaborator all
of Hegel and Marx in German on philosophy and political
economy. Marx had not been able to write the small treatise that
he had intended on the Hegelian dialectic. We came to the con
clusion that a fundamental investigation still remained to be
done, on Hegel's Science of Logic (with that of course had to be
associated the smaller Logic, a section of Hegel's Encyclopedia).
In the midst of his studies on the Logic Lenin had come to the
conclusion that you could not understand Capital without an
understanding of the Hegelian Logic and had stated semi
humorously:
·The Johnson-Forest Tendency of the Fourth International. (For a
description of this tendency, see W. Jerome and A. Buick, "Soviet
State Capitalism? The History of an ldea", in Survey no. January
62,
1967.)
7
The next stage in the development (evolution) consists in the
Aphorism: It is impossible completely to understand Marx's .
Capital, and especially its first chapter, without having thoroughly gathenng strength of one of the opposites so that it overcomes
studied and understood the whole of Hegel's Logic. Consequently, the o�her, embraces it, and itself becomes the basis of a new
half a century later none of the marxists understood Marx. �tage 10 the: Subst�ce, in which the Subject, equally developing,
.
IS able to dIstmguish the new unity of further opposites.
This he enclosed in a box, and we presume a conscientiously
What matters, events, things, personalities are historically
humorous modification of the stern judgement by the two
exclamation marks with which he ended the aphorism. ?bservable? If '!Ie �re analysing society we will note certain mass
Impulses, mstmctive actions, spontaneous movements the
For many years my friends and I were very conscious that
Lenin in the hectic months of September to December 1914 e�ergence o� personalities, the incalculable activities which con
wrote on The Science oj Logic what ultimately filled a hundred st�tute a S?�Ie:ty. At a certain stage these apparently indeter
mmate actIVItIes coalesce into a hard knot "which are foci of
and fifty-six printed pages of his Collected Works. My friends
and I sought in vain for any treatment of the Logic which went arrest and. direction in mental life and consciousness". That
knot constItutes the basis of new Substance. When the elements
further than a presumed summary of its relation to Marx's
h rden into a knot, Mind, Subject, can enter. Mind will observe,
method in general. (That is not altogether surprising, because �
SaId Hegel, that the knot consists of two antagonistic elements
the two volumes of the larger and the volume of the smaller con
stitute over a thousand of the most difficult pages we have yet locked. tog�ther in � unity. But it cannot remain as such. In a
met anywhere.) I was able to find a way into it and even to ne� histoncal penod there are further impulses, instinctive
speCulate, i.e. draw temporary conclusions from it, because I actIo��, spontaneous movements, the emergence of per
recognized from early on that the Logic constituted an algebra, sonalItIes, calculable activities whereupon another knot is
made to be used any analysis of constitution and development formed givin� the basis to Subject, Mind, opportunity for
further analysIs. It is along these lines we can examine the First
in nature or in soincie ty. To hand was the knowledge of the history
International. This knot consists essentially of mobilization of
of the labour movement beginning in 1789 and continuing to our
day. For us active marxists that analysis centred on three names: th� .mass, and intell�ctual clarification by those who through
abIIty, energy and aIms constitute the leadership. Marx himself
Marx (and Engels), Lenin, and Trotsky. So that when we �
worked on the Logic we were able to understand its movement (Mmd) lays down �he principles and supervises the organization.
fter another hIstorical period of indeterminate activities we
by testing this movement against the history of the labour move �
ment and, conversely, the movement of the Logic enabled us to arnve at t�e Second I�ternational, which distinguished itself
understand and develop for contemporary and future needs the· from the FI�st �nternat1on�1 by the organization and power of
history of the labour movement. th� leadershIp, 10 trade UnIons and labour parties. The leader
It would be idle to attempt to summarize this process in any �hIP moves away from its marxist origin and concentrates on
Itself. "The movement" , said Bernstein, "is everything."
