What's the best primer on Marxism for someone who's only interested in it to better understand postmodern philosophy and critical theory like Deleuze, Zizek, Debord, Baudrillard, etc.?
Infinite Jest
>>7841973
SWTG
Reading Capital, Louis Althusser
>>7841973
Thomas Sowell On Marx
>>7841973
I am also interested in this.
How's pic related? Anyone read it?
>>7841973
start with the greeks
>>7842016
He didn't fly, Sowell.
The State and Revolution is a super-important read for every Marxist.
marxists.org has all you need.
I recommend Quotations of Mao Zedong. Anything by Lenin, Stalin, Che, Hoxha, and especially Engels.
Or idk. Jason Unruhe is also cool.
>>7843482
>Mao, Stalin, Hoxha, Jason Unruhe
Jesus Christ dude.
>>7843482
>Jason Unruhe is also cool.
I used to be a massive fanboy of his. Regret that now. Still, he introduced me to a lot of marxist theory, that I would never have heard of otherwise.
>>7841973
If you want a good set of starter books, then I'd have to recommend reading:
A companion to Marx's Capital - David Harvey.
Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State - Engels
Foundations of Leninism - Joseph Stalin
Left-Communism, and infantile disorder - Lenin
Quotations of Chairman Mao - duh
>being Marxist
May as well be a religion at this point.
>but guys this dude 200 years ago said the stateless society would come to be
Yeah I'm sure if you spend another century tweaking your neo-Marxist values it'll happen!
>>7841973
Let's share everything! Everyone's the same!
>>7843486
Not to sound edgy or anything but...
Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, and Truman were either slaveowners, genocidal, racist, or comfortable with carpet bombing entire nations if this advanced American interests.
Lenin decriminalized homosexual relations.
Stalin waged war on a racist death cult (Nazism).
Mao radically pushed for a modernization of culture, doing away with sexism, illiteracy, and rampant superstition.
>>7843542
Stalin and Mao murdered millions of people.
>>7843539
>Let's share everything.
Fundamental misunderstanding of how socialist distribution works. Private property is commonly owned, and run collectively. Personal property is distributed based on need, and from that point onwards, belongs personally to whomever it was distributed to. Nobody's taking away your iPhone. (Though it will be replaced with a comparable machine that was made humanely, and isn't literally designed to break).
>Everyone's the same.
What the fuck made you think that Marxists think that?
>>7843535
>being capitalist
But dude, this guy 400 years ago predicted perfect competition, radical freedom, and spoke of the Invisible Hand of the market.
>>7843542
>Lenin decriminalized homosexual relations.
I know, one of the reasons I like Lenin. Stalin criminalized it again.
>>7843552
...Except that capitalism exists and has raised large portions of the world out of poverty.
>>7843554
Yes...during the 1930s. In Britain, this was a prison sentence or chemical castration.
Either way, they were ahead of their time and the punishments for it were far less severe and regressive.
>>7843563
Indeed. You don't need to convince me of the superiority of socialism, I'm a Marxist myself. It's just that I don't appreciate Stalinism
>>7843562
>capitalism brought people out of poverty meme
But what caused people to go into poverty to begin with?!
>>7843562
>and has raised large portions of the world out of poverty.
Compared to their status under feudalism? Yes. They are better off, now. In much the same way, the Soviet Union, and Maoist China lifted large portions of the world out of poverty. And Capitalism necessarily creates inequality, which invariably leads to poverty.
>>7843570
>But what caused people to go into poverty to begin with?!
The human condition is poverty, go set up shop in a forest without tools you delusional faggot
>>7843571
How are those states Communist? They're dictatorships
>>7843572
Oh, for fuck's sake, the natural scarcity faced by a lone hunter-gatherer is not comparable to the situation faced by the poor in an industrialised society. We have the ability to feed everyone, but our economic system is organised in such a way that we don't. That is the issue here.
>>7843574
I didn't say they were communist. They were socialist, and yes, those regimes were inordinately authoritarian, that's what happens when the international situation, partnered with a serious underindustrialisation problem, and massive numbers of counter-revolutionaries sends your country into a state of perpetual crisis.
>>7843572
Actually wages fell and working hours increased during early capitalism
>>7843551
>replaced with a comparable machine that was made humanely, and isn't literally designed to break
I don't see how that follows from the institution of socialism as the economic system of the world or a country. What incentive would people have to do something like that?
And anyway, it shows how far from reality a scenario like that is. Fat chance of Apple just giving away their "patents" and shit, unless by gunpoint.
>>7843583
> They were socialist
Don't know about China, but didn't the party control pretty much everything in Soviet Union? Making it something like planned state-capitalism.
>>7843675
>I don't see how that follows from the institution of socialism as the economic system of the world or a country.
