How useful would you rate, the economic analysis of Karl Marx [Das Kapital]..........
- Thread starter TremulousTetra
- Start date
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
Employee then?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Comrade.
Now Rosa Luxemburg, she had proper servants and maids that she paid for.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
With an iron broom?
Flies. he also kept rabbits. We have a rabbit. Its a mini lop eared blue. i have much in common with Trotsky, except that i'm slightly disapproving of hunting deer.
xslavearcx
time for a nu-metal revival?
I managed I-III, but it took so long that by the time I'd finished V.3 I'd forgotten most of V.s 1 & 2, despite copious note-taking.
volume 2 hurts.
love detective
there's no love too small
Most of it is fairly straightforward (if a little dry and technical) - the last section on the reproduction schema takes a bit of getting your head around though - I spent about 4 hours on one page from there once
xslavearcx
time for a nu-metal revival?
its something i will definately have a go at again as i was reading it in the timeframe of a reading group which went at a pace that i think was way to fast (think it was like 3 months iirc)for me so i dont think i took much in alas. On the other hand, volume 1 i read in my own pace - sometimes reading it pretty fast, other times not reading it for a couple of weeks and going back to it. in the end it took me about a year, and i also did it in tandem with the david harvey lectures as well. i have to say, at that pace i didn't find it that difficult at all, and oftentimes was a very pleasurable read. Although in saying that i didn't find it too hard, that may be because i've totally misread it lol.
Still find the commodity fetishism section a bit of a headscratcher. I'm planning on going back to that once ive read limits to capital and kliman maybe next year. would love to do volume 2, 3 and the grundrisse afterwards...
Still find the commodity fetishism section a bit of a headscratcher. I'm planning on going back to that once ive read limits to capital and kliman maybe next year. would love to do volume 2, 3 and the grundrisse afterwards...
xslavearcx
time for a nu-metal revival?
ahh shit i forgot i never read that appendix. Does that mean ive not read capital?
Humberto
Callooh! Callay!
Is this readable by the not particularly academic? I fancy having a crack at it. Is there a particular version recommended? And how many pages roughly is it i.e is it thousands and thousands of pages in multiple volumes or is it just a hefty single book that you can tackle with a bit of effort?
Also did those who have read it get a lot out of it?
Also did those who have read it get a lot out of it?
love detective
there's no love too small
if you read the first 3 to 4 pages of this thread all the stuff you ask above is answered
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
You can do about 30 pages a day, IME, in fact I need to get back to it. It's not as heavy as it looks - the bits where Uncle Charlie takes those whose economic theories displease him (like Malthus) and "rips them a new one" are particularly enjoyable.
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
xslavearcx
time for a nu-metal revival?
Volume 1 IMVHO is sufficient to understand most of the stuff thats said about marx out there.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
deer deer.
Last edited:
xslavearcx
time for a nu-metal revival?
definately. just take your time and maybe watch the david harvey lectures and you'll be grand. took me about a year to do it..
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
But not marx.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
I wondered what this meant, thanks for explaining yourself.
xslavearcx
time for a nu-metal revival?
just out of interest, what in your opinion would be enough to be sufficient to get marx?
Is Volume 1 not enough to get the basic concepts going?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
To get what people say about marx - yep. But that's a vicious circle. Because what they say about marx is based on reading at best capital vol 1 and the leading political stuff. I'd say there is no getting marx's critique of political economy without doing two things: a) understanding that capital was one book of a wider project and it involved 'provisional closures' (this basically means cutting out the active role of the w/c) and that b) this closure became a political project for marxists tied to official Communism. Getting marx - depends what you mean. Recognising the range of stuff within his writings is part of that.
love detective
there's no love too small
This is a key point that is often not appreciated by both those who have read it and those who haven't (and it's something that is over and above the other problems that derive from an 'understanding' of marx/capital based purely on a reading of volume 1 alone)
Michael Lebowitz's book 'Beyond Capital - Marx's political economy of the working class' is excellent on this
love detective
there's no love too small
the original original project was for 6 separate books - of which Capital in its entirety was but one
some of the content that was planned for the other books (to an extent) were subsumed within the three volumes of capital proper and TSV - other stuff wasn't done at all (or at least not published pre or post Marx's death).
The planned book on wage-labour i.e. the political economy of the working class (being a similar project to Capital but from the point of view of Labour) was never done. Some people claim its intended content was subsumed into Capital but that's nonsense. And that 'failure' has the biggest implication in terms of a complete understanding of Marx in general and Capital in particular - which is what butchers was referring to above in terms of understanding the temporary closures that were necessary to write Capital itself. The implications of this is the claim that Marx was a determinist who saw Labour as a passive object not an active subject
the overall message is that to understand Capital it is necessary to grasp what it is not
some of the content that was planned for the other books (to an extent) were subsumed within the three volumes of capital proper and TSV - other stuff wasn't done at all (or at least not published pre or post Marx's death).
The planned book on wage-labour i.e. the political economy of the working class (being a similar project to Capital but from the point of view of Labour) was never done. Some people claim its intended content was subsumed into Capital but that's nonsense. And that 'failure' has the biggest implication in terms of a complete understanding of Marx in general and Capital in particular - which is what butchers was referring to above in terms of understanding the temporary closures that were necessary to write Capital itself. The implications of this is the claim that Marx was a determinist who saw Labour as a passive object not an active subject
the overall message is that to understand Capital it is necessary to grasp what it is not
Fozzie Bear
Well-Known Member
I read the first few chapters of volume 1 last year and got a lot out of them. I would also recommend Harvey's lectures.
It's definitely worth a go.
I will get back to it soon. Probably
.butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Yes, excellent book - i would say to read alongside The incomplete Marx by Felton Shortall. I'd say this was the better book myself.
TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
I do not see how this couldn't be obvious to anyone who had a little understanding of his LIFE and works. But that might be me being being influenced by the political goggles I see the world through.
Similar threads
- Poll
