• @lets_get_off_lemmy@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      24
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Long, boring, hard to pay attention to. I read philosophy and theory sometimes but it’s few and far between for those reasons. I really have to be in a special mood to sit down and read something that dense.

      • Cowbee [he/they]
        link
        fedilink
        197 months ago

        Long, boring, hard to pay attention to.

        There are simpler, shorter, and easier works by Marx, Like Critique of the Gotha Programme, Wage Labor and Capital, as well as Value, Price, and Profit.

    • @ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      07 months ago

      Reading Marx is like reading Adam Smith. Both wrote about economic systems before economics was even a thing. All ideas start somewhere but our ideas, and our society, have advanced dramatically in the 140+ years they’ve been dead. They’re more interesting for historical purposes than economic ones.

      • Dessalines
        link
        fedilink
        137 months ago

        All of Marx’s main concepts, surplus value, classes and class struggle, alienation, are just as relevant today as when they were written. Much like Newton, Marx built the solid foundation that scientific socialists stand on today.

        • @ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          I thought to look this up cause I think it’s neat and it’s often the case that some technology is described long before you’d think. The first description of using electrical switches to do logic operations came in 1886 in a letter from Charles Sanders Peirce. That’s between Capital volume 2 and 3, and most importantly, AFTER he described the law of value.

      • Cowbee [he/they]
        link
        fedilink
        5
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Both wrote about economic systems before economics was even a thing.

        Lol. Lmao, even.

        and our society, have advanced dramatically in the 140+ years they’ve been dead.

        In what manner has this proven Marx wrong?

        • @GiveMemes@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          -5
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          You’re very good at saying you’re right and very bad at providing evidence. The best thing about lemmy’s size is I can recognize which usernames to disregard immediately after enough encounters.

          • Cowbee [he/they]
            link
            fedilink
            107 months ago

            What evidence am I supposed to provide here, exactly? I’m asking for clarification.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
            link
            fedilink
            27 months ago

            The books Marx wrote are the evidence. If you read them then you’d see why they are obviously relevant today. Of course, reading and understanding serious literature takes more effort than trolling on public forums.

            • Nemo's public admirer
              link
              fedilink
              77 months ago

              Are there any modern books which talk about the same/similar contents which are easier/smaller for a beginner to start?

              • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
                link
                fedilink
                87 months ago

                These books are fairly accessible and touch on a lot of the same ideas you’d find in seminal works like Das Kapital

                • Profit Pathology and Other Indecencies by Michael Parenti
                • Understanding Marxism, Economics: Marxian Versus Neoclassical, and Understanding Socialism by Richard D. Wolff
                • Super Imperialism and Finance Capitalism and Its Discontents by Michael Hudson
                • Capitalism, Coronavirus and War by Radhika Desai
      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
        link
        fedilink
        17 months ago

        It’s always hilarious when illiterates proceed to make clowns of themselves by discussing things they haven’t read.