One of the problems I have faced debating this 'theory' with DM-fans over the last thirty years or so is that none of you seem to know your own theory! In this case, you seem not to have read the DM-classics with due care (or all!); you appear to be ignorant even of basic concepts -- such as the nature of 'dialectical opposites', 'self-motion', and even 'external contradictions' (a term Stalin in fact invented, and which Mao then appropriated -- follow the above links for the actual quotations from Stalin and Mao you seem to be unaware of). This woeful state of affairs has been compounded by what can only be called self-inflicted ignorance of logic (and that includes Aristotle's Logic, never mind the 99% of the discipline that has been invented since 1870 -- check this out) -- even though you all like to pontificate about it.
As I also noted, this means that dialectics can't actually cope with change; in fact, as I demonstrated in extensive detail (follow the link below for more details): if this theory were true, change would be impossible.
[Which also reproduces -- in Section Three -- dozens of quotations from the DM-classics and 'lesser' DM-works to show that the allegations I levelled above are completely accurate.]
Finally, you say you need to read more Hegel. Well, good luck with that! I have studied logic and philosophy to PhD level, and still can't fathom what he was banging on about. However, he committed several sophomoric logical errors, so egregious that they undermine the entire 'dialectic' -- upside down or 'the right way up'. I have exposed them in all their crassness here:
Hits Since 02/01/16: