Marx Anyone?

by Finghin Mon Feb 18, 2002 18:33

Marx was without a doubt one of the greatest thinkers of all time. I don't think that I could do justice to him or his writings in a posting on a message board. If you'd like to discuss Marx/Marxism please email me, I'll reply as soon as I can.

Is there any aspect in particular of Marx's writings that you find interesting?

There is alot of Marxist writings on the Socialist Youth (which is a Marxist youth organisation) websites also
http://www.socialistyouth.cjb.net
http://www.syucd.cjb.net

by Anarchy99 Mon Feb 18, 2002 18:50

Why? Granted Marx had some "interesting" theories, but lets remember, marx was a scientist, he took events as he seen them and compiled his theory or solution, in essence i mirror what you call him, a thinker. But, he wasn't a doer and refused to move past his authoritarian outlook.

For a doer i suggest reading the anarchist version of marx, Michael Bakunin, you can find some of his very interesting idea's and EXPERIENCE's on the http://www.struggle.ws site.

by the burningman Mon Feb 18, 2002 20:08

I love when sectarian anarchists tell people not to read Marx. Whatever. If you want to understand capitalism, and do so from analyzing what's happening on the ground, read Marx and try to learn from his method.

Bakunin did.

In fact, Bakunin translated Marx's most important work, Capital, into Russian for the first time. All three volumes. So, Bakunin thought it important enough to dedicate literally years to a translation, while latter day followers of Bakunin can't even read it.

That says a lot, unfortunately.

If you're interested in Marx, I would suggest a few others:

Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, by Engels
Anything by Rosa Luxemborg
Imperialism, Lenin
State & Revolution, Lenin
Left-Wing Communism, Lenin
What is to Be Done?, Lenin
What is to Be Undone?, Mike Albert (USA)
On Practice, By Mao
On Contradiction, By Mao
The Ghost of Stalin, by John-Paul Sartre

On, and more.

by Anarchy99 Tue Feb 19, 2002 01:11

I didn't tell people not to read Marx, by all means do, capital is an interesting book if you can be bothered reading it. Also, i did declare that Marx had some interesting theories, therefore not throwing his writing out the window altogether. While Bakunin and Marx agreed on some points they were in the end total opposites. All I suggested was that for those interested in marx, they may find the writings of Bakunin more accessible and interesting, i certainly did. As for anything by lenin or mao, i'm sorry but i'm gonna have to be a good old sectarian anarchist (lol) and say don't bother. Outdated, authoritarian, mass murderers went out 10 years ago i'm afraid...

but hey luxembourg is good, maybe try some mary bookchin to go along with that

by anarcho Tue Feb 19, 2002 22:24 anarcho at geocities dot com

Well, as an anarchist, I would urge everyone to
read Marx. He said some interesting things, some
of which were right, some of it wrong. Just as I
would ask everyone (particularly Marxists!) to
read Bakunin, Kropotkin, Goldman and so on.

Maybe if Leninists actually read anarchist theory
we would not be subjected to crap articles like
Pat Stack's "Anarchy in the UK?" which the SWP inflicted on us! It seems amazing that the SWP let someone
with absolutely no knowledge of anarchism write an
article on it! Then again, maybe he was just lying.

anyways, for anarchist critiques of marxism visit:

http://www.infoshop.org/texts/iso.html

http://www.infoshop.org/faq/append3.html

http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secHcon.html

these contain replies to SWP distortions on
anarchism and so should be useful in evaluating
Marxism.

So, in general, read Marx, *not* those who claim
to follow his ideas. In general, the best Marxist
theorists are those who think for themselves --
such as the council communists, the situationists
and so on. Its probably not a coincidence that
these marxists are closest to anarchism.

by anarcho Tue Feb 19, 2002 22:31 anarcho at geocities dot com

actually, Bakunin did *not* translate Marx's Capital, into Russian for the first time.
Not all three volumes, not even the first one.
He started it, but thought there were more
important things to do -- like organise for
revolution.

So, Bakunin did *not* think it "important enough
to dedicate literally years to a translation."

Its this type of ignorance of anarchism which
Marxists seem so consistently to express -- while
saying that anarchists are ignorant of anarchism!

So, to claim that latter day followers of Bakunin
can't even read it seems a tad ironic, given the
level of inaccuracy concerning bakunin and his
activities!

Please, read Marx but also read Bakunin, Kropotkin
and others. Maybe then we can avoid elementary
mistakes and, hopefully, avoid terrible articles
like those the SWP inflict on us concerning anarchism. It would be nice to read an accurate
critique of anarchism from a Leninist -- I've been
waiting for over 15 years and still no sign of it!

by anarcho Wed Feb 20, 2002 13:59 anarcho at geocities dot com

so amazing, in fact, that according to our
Marxist friend Bakunin managed to translate
volumes 2 and 3 of Capital *after he was dead*!

Bakunin died in 1876, Capital vols 2 and 3
were published after Marx's death in 1883.

sorry, but I forgot to mention that earlier
but I forgot, but it seemed too funny a comment
not to make!

so, please, would Marxists please bother to find
out something about anarchism before talking about
it? Thanks!

by Disillusioned kid Thu Feb 21, 2002 23:41

The link below is the Z-Net Radical Thory Instructional which suggests basing the way we view the world on a combination of anarchist, marxist, feminist and nationalist viewpoints. It might sound strange, but it actually makes a lot of sense (though it should probably also include ecologist thoughts aswell).

Even those of us who call ourselves anarchists should understand that the government is not the root of all our problems and, whatever their faults, we can learn something from other arms of leftist thought.