introductory statement. This volume is summary enough. A few
things, however, can be usefully said. Early in the Logic Hegel After another historical period Lenin organizes the Third
International, i form another leadership organization opposed
lays it down: "In my view-a view which developed exposition �
to the leadershIp of the Second International. After a period
of the system can alone justify-everything depends on grasping . . .
and expressing the ultimate truth not as Substance but as Subject bo�h the�e o�ganiZatIOns decay mto opportunist groups with
neither histoncal nor organizational perspective, in particular
as well." It is absolutely true, as Hegel warns, that only the
Eurocommunism. It is obvious that what the three Inter
developed exposition of the system can justify what everything
nationals in their turn were seeking is now wide open and more
.depends on. Nevertheless with the ultimate truth not only as
than ever needed.
Substance (objective reality) but as Subject (Mind) we can tackle
eombvpiioruicsa tllhya tth tahte froe rwmei daareb ldee paalirnagg rwaipthh wthieth s pwohnictahn weoe ubse gdaenve. lIot pis speH�ueglaetl ei �msitsots tthhea t ftuhteu irme.p oWrthaantc ed ooef sd itahlee cLtioc gisic t htee lcl aupsa caibtyo utot
Subject, except (as we have alre�dy stated) that Subject is to be
menforpiocesses in real life, obvious also that any stage of these
analysed as strenuously as Sub�tance? Here there is room for
processes is a unity, consisting of opposites which are mutually
only one indication of method. The two elements of a stage of
exclusive but though unified are yet historically observable.
9
8
The next stage in the development (evolution) consists in the
Aphorism: It is impossible completely to understand Marx's .
Capital, and especially its first chapter, without having thoroughly gathenng strength of one of the opposites so that it overcomes
studied and understood the whole of Hegel's Logic. Consequently, the o�her, embraces it, and itself becomes the basis of a new
half a century later none of the marxists understood Marx. �tage 10 the: Subst�ce, in which the Subject, equally developing,
.
IS able to dIstmguish the new unity of further opposites.
This he enclosed in a box, and we presume a conscientiously
What matters, events, things, personalities are historically
humorous modification of the stern judgement by the two
exclamation marks with which he ended the aphorism. ?bservable? If '!Ie �re analysing society we will note certain mass
Impulses, mstmctive actions, spontaneous movements the
For many years my friends and I were very conscious that
Lenin in the hectic months of September to December 1914 e�ergence o� personalities, the incalculable activities which con
wrote on The Science oj Logic what ultimately filled a hundred st�tute a S?�Ie:ty. At a certain stage these apparently indeter
mmate actIVItIes coalesce into a hard knot "which are foci of
and fifty-six printed pages of his Collected Works. My friends
and I sought in vain for any treatment of the Logic which went arrest and. direction in mental life and consciousness". That
knot constItutes the basis of new Substance. When the elements
further than a presumed summary of its relation to Marx's
h rden into a knot, Mind, Subject, can enter. Mind will observe,
method in general. (That is not altogether surprising, because �
SaId Hegel, that the knot consists of two antagonistic elements
the two volumes of the larger and the volume of the smaller con
stitute over a thousand of the most difficult pages we have yet locked. tog�ther in � unity. But it cannot remain as such. In a
met anywhere.) I was able to find a way into it and even to ne� histoncal penod there are further impulses, instinctive
speCulate, i.e. draw temporary conclusions from it, because I actIo��, spontaneous movements, the emergence of per
recognized from early on that the Logic constituted an algebra, sonalItIes, calculable activities whereupon another knot is
made to be used any analysis of constitution and development formed givin� the basis to Subject, Mind, opportunity for
further analysIs. It is along these lines we can examine the First
in nature or in soincie ty. To hand was the knowledge of the history
International. This knot consists essentially of mobilization of
of the labour movement beginning in 1789 and continuing to our
day. For us active marxists that analysis centred on three names: th� .mass, and intell�ctual clarification by those who through
abIIty, energy and aIms constitute the leadership. Marx himself
Marx (and Engels), Lenin, and Trotsky. So that when we �
worked on the Logic we were able to understand its movement (Mmd) lays down �he principles and supervises the organization.
