/lit/ - Literature

>>17886935
Only because they have it archived in their servers.
Read the sticky.

>>17886935
Avoid Lenin, conflated Joseph Dietzgen's Dialectical Materialism with Marx's Historical Materialism.

>>17886935
>marxism = lefty political and dialectical materialism
Yes

>marxism = marxian dialectical materialism
Not bad at all, at least till the "marx critique of political economy section". ToF, tGI and C are essential Marx (you should add Grundrise).

>>17886935
just watch yt vids my nigga, reading is for white people

It's too bad about how pseudoscientific the whole thing is, otherwise I'd agree with Marxism.

Lenin was a terrible writer and his style of explaining things is greatly responsible for the stereotype that Marxism is about a cult-like, mechanical repetition of slogans.

>>17887026
+1. I'm not a marxist, but i have to say that:
>theses on feuerbach are really tight theses
The fact is that theses on feurebach can't be derived from dialectical materialism for DM is still too transcendental. Also Marx was a complete retard beyond his own philosophy. Not that capitalist theoricians are better (they are even worse --/pol/capitalincel tier).

read Hegel before unless you're a pussy

Begin with Schumpeter

>>17886935
Being castrated

>>17886935
what a retarded fucking chart
read some introductory texts to grasp the basic tenets and language of marxist literature - i.e understanding what a commodity is, surplus value etc. then just dive straight into the deep end and read capital (i would recommend reading vol. 2 at least too). take your time, it's nowhere near as difficult as people say if you concentrate a little. but don't leave it at that as you will have a dogmatic and reductionist outlook on economics and society. you must necessarily complement reading capital with with a wide range of analyses. read lenin (the main one is state and revolution - it's very short) and most importantly more contemporary critical theory - i highly recommend althusser - pour marx, postone - time, labour and social domination, a good selected reader for the gramsci prison notebooks and maybe some post-structuralist stuff, a fun intro the "post-marxist" thing might be baudrillard - pour une critique de l’economie politique du signe. always keep class in mind but don't fall into the trap of class reductionism and rigid historical and economic determinism - the world is complex, right wingers aren’t always wrong, and technology has changed everything. sorry about the french titles, i don't know what they are in english and couldn't be bothered to look it up. have fun anon

ALSO don't fall into the retarded ideology of marxism as a science. marxism is not a science, marx was not an economist - that’s doesn't make it less powerful.

>>17887253
huh?

>>17887240
not taking advice from someone who doesn't use linebreaks

>>17887268
i agree, it is difficult to read the equivalent of one short paragraph

>>17887265
it's a negative science in one sense, in that it doesn't present a viable economic model but highlights the contradictions inherent to capitalism extremely well. in another sense it's a revolutionary philosophy of history, detaching itself from incrementalism and describing history as a series of ruptures. there's a lot more to say on this point, but treating marxism as a science in this day and age is kind of retarded

>>17886935
Were marx critiques of capitalism anything new or innovating? I've seen different opinions on it.

>>17888010
marx didn't write his works in a vacuum, i'm not sure what you expect? but yes his systemisation of the contradictions inherent to capitalism and his value form theory are "new". even if they weren't it's his formulation of the critiques that has profoundly affected the world we live in so whatever

>>17886935
>reject materialist philosophy
>Marxism in its entirety falls completely on its head
Oops

>>17886935
Just start with Socialism: Utopian and Scientific and then read whatever you want. If you find something too difficult, read something by Marx or Engels that's easier. The best intro is to just immerse yourself in the writings and read as much as you can.

>>17888081
are you 16?

>>17887199
You haven't read Hegel; you can't even capitalize the first word in a sentence. Stop LARPing as an elitist intellectual on the internet.

>>17888102
No.

>>17888106
Then how you can have such a retarded surface level take on marxism?

>>17888169
It's not, Marxism is fundamentally rooted in materialism.

>>17886935
here you go anon

Also this

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Why-Socialism-Works-Harrison-Lievesley/dp/1521531218

>>17888250
No, thats Dialectical Materialism, not Marxism

>>17888907
Dialectical materialism is fundamental to Marxism. Without it Marxism in its entirety falls completely on its head.

>>17887032
If you want to see that amplified by 1000 read Hoxha

>>17888081
Only idiots believe in idealism. Materialism is clearly the superior stance

>>17888957

>>17888957
I'm not an idealist. My understanding is that there is a metaphysical demonic substrate influencing the course of human history, as remarked upon in various ancient scriptures.

i'm a communist but please redpill me on the metaphysical demonic substrate unironically. what should i read?

>>17888999
>antisemitism
>digits confirm

>>17889008
I'm not an anti-Semite.

>>17888999
explain more.

>>17888999
>im not an idealist
>bro demons dude the metaphysical demonic substrate n shiet
is this were a non material analysis gets you?

>>17889034
Well, first of all I'll admit I'm more closely aligned with Hegel's view of history than Marx's. If we want to accept Hegel's historical sublations however, it's better to view them, instead of the determining of "Absolute Spirit" or whatever he named it (which is unconditionally real), as instead merely a conditionally valid demonic determination of the collective human consciousness, or at least large parts of humanity, by various nebulous forces which we are barely aware of, but which effect each of us noticeably even in our daily lives. Most people are familiar with the more mundane types, hunger, thirst, sex, and such, but few people are aware of even deeper* rooted tendencies which can only be discovered through deep meditation, generally through Buddhist practices, which is at least what I use.
One notices that there are far more subtle, yet much more questionable to our individual survival (like hunger and so forth), influences acting upon us. Now, when you consider that these influences are not just acting upon you, but upon everyone you know and expand the scope of that influence to the entire planet... One can see how these subtle, irrational influences can have major impacts on world history. These influences are not rational in the slightest, like Hegel claimed (which was something like, "everything rational is real, everything real is rational) -- they are extremely real, much more real than any rational theory you've concocted at your study.
When one introspects to a great enough degree, it is also possible to see not only the biologically conditioned nature of these influences (the basic cravings), but also the "historically" conditioned, which is the conditionality of the influence even within a predefined human or animal existential condition. That is to say, the influence is not guaranteed merely by being human or animalian (which are themselves demonic influences, but not the kind we are interested in for this discussion), it is produced by a certain metaphysical climate which is unperceivable to the common senses.
It's not really possible to go further than this without becoming too abstract, but hopefully it helps. In fact, with what I've given one could merely interpret this as psycho-babble, which is only partially true. There is a very real substratum underlying psychological mechanisms which goes beyond "random" influences and impulses. It's up to you to discover the basis of these, no amount of writing or scripture will help.

*I said "deeper" here, but "shallower" could also be used. It's only deeper in the sense that it's harder to detect, it's not necessarily more deeply ingrained in our composites.