Karl Marx's works- Who has read any? Are they interesting? Also Orwell...

[thoughtcrime1984]

I have recently developed an interest in George Orwell, and have read several of his books. I will read everything he has written, as I find him to be a great read. I am branching out into Marx a little bit, as I would like to learn more about his views and life. What should I start with/avoid? And for that matter, what is your favorite Orwell book? I like 1984 best so far, but am loving every other one that I have read also- Burmese Days, Animal Farm, Keep the Aspidistra Flying,and am just starting Homage to Catalonia.

[tanngrisnir3]

1. Yes, I have, but political theory is the most boring shit I could imagine

Important for historical purposes only, and dry, dry, dry.

[Chan790]

50. I love Poli. Theory...

of course, I have a B.A. in it so I probably would love poli. theory, otherwise it'd have been a poor choice for a major. I disagree that it is only useful for historical purposes, if anything it's a far more valuable philosophical-humanity than...say...economics (outside of Keynes and Galbraith.) or comparative theology.

But in one sense, I agree...Marx is &$%@# boring. I say that as a staunch leftist...there is more value to the left in reading a broader field of liberal thinkers including Hobbes, Rousseau, Trotsky and Emma Goldman. There is too much reverence given to Karl Marx, his personal writings on Communism (as differentiated from those co-written with Engels) provide little more than a framework upon with to build the ideology and he was by no means a deep thinker...Engels was not merely his co-theorist but also his editor and a vital apologist who deserves far more of the credit...better still are Engel's works sans Marx.

[barb162]

2. I've read two of his books

a long time ago. They were intersting then although I doubt I would find them interesting now. Read the Communist Manifesto first.

[Xipe Totec]

3. I recommend Rius - Marx for Beginners:

Synopsis

A cartoon book about Marx? Are you sure it's Karl, not Groucho? How can you summarize the work of Karl Marx in cartoons? It took Rius to do it. He's put it all in: the origins of Marxist philosophy, history, economics; of capital, labor, the class struggle, socialism. And there's a biography of "Charlie" Marx besides.

Like the companion volumes in the series, Marx for Beginners is accurate, understandable, and very, very funny.

Annotation
The origins of Marxist philosophy, history, economics of capital labor, the class struggle and socialism, all in a series of cartoons.


http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Marx-for-Beginners/Rius/e/9780375714610

[Shine]

4. I have a degree in Politics, so yes, I've read Marx.

Interesting? Not so much. :D

I like Orwell, too. 1984 my fave.

[ghostsofgiants]

38. It's interesting if you're a nerd lke me.

I listen to lectures on Marx for fun. :P

[thoughtcrime1984]

5. Thanks for the replies!

I will start with The Communist Manifest, and if that piques my interest, maybe I'll tackle Das Kapital.

[Swede]

6. Every card carrying DUer has.

Are you saying you only read it now?

[thoughtcrime1984]

7. I haven't been around forever. Anything to add to the conversation?nt

[Orrex]

8. Didn't he write Animal Farm? I read that.

[thoughtcrime1984]

10. Orwell did, yes. nt

[Orrex]

12. You don't know what you're talking about. Orwell wrote Capital.

Not to mention The Communist Manifesto.

Duh.

[thoughtcrime1984]

13. Cool

[Orrex]

14. Glad we got that straightened out.

[acmavm]

57. Hell, since you're already on this depressing political bent, try some

Zola and Sinclair (Upton) and Solzhenitsen (can't spell it).

But make sure there are not sharp objects around while reading. Especially Zola's 'Germinal' and Sol's One Day in the Life of Ivan Denosovich.

I mean while you're at it, might as well do it up right.

[thoughtcrime1984]

60. I've read Sinclair's "The Jungle" and enjoyed it thoroughly.

I like dark, politically tinged works. No need to worry about the sharp objects. :)

[Tom Kitten]

9. regarding Orwell

Of course 1984 and Animal Farm, but seek out "Homage to Catalonia"...his account of fighting in the Spanish Civil War as a volunteer with a band of anarchists and the betrayal by their Stalin backed compadres...he was badly wounded (shot in the throat) in that war...