fter another hIstorical period of indeterminate activities we
by testing this movement against the history of the labour move �
ment and, conversely, the movement of the Logic enabled us to arnve at t�e Second I�ternational, which distinguished itself
understand and develop for contemporary and future needs the· from the FI�st �nternat1on�1 by the organization and power of
history of the labour movement. th� leadershIp, 10 trade UnIons and labour parties. The leader
It would be idle to attempt to summarize this process in any �hIP moves away from its marxist origin and concentrates on
Itself. "The movement" , said Bernstein, "is everything."
introductory statement. This volume is summary enough. A few
things, however, can be usefully said. Early in the Logic Hegel After another historical period Lenin organizes the Third
International, i form another leadership organization opposed
lays it down: "In my view-a view which developed exposition �
to the leadershIp of the Second International. After a period
of the system can alone justify-everything depends on grasping . . .
and expressing the ultimate truth not as Substance but as Subject bo�h the�e o�ganiZatIOns decay mto opportunist groups with
neither histoncal nor organizational perspective, in particular
as well." It is absolutely true, as Hegel warns, that only the
Eurocommunism. It is obvious that what the three Inter
developed exposition of the system can justify what everything
nationals in their turn were seeking is now wide open and more
.depends on. Nevertheless with the ultimate truth not only as
than ever needed.
Substance (objective reality) but as Subject (Mind) we can tackle
eombvpiioruicsa tllhya tth tahte froe rwmei daareb ldee paalirnagg rwaipthh wthieth s pwohnictahn weoe ubse gdaenve. lIot pis speH�ueglaetl ei �msitsots tthhea t ftuhteu irme.p oWrthaantc ed ooef sd itahlee cLtioc gisic t htee lcl aupsa caibtyo utot
Subject, except (as we have alre�dy stated) that Subject is to be
menforpiocesses in real life, obvious also that any stage of these
analysed as strenuously as Sub�tance? Here there is room for
processes is a unity, consisting of opposites which are mutually
only one indication of method. The two elements of a stage of
exclusive but though unified are yet historically observable.
9
8
At this stage of Actuality in the labour movement I come
Substance must be examined as two independent unities. Hegel
inevitably to the conclusion that there was no further place in the
first labels them unities of Imagination. The dialectic further
labour movement for the party. The party as such had to be
analyses the parts as being reflected into one another, still part
negated. The one-party state is the incorporation into bourgeois
of a unity but one part reflected into another. We understand
capitalist society of the nearly two-hundred-year-old efforts by
the word reflected when we face the third method of analysing
the labour movement to create a party to take over the state.
the opposites. This entails a recognition that the two parts of the
Instead the state takes over the party. In 1946 for example in
unity are in violent opposition, contradiction, to each other. It is
Italy the party consisted of two and a half million members and
when Subject realizes that "Contradiction" is a fundamental
was in complete control of the organized labour movement. If
principle of life, that it jams the opposites together and so
all the revolution had -continued, the two and a half million would
unlooses (in speculative thought) inherent movement. The idea,
thus logically divined, is the Ideality of the next stage of reality. rap.idly ha�e become at least six or seven million, and a party
Where is the Logic taking us? The end, Hegel insists, is the WhICh conSIsts ?f six or seven million members is not a party at
beginning, although you can understand that beginning only all. It automatically becomes the state: the state has withered
away into the party. Unless the labour movement arrives at the
when you approach the end. What is then the beginning of the
labour movement? We find the historical beginning in the abolitio� of the party, the state will never wither away.
French revolution as Marx saw it. Here are some of his state There IS only one warning to be borne in mind. Hegel warns us
ments about the revolution. The masses went "as far as the sup that the logical development and transition of subject, Mind,
does not always find its reality in Substance. I therefore having
pression of private property, to the maximum of confiscation".
