/lit/ - Literature

Where in Marx's corpus does he talk about money being a commodity in it of itself?

i.e deflation if new money is not created

Ty

What do I write and publish to be as provocative, destructive, disruptive and edgy as Karl Marx?

How did he get so many people to listen to him?

>two more weeks bro trust me western europe is going to collapse under the contradictions it's going to happen trust the dialectics the end of history is almost here

>While Karl was born to Jewish parents, he wrote excessively about his dislike for his own people. “What was the profane basis of Judaism?” he wrote. “Practical need. Self-interest. What is the worldly cult of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money.”

>Marx also commented on the US annexation of then-Mexican California during the Mexico-America war, saying “Is it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know what to do with it?”

>Marx had horrid personal hygiene, barely ever bathing or cleaning his home. A Prussian policeman investigating Marx in London in 1850 reported on his room: “Everything dirty and covered with dust, so that to sit down becomes a hazardous business.”

>Karl Marx suffered from abscesses all over his body, but particularly badly affected were his backside, his groin and under his armpits, which he himself described as 'a mess'. Painful lumps on his inner thigh would grind against his trousers, making even a short walk very difficult. Sitting was often impossible because of the carbuncles on his bottom. A large boil beneath the shoulder blade would make lying down quite an ordeal. In particularly black moods, Marx would hack at them with a cut-throat razor.

>Though Marx was “middle class” and even “Victorian” in many of his everyday cultural attitudes, this did not stop him from breaking his marriage vows and committing adultery. He had sex enough times with the family maid that she bore him an illegitimate son – and this under the same roof with his wife and his legitimate children (of which he had seven, with only three living to full adulthood).

>But he would not allow his illegitimate child to visit their mother in his London house whenever he was at home, and the boy could only enter the house through the kitchen door in the back of the house. In addition, he had his friend, longtime financial benefactor, and intellectual collaborator, Fredrick Engels, claim parentage of the child so to avoid any social embarrassment falling upon himself due to his infidelity.

>>21613909
Only answer.

>and my dumbass ideas

Reminder that Marx didn't have a labor theory of value.

The only German that wasn't autistic.

Which author done the most damage to humanity? Pic unrelated

so i read the manifesto, das kapital and state and revolution, but i honestly didn't take much away from it. can any lefties recommend me some second source literature? i'd be interested in maybe an overview of communists and its branches or some specific guidelines on how exactly it is to be implemented. Comparison to how it went in real life and what went wrong would be interesting too.

Marx reading list:

Brumaire
Manuscripts
Gotha
Grundrisse
Capital 1, 2, and 3 (yes you need to read all of them. 1 is not self-contained.)

Further Reading:
Michael Heinrich's Introduction (note: not an introduction)
Heinrich's 3-4(?) volume biography of Marx that he is still writing (vol 1 is out)
Love and Capital (another biography)
Isaak Illich Rubin's Essays on Marx's Theory of Value
Time, Labor, and Social Domination by Postone
Value by Diane Elson
Workers and Capital by Tronti
Law and Marxism by Pashukanis
Notebooks by Gramsci
The Principle of Hope by Bloch
Selected Writings by Benjamin
The Production of Space by Lefebvre
The Making of the English Working Class by Thompson (also read his essay on time.)
The Black Jacobins by C.L.R. James
Antiquity to Feudalism and Lineages of the Absolutist State by Perry Anderson
The Essential Lenin
The Essential Stalin
On Contradiction and On Practice by Mao
Dialectical Logic by Ilyenkov
Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays, I and IS Apparatuses, and Philosophy of the Encounter by Althusser
H and CS by Lukacs
Marx: Towards the Centre of Possibility by Karatani
Eclipse by Gilles Dauve
What Was the USSR? Towards a Theory of the Deformation of Value Under State Capitalism by Aufheben
Reading Marx Politically by Cleaver
Marx's Inferno by William Clare Roberts
Moneybags Must Be So Lucky: On the Literary Structure of Capital by Robert Paul Wolff
In the Long Run We Are All Dead: Keynesianism, Political Economy, and Revolution by Geoff Mann
Crack Capitalism by John Holloway
The Origins of Capitalism as a Social System: The Prevalence of an Aleatory Encounter by John Milios
Critical Theory and the Critique of Political Economy: On Subversion and Negative Reason by Bonefeld
There's No Such Thing as "The Economy": Essays on Capitalist Value by Samuel A. Chambers
Marx at the Millennium by Cyril Smith
Critiquing Capitalism Today: New Ways to Read Marx by Frederick Harry Pitts
The Dialectical Imagination by Martin Jay
Money and Totality by Moseley
The Constitution of Capital: Essays on Volume 1 of Marx's Capital by Bellofiore
The Origin of Capitalism: A Longer View by Ellen Meiksins Wood

Where do I start with Marx and Marxism?

how could one man be so wrong?

How many of you have honestly read all 3 volumes of Capital?

If capitalism is supposed to gradually evolve into communism then why did he advocate both for violent socialist revolutions as well as socialists participating in liberal electoral politics?

What the fuck was his problem?

I’ve seen the light and am going to take the Marxpill.What translations are best?

>>16678172
>>16678268
>>16678331
>>16678405
I warned you about capitalism bro. I told you dog.

karl marx failed to consider when i buy thing i happy

>The bourgeois sees in his wife a mere instrument of production. He hears that the instruments of production are to be exploited in common, and, naturally, can come to no other conclusion than that the lot of being common to all will likewise fall to the women. He has not even a suspicion that the real point is to do away with the status of women as mere instruments of production. For the rest, nothing is more ridiculous than the virtuous indignation of our bourgeois at the community of women which, they pretend, is to be openly and officially established by the Communists. The Communists have no need to introduce the community of women; it has existed almost from time immemorial. Our bourgeois, not content with having the wives and daughters of their proletarians at their disposal, not to speak of common prostitutes, take the greatest pleasure in seducing each other's wives. Bourgeois marriage is in reality a system of wives in common and thus, at the most, what the Communists might possibly be reproached with, is that they desire to introduce, in substitution for a hypocritically concealed, an openly legalised community of women. For the rest, it is self-evident that the abolition of the present system of production must bring with it the abolition of the community of women springing from that system, i.e., of prostitution both public and private.

Doesn't the idea that people act in their material interests make the same assumptions of the 'rational actor' in economics?

This guy didn't know very much about linen