Daily reminder to actually read Marx before posting

daily reminder to actually read Marx before posting.
reminder that Critique of the Gotha Programme, Value Price and Profit and Wage Labor and Capital are only 30 pages long each.
nobody on here should even speak as a leftist without reading these. they're extremely short and easy to read.

Other urls found in this thread:


Despite that people still misinterpret them on a daily basis.

There's a difference between reading them, interpreting them, and actually incorporating them into a larger political framework.

I had to read those like 3 times each to get them right.

maybe because those people aren't aren't reading them

Reminder that you're not fooling anyone Muke.

Reminder that you can't talk pol-econ before reading Capital instead of shit tier pamphlets which are superseded in Capital's argument. Reminder that you can't talk Marx's social philosophy without taking into account >all< the various commitments from 1844—German Ideology—Grundrisse.

Reminder that leftcom abstract idealists aren't Marxists by Marx's own standards of practice and theory based on actual conditions of reality.

Reminder that Mao was actually a pretty good Marxist until he took power, after which he literally became a retarded leftcom who fucked things up by ignoring concrete reality.

Reminder that you need to read several fucking good books, and not take two years to read 60 pages of babby theory.

Marx said these are the second best after reading Capital itself:
Italian: marxists.org/italiano/marx-engels/1867/capitale/compendiocafiero.html
French: cga-rp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Abrege-du-Capital-de-Karl-Marx-Carlo-Cafiero.pdf
Sadly I couldn't find it in English.

It doesn't help that WL&C and VP&P are inconsistent with Marx's later work. If you're serious about understanding Marx, I would recommend going straight to Capital Volume One, Chapter One: On Commodities. It is both shorter, and better organized than either WL&C or VP&P.


not everyone has the time to read books whenever they want. But if you expect everyone here to be well-versed in Hegel and Lacan or something then idk what to say to that.

If the price of goods has nothing to do with wages why are the price of goods so high in the countries with the highest wages I.e Scandi countries, Australia, Britain, Germany, etc ?

That's nice sweetie, but when are you releasing your complete system? Any day now?

What are the inconsistencies?


I don't know shit but, doesn't it depend on who's buying? I imagine the slaves in Dubaï aren't paid much above horse shit, but a latte must be like $20

A.W. you're a fucking poser and a pseud

they are related though, you completely misunderstood VPP
Marx is simply debunking the wages fund theory which assumes capital returns will always be constant and cannot be reduced to provide higher wages for workers
those countries you mentioned still have significantly higher purchasing power so it's not like Weston's prediction that a 10% wage increase would lead to a 10% price increase
furthermore, wages nowadays don't even keep up with inflation, so prices increase without an increase in wages
this is actually Marx's main argument to fight for wage raises: you simply gotta get back what you lost

forgot to add "was correct" at the end

People keep saying this and yet no one has actually posted how they are inconsistent. WL&C was written 18 years before Capital, but it was still being posted as a pamphlet in 1891. VP&P was written in 1865, two years before Capital.

He conflates cost of production with value, and labor with labor-time. Engels mentions

…it in his forward.

Just read WL&C before bed and don't think I learned much. Might have to reread when I'm more awake.

But I have to read a book for school first. I’ll read those afterwards.


but what's the difference.

I meant labor-power, my bad.

Why should I read a 1000-page book?

I can't read more than 5-10 pages of any book without getting bored. But I can read hundreds of paragraphs written by individual leftists on this board.

then start off with novels.

Read 5-10 pages a day? Should finish it in under a year.


Just start with the first chapter. If you read that, then you will already be better off than most people on this board.

This is not a very good idea because his ideas aren't fully fledged out in WLC and VPP. Please stop listening to Muke, he is a moron. If you read Das Kapital, it says in the introduction that it is a continuation of Political Economy.

My recommendation:
1. Grundrisse & Communist Manifesto
2. Political Economy
3. Capital Vol. 1 & 2
(after that I'd read Engels Principles of Communism, Anti-Dühring, Origin of Family Property and State as well es State and Revolution by Lenin and Dialectical and Historical Materialism by Stalin)
5. Critique of the Gotha Program
5. Capital Vol. 3

You must be reminded

1. Grundrisse
Isn't that Marx's most difficult work after Capital?

inb4 butthurt lefties


shoo, babby. the adults are discussing economics.

all economics are bourgeois, the only true free way to consume what was produced is an anarchichal one.

okay. so what's your system for determining the value of a product?

doesn't exist

wrong. read bordiga


Honestly, Marx's writing style is kind of obtuse and the frequent reference to historical context is lost on most people in the present. If we had For Dummies versions of his theory we could probably get more people to actually understand the concepts.

why don't you try getting that started then?

this is why marxists bully us anarkiddies

wtf I like this retarted poster now.

< And he reckons the falling or rising of the profit according to the degree at which the exchange value of his goods stands, whether above or below his zero – the cost of production.

< Consequently, it appears that the capitalist buys their labour with money, and that for money they sell him their labour. But this is merely an illusion. What they actually sell to the capitalist for money is their labour-power.

I read wage labor and capital, but I still don't know the difference between labor and labor power. Unless I missed something, Marx just says they are different without saying why.


AFAIK, labor is literal labor, while labor-power is the potential to do labor. In most cases the employer buys your labor-power for a certain timeframe, usually in hours per a day. That's why one is paid hourly and not by the actual work they do in that hour, because it is their labor-power that is sold and bought, not their labor.

If you are paid an hourly wage, you are selling your labor-power, while if you are directly paid for the goods or services you provide, you are indirectly paid for your labor.


Ah I get it. Thanks for the explanation.

People are accusing posters of being muke for…trying to get people to read?

Has the meme gone full circle?