/lit/ - Literature

the reason anti-Marxists talk about the Manifesto so much instead of Capital is that they have no refutation of Marx's theory of value.

*blocks your path*

>>13440103
the law of value implies otherwise brother - hh

just provide an argument against anything in this

to continue discussion on LTV.

Find a flaw.

Have you ever been afraid of reading a book? I'm afraid of reading The Capital vol. 1 and becoming a pious marxist

reading this book is making me feel like a brainlet. i read pretty frequently but goddamn

So what the fuck is this retard trying to say in a nutshell?
l have better things to do than to actually read it.

Volume 1 of Capital tbqhwy, I know it was written by Marx, but volume 1 is just him deconstructing and criticizing capitalism.

What the actual fuck is this guys problem?

More like The KEKital

ITT nobody read "The Capital Volume 1"

>>9823566
def this one, you'll fuck them up royally with this

>>9644407
Sure is my man. None more prime than this.

Sorry, I couldn't resist. Of course there are. David Harvey is good. /lit/ will know others. But there's never any substitute for reading the originals.

Basically I think my own attraction to this is more in intellectual history. In terms of What Is To Be Done I never know. It's all too mimetic for me. The reason why I like Land and other guys is because they perform this minor miracle of crowbarring the intellect out of the redoubts and hidey-holes where it likes to go and say, Fuck You I'm Good Here. Because we never are. Philosophy is basically always undoing locks or sapping the floors or taking the roof off of these neat little places we create for ourselves: ideology, in other words. But that's my own blog-tier shitposting I guess.

Can also read that younger and sexier Marx too.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Economic-Philosophic-Manuscripts-1844.pdf

26
Burgerland
Das Capital

>>8593606

>>8457666
not really. still every professor will come up with the "invisible hand" though Smith himself rarily mentions it in TWoN. Besides that the book was revolutionary because of its take on differentiation on labour, the definition of a commodity and general market equilibria. even marx praises it for that achievement.

But on the other hand it is easily suprassed by "The Capital" by Marx, which isn´t as relevant today in economics as it should be.

>>8446375

Read this instead

>>8439600

How dense is Marx? Is it just a standard read with an intimidating page count?