Furthermore they placed themselves "in violent contradiction arrived at a perspective for the future, embarked upon what I call
with the very conditions of existence of bourgeois society (by) the "historical tendency" and traced historically the labour
declaring the revolution permanent". Its ultimate aim is self movement .and its party from 1789 to the present day and its
mobilization. The opposite which at every stage the labour �uture perspective. What is astonishing is not how little Subject
movement meets and must overcome is the developing capitalist reproduced in reality, but the miracle in which mutually
society. Stage by stage the new expresses itself instinctively in IcSl usive opposite tendencies in their self-movement and develoexp
ment, in their unity of opposites, embodied historical reality.
Substance to be organized intellectually by Subject, Mind.
Ultimately the new developing reality faces an opposition with
Logic
which it must engage in mortal struggle. This stage the
describes as Actuality. In the self-mobilization that the Labour .
movement has been seeking, its ultimate obstacle (perpetuated
under Brezhnev) turns out to be the Russian regime and the com
munist parties. It is the last opposition to be overcome.
Stalinism is not an accident. To quote Hegel:
In the course of its process the idea creates the illusion, by setting an
antithesis to confront it; and its action consists in getting rid of the
illusion which it has created. Only out of this error does the truth
arise. In this fact lies the reconciliation with error and with finitude.
Error or other-being, when superseded, is still a necessary dynamic
element of truth: for truth can only be where it makes itself its own
result.
Truth can only be where it makes itself its own result. Truth, in
our analysis, the total emancipation of 1abour, can only be
achieved when it contains and overcomes its complete pene
tration by its inherent antagonism, the capital relation.
11
10
At this stage of Actuality in the labour movement I come
Substance must be examined as two independent unities. Hegel
inevitably to the conclusion that there was no further place in the
first labels them unities of Imagination. The dialectic further
labour movement for the party. The party as such had to be
analyses the parts as being reflected into one another, still part
negated. The one-party state is the incorporation into bourgeois
of a unity but one part reflected into another. We understand
capitalist society of the nearly two-hundred-year-old efforts by
the word reflected when we face the third method of analysing
the labour movement to create a party to take over the state.
the opposites. This entails a recognition that the two parts of the
Instead the state takes over the party. In 1946 for example in
unity are in violent opposition, contradiction, to each other. It is
Italy the party consisted of two and a half million members and
when Subject realizes that "Contradiction" is a fundamental
was in complete control of the organized labour movement. If
principle of life, that it jams the opposites together and so
all the revolution had -continued, the two and a half million would
unlooses (in speculative thought) inherent movement. The idea,
thus logically divined, is the Ideality of the next stage of reality. rap.idly ha�e become at least six or seven million, and a party
Where is the Logic taking us? The end, Hegel insists, is the WhICh conSIsts ?f six or seven million members is not a party at
beginning, although you can understand that beginning only all. It automatically becomes the state: the state has withered
away into the party. Unless the labour movement arrives at the
when you approach the end. What is then the beginning of the
labour movement? We find the historical beginning in the abolitio� of the party, the state will never wither away.
French revolution as Marx saw it. Here are some of his state There IS only one warning to be borne in mind. Hegel warns us
ments about the revolution. The masses went "as far as the sup that the logical development and transition of subject, Mind,
does not always find its reality in Substance. I therefore having
pression of private property, to the maximum of confiscation".
Furthermore they placed themselves "in violent contradiction arrived at a perspective for the future, embarked upon what I call
with the very conditions of existence of bourgeois society (by) the "historical tendency" and traced historically the labour
declaring the revolution permanent". Its ultimate aim is self movement .and its party from 1789 to the present day and its
mobilization. The opposite which at every stage the labour �uture perspective. What is astonishing is not how little Subject
movement meets and must overcome is the developing capitalist reproduced in reality, but the miracle in which mutually
society. Stage by stage the new expresses itself instinctively in IcSl usive opposite tendencies in their self-movement and develoexp
Substance to be organized intellectually by Subject, Mind. ment, in their unity of opposites, embodied historical reality.
Ultimately the new developing reality faces an opposition with
Logic
which it must engage in mortal struggle. This stage the
describes as Actuality. In the self-mobilization that the Labour .
movement has been seeking, its ultimate obstacle (perpetuated
under Brezhnev) turns out to be the Russian regime and the com
munist parties. It is the last opposition to be overcome.