Marx is tedious to read...many astute observations but deeply flawed and self-contradictory...as a dialectic materialist he rejected all spiritual arguments that opposed his yet believed that once all private property was abolished humanity would leap into a new conscienceness...in of itself a "spiritual" act...

[ellisonz]

65. I will admit that Das Kapital can be tedious. It's designed as a textbook.

But most of Marx's other writings are extremely good reads. Marx is best read in conjunction with Hegel. Communism as a practice is not spiritual per say but rather based on the ethical equation that "welfare and freedom" cannot be trully contradictory except in service to the cause of democracy. It's a revolutionary ideology..."spiritual" has nothing to do with Marxism in so far as it is a delusive concept employed by the bourgeoise to enslave the proletariat to the cult of Christo-capitalism.

Marx the historian is far more interesting than Marx the economist or "political theorist."

Have you read Marx's critique of Hegel?

[no name no slogan]

11. I was going to recommend "Homage..."

but I see you've already started it. You will enjoy it, but at the same time you will be hugely frustrated and disappointed, too.

I was a PoliSci major in college with concentration in political theory, so I got my fill of Marx. He makes a lot of good points (which is little more than pointing out the obvious), but then gets a bit long-winded when it comes to the solution (the socialist state). I guess it's for that reason that I always preferred Bakunin to Marx as far as that goes.

If you really want to read Marx, start with the Communist Manifesto. It's an easy read and pretty easy to comprehend. If you want to read more, go on to Das Capital. You'll probably know most of the content of these, as they've been argued about ad infinitum for the past century and a half.

[ghostsofgiants]

39. I haven't read nearly enough Bakunin.

Suggest me some works!

[old mark]

15. Very dry, theory. I can get through Marx for short periods, but

I have to go outside and walk around after.

Some people love it, just not for me, but then neither is dialectical materialism.
I'm just a Democrat, not a commie.
mark

[MissHoneychurch]

16. I grew up in Estern Germany

so no, I will never read Marx - I had to live with what the Communists did with his theory. Thanks a lot. Never again.

I read 1984 by Orwell. It is great literature. And should be read in all schools.

[bird gerhl]

17. Probably read the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 to start with.

Or just go with The Portable Marx, if you want more bang for your buck

[Monk06]

20. Good rec. The 1844 Manuscripts predate the Revolution of 1848 and Marx's encountrer

with Hegel. Marx was a better political
journalist and critic than a philosopher.

[bird gerhl]

21. Er, no, the 1844 manuscripts contain Marx's famous Critique of Hegel?

I don't know what you're talking about.

Marx was a better poet than he was a political journalist, philosopher, or economist :dunce:

[Monk06]

31. Thanks for the correction. My copy was stolen ten years ago along

with all my other philosophy texts so
I missed the Critic of Hegel being part
of that collection of essays.

I think the critique was his first foray
into philosophy but I may be wrong.

I seem to recall thinking Marx's remarks
on the logic of Hegel involving an ontological
quibble over materialism vs idealism and did
not make any essential structural points against
the formal structure of dialectical reasoning.

Ultimately I think Marx ended up being constrained
by his own brand of formalism, due to his debt to Hegel.

This is evidenced in the flaws of Historical Materialsm
which was a dead end for Marxism as historical theory.

JMO

[Richard Steele]

18. Orwell was a brilliant writer...Marx was a loony nutcase.

Don't bother with Marx. That guy was nuttier than squirrel feces.

[SteppingRazor]

27. Yeah, don't bother. He's only the most important political theorist of the last couple centuries.

:eyes:

[Richard Steele]

33. He's dead, and his IDEAS were childish "pie-in-the-sky" fantasy-land bullshit.

The only way any "Marxist" society could actually function
is if every member of that Society was a lily-pure ALTRUIST
who possesed neither EGO nor AMBITION.

Such a society has never existed, and it never will.

Such a Society would have no need of 'Marxism', because
such a Society would have no need of any "ism" at all.



Marx was an IDJIT. Everyone who has ever attempted
to put his theories into practice has created MISERY on an epic scale.

FUCK Marx, says Richard Steele.

