Stone is Hard Egg is Light

Common sense tells us: when an egg strikes a stone, it is always the egg that breaks.

Yet throughout history, we have repeatedly witnessed a paradox: a latecomer, absolutely inferior in troops, equipment, and resources, ultimately manages to overturn a colossus.

Such reversals of power are never the result of luck, but of ruthlessly rigorous strategic reasoning.

Today, let us return to the historical scene of over eighty years ago and reopen three classics written by Mao Zedong across three distinct periods. Let us see how, under those extreme circumstances where the enemy was strong and we were weak—when hope seemed all but extinguished—he dissected the problem step by step and turned the tide.

I. On Contradiction — August 1937

To understand this work, we must first return to that historical juncture. The Red Army had just completed the Long March, and the bloody lessons of the failed Fifth Counter-Campaign against "Encirclement and Suppression" were still fresh in memory. Reflecting on the pain, why had we suffered such heavy losses time and again? The root cause lay in the decision-makers' blind faith in dogma, treating directives from the Comintern as sacred edicts and using foreign yardsticks to measure Chinese cloth—completely detached from China's realities.

Thus, On Contradiction was born to thoroughly purge this erroneous thinking that ignored national conditions at its philosophical roots, addressing the question: "How exactly should we perceive reality?"

So how do we perceive it? On Contradiction offers an incisive entry point: distinguishing between internal and external causes.

The book contains this original passage:

"Materialist dialectics holds that external causes are the condition of change and internal causes are the basis of change; external causes operate through internal causes. An egg becomes a chick with appropriate temperature, but temperature cannot turn a stone into a chick, because their bases are fundamentally different."

Where lies the cutting edge of this statement? Back then, when dogmatists lost battles, they always blamed the enemy for being too strong or conditions for being too poor—all external causes. But On Contradiction tells you: the external environment and the opponent's strength are merely the "temperature"; your own organizational structure, core capabilities, and popular support constitute the "basis." Treating external factors as the fundamental reason for defeat is the beginning of strategic miscalculation. The first lesson On Contradiction teaches us is to strip away external distractions and fix our gaze unwaveringly on the "principal contradiction" within things themselves.

II. On Protracted War — May 1938

Having grasped the essence, how then do we fight? This brings us to the second book: On Protracted War, written in May 1938. It provides a roadmap for the transformation of power.

By then, the War of Resistance had been fought for ten months, vast territories had fallen, and debates between the theories of "national subjugation" and "quick victory" raged fiercely. Mao did not take sides based on intuition; instead, he dissected four fundamental contradictions between China and Japan, deducing one conclusion: China will not perish, nor can it win quickly.

The core methodology of On Protracted War is the dimensional reduction of "power" and the extension of the timeline.

He divided power into static factors (weapons, economy) and dynamic factors (organizational capacity, popular will). Static factors may dominate in the short term, but dynamic factors transform over time.

More crucially, he designed a three-stage pathway: "strategic defense, strategic stalemate, and strategic counter-offensive."

Here lies a massive cognitive misconception: many assume protracted war means merely "enduring," a passive avoidance of battle. Wrong! What Mao emphasized was the unity of "protracted strategy" and "quick decision in campaigns." Maintain patience at the macro-strategic level, but at the micro-tactical level, seize the initiative relentlessly. Through "offense within defense, quick decision within protraction," continuously create local advantages. This is how to tear open a turning point in the overall situation from within a passive position.

III. A Single Spark Can Start a Prairie Fire — January 1930

With methods and pathways established, one final, most critical question remains: when the disparity in power is extreme and despair engulfs everyone, what gives you the conviction to trust your own judgment?

This is the third book: A Single Spark Can Start a Prairie Fire, dated January 1930. It provides trend confirmation amidst desperation.

At that time, the Great Revolution had failed, the revolution was at its lowest ebb, and confusion pervaded the Red Army: "How long can the red flag be flown?" In a cramped room in Gutian, Fujian, Mao penned this eight-thousand-character letter.

Addressing doubts about the word "soon" in the phrase "the high tide of revolution is coming soon," he gave an extraordinarily clear answer:

"A Marxist is not a fortune teller. Regarding future developments and changes, one should and can only indicate the general direction; one should not and cannot mechanically fix specific dates."

Rather than shouting hollow slogans, he offered three historically penetrating metaphors grounded in his analysis of the structural contradictions of Chinese society.

He wrote that this is by no means something visible yet unattainable:

"It is like a ship whose masthead can already be seen from the shore gazing out to sea; it is like the morning sun whose radiant rays can already be seen bursting forth from atop a high mountain looking eastward; it is like a baby stirring in its mother's womb, nearly ready to be born."

The methodology behind these three metaphors is this: the core of trend judgment lies not in predicting precise timing like a fortune teller, but in confirming the inevitability of the general direction. As long as the underlying structural logic holds, short-term fluctuations and setbacks are merely ripples in the course of history.

Three Books, One Thread of Thought

We have just walked through these three books following a problem-based logic. Now, let us reorder them chronologically, and you will discover a clearer line of intellectual evolution:

• A Single Spark Can Start a Prairie Fire (1930): Piercing through the fog to discern the grand trend amid the迷茫 of revolutionary low tide;
• On Contradiction (1937): Eradicating the disease of dogmatism from a philosophical height after painful reflection;
• On Protracted War (1938): Deducing a strategic path to victory for the weak against the strong at a moment of existential peril.

You will find that none of this was "theory-first" speculation conjured up in an ivory tower. It was a weapon of thought forged step by step through countless cruel combats and sacrifices—emerging from practice, returning to practice. This itself is the most vivid embodiment of "practice, knowledge, practice again, know again."

Returning to our opening question: when an egg strikes a stone, must it always break?

When you master this framework—seeing through to the essence via internal and external causes, planning pathways through three stages, confirming trends through macro-structures—you will realize that balances of power are never static.

What breaks is not necessarily the egg. Indeed, you may no longer be a fragile egg at all.

Which of these three works' methodologies inspires you the most? Share your thoughts in the comments below.