Most of the people I talk to, whether they claim to be Marxist or absolutely hate him, haven't read Marx. They don't even know who Hegel is. They just spout quotes and jargon without any knowledge of Marx's ideas or how Hegel's ideas influenced his thought. Do you think it's necessary to read Hegel before Marx, and if so what should I read?
Help??
It's better to start off by reading the works of Hegelians before reading Hegel himself to understand the dialectical method in action. You just need to understand a bit of Hegelian philosophical terminology before hand:
http://www.london.ac.uk/fileadmin/documents/students/philosophy/ba_course_materials/ba_19thc_hegel_glossary_01.pdf
First read Feuerbach's The Essence of Christianity and his Principles of the Philosophy of the Future:
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/feuerbach/works/essence/
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/feuerbach/works/future/index.htm
Then read Marxs "Feuerbach," from The German Ideology and the "Theses on Feuerbach."
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01.htm
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/theses/theses.htm
Then read the preface, introduction, and opening chapters through the "Organic" of Hegel's The Phenomenology of Mind
>>7569828
thanks pal
If you read Hegel first you will just skip marx desu.
Most people waste a lot of time with marx before they realize his only good points are not his own points.
here is Heidegger letting you skip Marx entirely:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxmzGT1w_kk
![derrida-heidegger-porno[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/VjBMJ1f.png "derrida-heidegger-porno[1].png")
>>7569770
If you read Hegel first you will just skip marx desu.
Most people waste a lot of time with marx before they realize his only good points are not his own points.
here is Heidegger letting you skip Marx entirely:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxmzGT1w_kk
>>7569770
There is this book called Algebra of Revolution with a subtitle wih the word Dialectics in it. I recommend it. It is one of a few leftist works I don't regret reading. Along with a book by Fromm, humanist conception of man or something like that. The former I got from the Internet somewhere
>>7569885
lol look at all the mad Marxists in the comments
>>7569885
I'm not too worried about wasting time with Marx. I'm mostly reading Marx to understand what came after him, how he influenced others, and how these ideas affected the 20th century.
Not caring if OP is not interested, I feel like writing so I'm going to write. In a way it's just to clarify concepts to myself.
Semi off-topic, but can anyone find me a PDF of the Phenomenology? I've been searching the fuck out of the web and have been quite unsuccessful.
Now on-topic. In my understanding, yes, it is absolutely necessary not only to read but comprehend Hegel's thought, or at least the basics of dialectics. When you grasp Hegel's Master/Servant relation, from which, for Hegel, selfconsciousness emerges (historically speaking), you may understand why, for Marx, work, as mediation (negation) of nature is the only possible substance of man. You may understand, also, from where Marx derive's his Historical and Dialectical materialism. What means for him negation of a negation and why it is does not come back to the preceding affirmation.
A good starting point, an unorthodox and extremely clarifying book, is Alexandre Kojeve's Introduction to the Reading of Hegel. Kojeve's reading is opposed, or at least different to those of Hyppolite and Marcuse, it's also one of the unknown pillars of Lacan's psychoanalysis and therefore of Žižek's philosophy.
I tell you, as a Žižekian, that from reading Hegel you may not only understand Marx's philosophy, you may understand the points in which Marx makes a bad, simplistic, reading of Hegel's concepts. Take the case of alienation for exemple: Marx thinks (at least in his early days i.e. The German Ideology) that the alienated substance of work may be reappropriated by the subject. This is a mistake. In the dialectical process the alienated substance is forever lost to the the subject, for the negation from which derives the alienation is also the very creation of that subject. There is no subject-preceding-the-loss, the subject, for Hegel, the one who desires the very absolute negativity of desire, (i.e. desire of desire, or, what is the same: desire for recognition) is in-itself the process of automediation of Loss. When the conciousness sees itself in it's work (or when the negation of negation happens) it, already bears the sign of mediation and for this very reason it does not return to the affirmation.
If anyone wants a serious debate, feel free, but I will probably forget this topic and only see it again some two months from now.
>>7570472
For the Phenomenology try one of these:
http://home.lu.lv/~ruben/Vestures_filozofija/Hegel-The%20Phemenology%20of%20Mind.pdf
https://archive.org/details/phenomenologyofm02hege
And I'm almost positive I found it on the
marxist.org website. Hopefully one of those were what you were looking for.
Thanks for putting so much time and effort into replying. I'm definitely interested. I saved your reply to review after reading Hegel and then Marx.
>>7570472
Also you described yourself as a Žižekian, why is that?