I wave my private parts at his aunties,
and I FART in his general direction.

[ghostsofgiants]

36. "I am not a Marxist." - Marx.

Marx wasn't a Marxist, he was just a writer whose ideas became "Marxism" and if you actually read Marx, while he definitely wasn't 100% right about everything, a lot of his analysis and ideas were spot on.

As for everyone attempting to put his theories into practice creating misery on an epic scale, they deviated far from Marxist notions such as classless society and the withering of the state. authoritarianism does not a Marxist equal.

[Richard Steele]

42. So, you admit that I'm entirely correct.

Good for you.

[ghostsofgiants]

43. Yes, that's exactly it.

:eyes:

[Richard Steele]

45. Stop with all the sweet talk, and just take me right here right now, you magnificent bastard!!!!

All jokes aside, I just need to say that I
have noticed you on this board,
and although you and I may not arrive at the same conclusions
on any given issue, I really LOVE the way you think about things.


Your post above: perfect, awesome, and perfectly awesome;.


Nicely done! :thumbsup:

Dick

[skooooo]

47. Which shows you know very little about Marxism...

:eyes: There's more to Marx than warrants the laying the blame of failed governments at his feet. The whole theory about how economic conditions evolve and the affect of capitalism on the underclass was very right on. Try to go beyond the platitudes that the right wing has pushed at you.

[Richard Steele]

51. His ideas about the evolution of economic systems were demonstrably wrong from day one.

It simply doesn't work the way Marx insisted it does,
and I've got the history books to prove it.

I'm familiar with his work, and have arrived at my opinion of it
with no assistance from "the Right Wing".

He was WRONG about things that anyone could see.
He might as well have based his "theories" on the premise that
grass is red and the sky is green.

He was an IDIOT who found a ghostwriter capable of passing off
his idiocy as intellectualism, and some of the public fell for it.

[skooooo]

52. And that's why we're in such good shape today.....

...unbridled capitalism is the answer. :eyes:

Whatever. We don't have anything in common to discuss, imo.

[Richard Steele]

62. As opposed to those greatly successful nations who put Marxism into practice, right?

:eyes: indeed.

Since you are unwilling to face REALITY, and
have resorted to the childish technique of "putting words in my mouth",
in order to create a strawman arguement, I have to agree that
you and I have nothing to discuss.

If you ever learn what "discussion" is, and wish to honestly engage in it,
that may change.
Until then, I'll bid you "good day".

Good day.

[skooooo]

63. yes like sweden, germany, and others...

...especially those countries who didn't follow our greedy bankers down the path of sub-prime. Besides, you didn't address my point.

[Richard Steele]

67. Since you seem unable to grasp the concept of "Good day", I'm forced to say "Welcome to IGNORE".

Welcome to IGNORE. :hi:

[rug]

48. A fine example of the idiocy of rural life.

http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html

[Writer]

56. Analyzing Marx from a Freudian perspective is rubbish, because it's ahistorical.

Yes, there are plenty of issues with Marx, and certainly with pure socialism:

1. His socialist model assumes that an economy will always grow; he doesn't explain what will happen if the economy goes south and cannot attend to the needs of the worker. What answer does socialism provide then?

2. He fails to ground his idea of "false consciousness" in anything concrete. (How exactly does this ACTUALLY WORK in society?) It wasn't until Althusser's development of the subjective construct of the ideological state apparatus (ISA) that there was any grounding of this idea.

3. He assumes that the proletariat will grow uncomfortable and rise up to overthrow the superstructure. His "revolution" never really occurred in capitalist nations because our basic needs have been met. (i.e. We eat.)

4. Another problem is that too many have ripped up Marxian logic in order to craft ungrounded links of ideological power between the state and institutions based on simplistic notions of currency exchanges. (See: Chomsky, Noam.) This has seriously damaged the left's ability to serve as true media advocates. We cannot describe how these exchanges lead to the formation of ideology, especially within the proletariat (and don't get me started on Chomsky's naive propaganda model), so we cannot describe how a superior media system is supposed to function REALISTICALLY.


