Karl Marx expanded the notion of Hegel's Dialectic and applied it to history. Marx viewed human society as being created "Equal". Over thousands of years, mankind were living in peace and harmony till the war between tribes broke out. He referred to the peaceful tribes as primary common ( Primitive communists). When war broke out, some of the people from defeated tribe were taken in captivity. The conquerers used captives for free labour. . "Slavery Period" shaped in the history as a result of free labour from defeated tribes. it was the first sign of "Exploitation of man by man". Marx maintained exploitation in his manuscripts as "Social devil". "Antagonistic" is a term Karl Marx used to describe lack of harmony among individuals in the society. To his view, exploitation of man by man cause imbalance in society as "Antagonistic". Then again, Antagonistic cause "Social revolt". The mission of social turmoil is to resolve imbalance in the society. Destructive of imbalance or antigenic is the ultimate goal of any social revolt. Some get benefits and some are deprive from benefits. Ruling class in the society is on the side of people who gets benefits. In slavery period, slave masters get benefits and slaves were being exploited by them. The slavery establishment supported the slave masters, NOT slaves, therefore the social revolt is the consequence of that imbalance or antagonistic. One of the most famous rebels in slavery period was a man by the name of Spartacus whose social revolt ended to massacre of thousands slaves. Karl Marx sees all social turmoils tie to imbalance in the society or "Antagonistic". Then, he uses Hegel's dialectic to explain historical process. In his view, slave masters were (Thesis), On contrary to slave masters, there were large numbers of slaves on which Marx view them as (Anti thesis). The ongoing fight or struggle between slaves and their masters creates the new society which Marx refer to it as Feudalism (Synthesis). Accordingly, Feudalism or (synthesis) has no similarity with 2 previous entities of slave masters (thesis) or slaves(anti thesis) . In Feudalism the dialectic notion has been implemented by Marx again. He viewed the landlords or Feudals who possess extensive lands (thesis) and his interests is in sharp contrast with peasants who works on the lands. , Peasants are large numbers who works for landlords, therefore, their interests are in conflict with landlord or Feudal's interests. In the new society the landlord are thesis, and large number of peasants within the Feudalisms society are anti thesis. Anti thesis get shaped within thesis not the other way around. The struggle between thesis and anti thesis leads to synthesis. The struggle between landlords whom Marx call it (thesis) and peasants whom Marx call it (anti thesis) leads synthesis which Marx called the new society as "capitalism". Again synthesis (capitalism) has no similarity with thesis (landlords) and anti thesis (peasants). French revolution changed the Feudalism to bourgeoisie or Capitalism. In new society capitalism (Bourgeoisie) parallels to industrialization. Industrial societies posses factories and capital owners looking for cheap labor. Then again, Marx views capital owners as thesis. Labour class as anti thesis and fight or struggle between factory owners (thesis) and working class (anti thesis) leads to the new society which is socialism. Over the time, Socialism improves itself to communism which is ultimate utopia in Marx's mind. It is a "Classless" society" like a premitive society, though it is in industrialization and modern time. In this historical period, everybody lives in harmony and peace without antagonistic or any imbalance among people in the society. Therefore there wouldn't be any social revolt or antagonistic. It would be similar to time mankind were living in harmony and peace, The only difference is the time. it is the time of industrialization and modern society.
Mao's idea about historical process is way different than Marx. He sees most of society have not reached to the industrialization period. Therefore, his view of antagonistic completely different from Marx. He views China as agricultural society, not industrial, so he tries to explain Chinese revolution as fight and struggle between mass peasants and few landlords. He views cities as THESIS. peasants in villages as ANTI THESIS. Their invasion to the cities and surrounding cities by villagers as struggle between thesis and anti thesis. The distance between thesis and anti thesis is way far away. From villagers to the cities. That is NOT what Marx was saying. In Marx view anti thesis is within thesis, it is inside, not outside. In Mao's view, there is no connection between thesis and anti thesis. He goes further to conceptualize the struggle between homeowner and tenants is like struggle between thesis and anti thesis. He uses the example of relationship between employers and employees as if it is struggle between thesis and anti thesis.No similarity with Marx's idea a century earlier.