Stalinism is not an accident. To quote Hegel:
In the course of its process the idea creates the illusion, by setting an
antithesis to confront it; and its action consists in getting rid of the
illusion which it has created. Only out of this error does the truth
arise. In this fact lies the reconciliation with error and with finitude.
Error or other-being, when superseded, is still a necessary dynamic
element of truth: for truth can only be where it makes itself its own
result.
Truth can only be where it makes itself its own result. Truth, in
our analysis, the total emancipation of 1abour, can only be
achieved when it contains and overcomes its complete pene
tration by its inherent antagonism, the capital relation.
11
10
PART
I
The
Hegel's Preface to the First Edition of
Science 0/ Logic
Let us begin by looking at the Preface to The Science of Logic.
(This is henceforth referred to as the larger Logic; some years
later Hegel wrote what we call the smaller Logic, a brief sum
mary which forms part of Hegel's Encyclopaedia of
Philosophy.) What is Hegel trying to do? He is talking about
new ideas. His dialectic is new, a new way of organizing
thought. Not of thinking. But of knowing what you do when
you think.
Imperceptibly the new ideas became familiar even to their op
posers, who appropriated them and-though persistently slighting
and gainsaying the sources and principles of those ideas-yet had to
accept their results, and were unable to evade their influence. The
only way opposers could give content and positive value to their
negative attitude (which was getting to be of even less importance)
was by giving in their adherence to the new ways of thinking. I
We can see this is our whole development. The chief, or one of
the most striking examples is our application of the law of value
to the Russian economy. Today these God-damned scoundrels
turn up and say of course"! But you could look through the
••
lalitel rature of the Fourth International for pages and pages. I do
not remember any statements to that effect.
But in politics that is not enough, if it is enough anywhere.
Our opponents are stuck in their own roots. They adopt ideas,
but they remain stuck in their own "sources and principles" and
they use the new ideas solely for argument's sake and to preserve
their own position. Over and over again see them doing it. It is
testimony, however, to the strength of o1u r new ideas. We never
had to take anything from them-never. This should be ob
served.
Hegel is very wise. See again how he distinguished between
different stages of development of a new system of ideas:
On the other hand, the period of fermentation with which a new
creation begins seems to be past.�
(I think it is the same in our case. The period was 1940-46.)
13
PART
I
The
Hegel's Preface to the First Edition of
Science 0/ Logic
Let us begin by looking at the Preface to The Science of Logic.
(This is henceforth referred to as the larger Logic; some years
later Hegel wrote what we call the smaller Logic, a brief sum
mary which forms part of Hegel's Encyclopaedia of
Philosophy.) What is Hegel trying to do? He is talking about
new ideas. His dialectic is new, a new way of organizing
thought. Not of thinking. But of knowing what you do when
you think.
Imperceptibly the new ideas became familiar even to their op
posers, who appropriated them and-though persistently slighting
and gainsaying the sources and principles of those ideas-yet had to
accept their results, and were unable to evade their influence. The
only way opposers could give content and positive value to their
negative attitude (which was getting to be of even less importance)
was by giving in their adherence to the new ways of thinking. I
We can see this is our whole development. The chief, or one of
the most striking examples is our application of the law of value
to the Russian economy. Today these God-damned scoundrels
turn up and say of course"! But you could look through the
••
lalitel rature of the Fourth International for pages and pages. I do
not remember any statements to that effect.
But in politics that is not enough, if it is enough anywhere.
Our opponents are stuck in their own roots. They adopt ideas,
but they remain stuck in their own "sources and principles" and
they use the new ideas solely for argument's sake and to preserve
their own position. Over and over again see them doing it. It is
testimony, however, to the strength of o1u r new ideas. We never
had to take anything from them-never. This should be ob
served.
Hegel is very wise. See again how he distinguished between
different stages of development of a new system of ideas:
On the other hand, the period of fermentation with which a new
creation begins seems to be past.�
(I think it is the same in our case. The period was 1940-46.)
13
