/lit/ - Literature

>>15562871

>>14374700
Marx is anti-moralistic through and through, and he rejects Christianity by rejecting the political state:

>The religious spirit can only be secularized insofar as the stage of development of the human mind of which it is the religious expression makes its appearance and becomes constituted in its secular form. This takes place in the democratic state. Not Christianity, but the human basis of Christianity is the basis of this state. Religion remains the ideal, non-secular consciousness of its members, because religion is the ideal form of the stage of human development achieved in this state.

>The members of the political state are religious owing to the dualism between individual life and species-life, between the life of civil society and political life. They are religious because men treat the political life of the state, an area beyond their real individuality, as if it were their true life. They are religious insofar as religion here is the spirit of civil society, expressing the separation and remoteness of man from man. Political democracy is Christian since in it man, not merely one man but everyman, ranks as sovereign, as the highest being, but it is man in his uncivilized, unsocial form, man in his fortuitous existence, man just as he is, man as he has been corrupted by the whole organization of our society, who has lost himself, been alienated, and handed over to the rule of inhuman conditions and elements — in short, man who is not yet a real species-being. That which is a creation of fantasy, a dream, a postulate of Christianity, i.e., the sovereignty of man – but man as an alien being different from the real man — becomes, in democracy, tangible reality, present existence, and secular principle.

>>14350643
No, except don't read any garbage not written by Marx or Engels like the stuff listed here >>14351032
The best entry point is "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific", but Capital should be a high priority.

>>14350717
All true, except the last part where you try to paint him as a moralist because you never read him.

>>14351289
No, but you should read "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific", "Wage Labour and Capital" and "Value, Price and Profit".

>>14351324
No it isn't, it's a critique of economics, says so on the cover.

>>13389868
Oh, and of course there will be lots of scholastic disagreement about which "ethical theory" is actually "true". Is anarchic revolution "morally justified"? The anarchist will spend weeks writing an essay, trying to prove so to the liberal.