Marx was an idealist, yes, much in the same way as liberalism is an ideal. But don't try to use psychoanalysis as a means to describe why people won't rise up. The problem is within our social structures and our histories.

[GirlinContempt]

59. So what, in your mind capitalism = USA, Canada, England, and what...

Maybe a handful of other places? Come on, no revolution in capitalist nations? What's your definition of capitalist by that account? Capitalism has nothing to do with meeting peoples basic needs. And, the US, which is not 'capitalist', can't even meet those basic needs for huge numbers of people within their own borders. Just because those people haven't had a revolution doesn't mean that somehow every country that has is somehow less 'capitalist' than one that didn't. Countries on the brink of serious class strife often added more socialism in to their government and averted out and out rebellion that was brewing in a pressure cooker of poverty and abuse.

That isn't to say England, the USA, etc haven't had revolutions. They have. Just not on a scale we tend to remember, and they didn't end up being like what we now think of as "revolution". It didn't turn in to another USSR, so it doesn't count, right? Somehow people revolting against the system, if they fail, or if they don't ask for communism, aren't really revolting?

[Writer]

55. Marx is NOT PURELY a political theorist.

He's a socio-economic theorist who has been borrowed several times over from subsequent social theorists who have (in the vulgarized Western sense) used materialism for theories of power and subordination through language, institutions, and labor.

[hobbit709]

19. The only way to get through reading Marx is

1. Lots of spare time
2. Enough drugs to get you through the mind-numbing political theory

[tigereye]

22. Orwell is a much better writer

[Writer]

23. Marx is as fundamental to social theory as liberalism.

Marx is the reason why Europe leaned toward more of a collectivist mindset versus America's communitarian/individualist mindset.

Read the Philosophical Transcripts... and if you can stomach it, read The Commodity. The latter is where he explicates materialism.

[rolltideroll]

24. Animal Farm

is one of the most clever allegories ever written. it is really a masterpiece. 1984 as well. He was a communist until he went to the USSR and saw how life there really was. Snowball was Trotsky, The old Major was Lenin, and Napoleon was Stalin.

[bird gerhl]

25. No, he was a supporter of the USSR until the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact

[rolltideroll]

28. That;s right

I was thinking of another writer.

[tanngrisnir3]

34. Uh, I think his time in the Spanish Civil War was what disillusioned him.

[HamdenRice]

26. Definitely read him, with guidance. Brilliant, difficult, important, and fundamentally correct.

In the same way that the right wing spreads the dumb meme that the New Deal did not ameliorate the Great Depression, they also spread the dumb meme that somehow Marx was "wrong." Actually he was right about most of what he wrote about. Lenin was mostly wrong.

Marx was right about so many things, and set the social science ground rules about so many issues, that we can barely see within our social sciences what he first established in theory. In other words, you might read along and think that you are reading some not particularly remarkable observation or theory -- until you realize he was the first person to make that observation or establish that theoretical insight. That's why it's important to have some sort of teacher to point out the significance of what you are reading. For example even the right wing bitches about class warfare without acknowledging that our very concept of class conflict was first rigorously established by Marx.

Also, read some of the material that isn't ordinarily thought of as his fundamental texts. Someone upthread mentioned the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts; they are crucial, even if they are difficult.

Capital (Das Kapital) is very, very important, especially for its historical explanation of the effect of commerce on the countryside, and is absolutely vital for understanding what's happening in places like Latin America, Africa and China even today.

[ghostsofgiants]

40. Nicely said.

[SteppingRazor]

29. I've read the Manifesto, but not Das Kapital.

Marx is, um, a bit dry to put it as gently as I can. He's not particularly accessible. That Ruis book mentioned above is kinda cool, and a WAY easier read.

[ghostsofgiants]

37. Capital is really dry but worth reading.

And check out the link I posted below, really helpful in understanding Capital.

[gmoney]

30. Orwell's "Coming up for Air" was quite good, as I recall...

But it's probably been 20 years since I read it, so it's probably time I read it again.

