I’m not not exactly releasing state secrets with this observation, but drawing attention to an irony in the way the “Young Hegelian” Marx is rebuked by the older Marx who wrote Das Kapital.
The “Young Marx” of 1843 mocked Hegel with his syllogisms:
“We can say that in his development of the rational syllogism all of the transcendence and mystical dualism of his system becomes apparent. The middle term is the wooden sword, the concealed opposition between universality and singularity.” (Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, Marx, 1843)
But the mature, “scientific” Marx made a syllogism the basis for the division of the three volumes of Capital, the most fundamental structure of his life’s work.
In Volume I we analysed the phenomena which constitute the process of capitalist production as such, as the immediate productive process, ... supplemented in the actual world by the process of circulation, which was the object of study in Volume II. In the latter, namely in Part III, which treated the process of circulation as a medium for the process of social reproduction, it developed that the capitalist process of production taken as a whole represents a synthesis of the processes of production and circulation.
Capital in itself, for itself united in capital in and for itself. Marx was quite explicit in drawing attention to this Hegelian syllogism in the opening words of Volume III, but it is nice to see the mature, indeed posthumous Marx correct his younger self in this way.