Capitalism runs on the need to regularly sell shit, you don't have that with socialism, hence no need to equip your goods with a built-in expiration date.
>Fat chance of Apple just giving away their "patents" and shit, unless by gunpoint.
That's the idea. Capital won't just stand by watching itself getting redistributed.
>>7843699
>hence no need to equip your goods with a built-in expiration date
Yeah, that part I understand, but who would actually want to make memephones in a socialist world?
Besides the army of assembly-line workers, there's a lot of research that goes into it (probably), and in total that makes for a large number of people. I don't think all of them are doing it because they like iPhones.
>>7841973
>ctrl+f "communist": 2 results, pertinent to states
>ctrl+f "manifesto": 0 results
>I know even before posting this that someone will get up their own ass about the Babby-text, thereby completely missing the point
Be sure to read the Communist Manifesto among whatever other materials are recommended, anon. It is short, easy, historically (and ideolog-ic-ally *slurps* :^) pertinent. Consequently it is frequently included in collections of Marx/Engels, but I wanted to single it out - because no one else has - because this thread is largely a bourgeois dickwaving contest to name lesser-known Marxist texts.
The thread has also degenerated into a contest to see who can most sensibly point out that Marx sucks, which ironically happens all the time on /lit/, 4chan's most politically left-oriented board. What these people have completely failed to understand is that the OP has indicated no particular interest in or agreement with Marxism as such, and clearly just wants a decent background in the history/jargon so (he) can read the modern continental philosophy which is fashionable to discuss on /lit/. The OP clearly just wants to engage in some honest bourgeois dilettantrery and get something out of some books, that's all.
>>7841973
Elementary Principles of Philosophy by Georges Politzer
>>7843542
>DUDE WHO CARES IF THEY DID ALL THESE GOOD THINGS, THEY WERE STILL RACIST AND SHITexcept for Jackson, cause he was butthurt populist
This post reads like RATM lyrics
ITT: Leninists that actually think they were not counterrevolutionary.
You ruined the left. Please go away.
>>7843542
>this post
>>7843758
You like the word "pertinent", ok.
>who can most sensibly point out that Marx sucks
Yeah, it's funny that whenever you bring Marx up, all these Libertarians come crawling out of the woodwork trying to argue with you, and the poltards calling you a commie, even though you didn't voice on opinion at all.
>>7842253
>>7843758
Thank you, that was the point of the thread. I'm not looking to debate the efficacy of Marxism as a political system or singular ideology, I'm just looking for something that can cleanly and easily summarize the major points of Marxism as they apply to the mentioned philosphical movements.
>>7843815
>implying non-Leninists are ever relevant
>there are leftists on my board
ever consider moving to reddit?
>>7844901
/lit/ is more leftist than reddit now
>>7844857
>not knowing that a revolution has to be carried out by the majority of the people to be called a revolution
>>7843809
>points out bad things
>not necessarily denying good things
chill bruh
Outta my way, uneducated shits.
>>7844680
Assuming you're the OP, thanks for this further vindication. *jerks off to it*
But seriously, marxists.org has a free, sensibly arranged, historically-oriented selection of basic texts along the lines of what you want.
>>7844901
Reddit is center as fuck
>>7845064
Reddit is very fractured, the subreddit system with the voting and banning abilities make for very potent echo-chambers.
>they don't except the efficiencies of a capitalist system and productivity and innovation it inculcates
sorry bruhs, but i cant reject empiricism that much to go full socialist anymore
>>7846041
>except
>>7846041
pleb
>>7846041
by what measure are market economies supposed to be "efficient"?
>>7846052
Well they exist, that's usually the first step to determining something's efficiency. I realize this is a touchy subject for you guys.
>>7846053
LEFTISTS ABSOLUTELY BLOWN THE FUCK OUT
#REKT
#SHATTERED
#SHOTSFIRED
THERE'S NO COMING BACK FROM THIS
LEFTISTS ON SUICIDE WATCH
>>7846052
the efficient market hypothesis perhaps?
name a better way to transmit information to consumers and have an effective pricing system?
at least market socialists accept this, i'm just trying to make sure nobody actually believes in central planning anymore
>>7846041
>efficient
Yeah, I mean who cares about the present state of ecology, right? unrelenting production and innovation, onwards and upwards until the earth caves in beneath our feet!
>>7846094
there are market failures of course, and that is where good governance comes in, i am not a libertarian
>>7846101
fuck off commie
>>7846074
Capitalization evolved from merely the cost of material equipment to the earnings capacity of corporations as going concerns. Stock prices simply depend upon the psychological factors that determine expectations of earning capacity.
Finance has little to do with real investment and it's generally poor at actually allocating capital. Stock markets fail to allocate real capital to employments that would maximize social welfare.
Read Veblens The Engineers and the Price System for a pretty good critic of the price system:
http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/veblen/Engineers.pdf