[DBoon]

32. Marx reported on the US Civil War

for Horace Greeley's paper, the New York Tribune

http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1957/3/1957_3_20.shtml

During this period Europe’s extremest radical, proscribed by the Prussian police and watched over by its agents abroad as a potential assassin of kings, sent in well over 500 separate contributions to the great New York family newspaper dedicated to the support of Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, temperance, dietary reform, Going West, and, ultimately, Abraham Lincoln. Even at his low rate of pay—so low that his revolutionary friend and patron, Friedrich Engels, agreed with him that it was “the lousiest petty-bourgeois cheating”—what Marx earned from the Tribune during that decade constituted his chief means of support, apart from handouts from Engels. The organ of respectable American Whigs and of their successors, the new Republican party, sustained Karl Marx over the years when he was mapping out his crowning tract of overthrow, Das Kapital.

[ghostsofgiants]

35. With Marx, start off with The Communist Manifesto and maybe a Marx reader or something.

Capital Vol. 1 is good, but a little dry. www.davidharvey.org features university lectures (full video) from one of the best Marxian scholars out there on Capital Vol. 1.

[ghostsofgiants]

41. As for Orwell, "Down and Out in Paris and London" is good.

But then, so is most (probably all) of his work.

[DUlover2909]

44. I have read Marx and Engels Communist Manifesto and it made sense if you don't try to be critical.

I enjoyed Animal Farm while I was in college. For very deep reading try Hegel's Reason in History or Sigmund Freud's Jokes and the Relation to the Unconscious. That stuff takes serious time to get your mind around.

[HamdenRice]

49. The Communist Manifesto was really just a pamphlet and doesn't scratch the surface

Judging Marx on the basis of the Manifesto is kind of like evaluating the philosophical pragmatics of Cornell West based on his cameo in "The Matrix."

[skooooo]

46. Read "Road to Wiegan Pier""

By Orwell - it will teach you a lot about poverty and society, and how society keeps the poor down.
Marx's reading is more theoretical, from what I know.

[thoughtcrime1984]

53. I have read every reply thus far, most are very helpful. The essence of DU- thanks guys!

I am checking into much of what has been recommended.

[Taverner]

54. Das Kapital is interesting, but a long long long read

And all of his math is faulty

But other than that, and its antisemitism, its an interesting book

[Threedifferentones]

58. I love love LOVE

Homage to Catalonia. I also read Animal Farm and 1984 back in school. I liked them alright, but never wanted to revisit them...

I think you should read Marx, but know that these days the age of his thoughts really shows. Definitely brilliant and influential, but their relevance is fading: class warfare is a lot more complicated than Marx ever imagined, IMHO.

[thoughtcrime1984]

61. I have purchased per suggestions, "The Portable Karl Marx"

It seems to include parts of many of his important books, and The Communist Manifesto in it's entirety.

[crimsonblue]

64. start with the Communist Manifesto. It's only 30 pages long.

It is a quick read and will let you get the entire gist of Marx. He wrote it for the Communist Party in Germany and it was the party's platform and a call to revolution. 1848, the year he wrote it, was a year of revolutions: in France, and Germany (unsuccessful), Italy (unsuccessful), Austria (unsuccessful), and Spain (unsuccessful). Around this time, Europeans began to realize that the time of revolution was over. It was determined to no longer feasible to try to overthrow and create a new government. It became necessary to work within the constraints of government and reform it. Contrast this, while reading the Manifesto, with Marx's belief that a class-based revolution was necessary and inevitable. Also, a good way to get a feel for the oppressed poor, read Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle". Conditions at factories owned by Joseph Engels, "co-author" of the Manifesto and financial benefactor for Marx, are very similar to that described by Sinclair and these conditions motivated Marx to write the Manifesto. Also, look for the inherent flaws in Marx's justification for the goodneed of humanity (his logical fallacies in this respect led to an over-simplification and tendency towards eutopian idealogy-- He fails to recognize that greed is a fundamental force in people, many times overriding the tendency towards goodness).

[JitterbugPerfume]

66. I have read Orwell

and he is great. Marx is on my shelf along with a bunch of other authors I want to read before I lay me down and die .

[DeepBlueC]

68. I loved Down and Out in Paris and London

It's a classic. Very funny. :D