What do you think?
Capital: Critique of Political Economy, Volume 1
952 pages, Paperback
Published June 30, 2026
About the author
Karl Marx
3,506 books7,152 followersWith the help of Friedrich Engels, German philosopher and revolutionary Karl Marx wrote
The Communist Manifesto
(1848) and
Das Kapital
(1867-1894), works, which explain historical development in terms of the interaction of contradictory economic forces, form many regimes, and profoundly influenced the social sciences.
German social theorist Friedrich Engels collaborated with Karl Marx on The Communist Manifesto in 1848 and on numerous other works.
Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakunin in London opposed Communism of Karl Marx with his antithetical anarchy.
Works of Jacques Martin Barzun include Darwin, Marx, Wagner (1941).
The Prussian kingdom introduced a prohibition on Jews, practicing law; in response, a man converted to Protestantism and shortly afterward fathered Karl Marx.
Marx began co-operating with Bruno Bauer on editing Philosophy of Religion of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (see Democritus and Epicurus), doctoral thesis, also engaged Marx, who completed it in 1841. People described the controversial essay as "a daring and original piece... in which Marx set out to show that theology must yield to the superior wisdom." Marx decided to submit his thesis not to the particularly conservative professors at the University of Berlin but instead to the more liberal faculty of University of Jena, which for his contributed key theory awarded his Philosophiae Doctor in April 1841. Marx and Bauer, both atheists, in March 1841 began plans for a journal, entitled Archiv des Atheismus (Atheistic Archives), which never came to fruition.
Marx edited the newspaper Vorwärts! in 1844 in Paris. The urging of the Prussian government from France banished and expelled Marx in absentia; he then studied in Brussels. He joined the league in 1847 and published.
Marx participated the failure of 1848 and afterward eventually wound in London. Marx, a foreigner, corresponded for several publications of United States.
He came in three volumes. Marx organized the International and the social democratic party.
Marx in a letter to C. Schmidt once quipped, "All I know is that I am not a Marxist," as Warren Allen Smith related in Who's Who in Hell .
People describe Marx, who most figured among humans. They typically cite Marx with Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, the principal modern architects.
Bertrand Russell later remarked of non-religious Marx, "His belief that there is a cosmic ... called dialectical materialism, which governs ... independently of human volitions, is mere mythology" ( Portraits from Memory , 1956).
More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bi...
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/...
http://www.historyguide.org/intellect...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/...
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/t...
German social theorist Friedrich Engels collaborated with Karl Marx on The Communist Manifesto in 1848 and on numerous other works.
Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakunin in London opposed Communism of Karl Marx with his antithetical anarchy.
Works of Jacques Martin Barzun include Darwin, Marx, Wagner (1941).
The Prussian kingdom introduced a prohibition on Jews, practicing law; in response, a man converted to Protestantism and shortly afterward fathered Karl Marx.
Marx began co-operating with Bruno Bauer on editing Philosophy of Religion of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (see Democritus and Epicurus), doctoral thesis, also engaged Marx, who completed it in 1841. People described the controversial essay as "a daring and original piece... in which Marx set out to show that theology must yield to the superior wisdom." Marx decided to submit his thesis not to the particularly conservative professors at the University of Berlin but instead to the more liberal faculty of University of Jena, which for his contributed key theory awarded his Philosophiae Doctor in April 1841. Marx and Bauer, both atheists, in March 1841 began plans for a journal, entitled Archiv des Atheismus (Atheistic Archives), which never came to fruition.
Marx edited the newspaper Vorwärts! in 1844 in Paris. The urging of the Prussian government from France banished and expelled Marx in absentia; he then studied in Brussels. He joined the league in 1847 and published.
Marx participated the failure of 1848 and afterward eventually wound in London. Marx, a foreigner, corresponded for several publications of United States.
He came in three volumes. Marx organized the International and the social democratic party.
Marx in a letter to C. Schmidt once quipped, "All I know is that I am not a Marxist," as Warren Allen Smith related in Who's Who in Hell .
People describe Marx, who most figured among humans. They typically cite Marx with Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, the principal modern architects.
Bertrand Russell later remarked of non-religious Marx, "His belief that there is a cosmic ... called dialectical materialism, which governs ... independently of human volitions, is mere mythology" ( Portraits from Memory , 1956).
More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bi...
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/...
http://www.historyguide.org/intellect...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/...
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/t...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
September 1, 2026
JUST LIKE MARX THIS BOOK IS BIG, THICC AND UUUUUGLYYYY. I READ IT SO YOU DONT HAVE TO!!!!!!
This book is basically universally misunderstood: It is not a book of polemics against the wealthy class; it is not a revolutionary manifesto; it is not a history of the industrial transformation of England from the 15th-19th century; it is not a treatise of a political economist; it is all of those things.
It's also not an anthropological history of the emergence of Money, despite the fact that Marx (among every other economist of his day) are happy to promulgate the same myth from Aristotle: that money emerged bottom up to simplify societies reliant on barter. The real origin of money is much more violent and, in a turn that would absolutely not have surprised Marx, has a lot more to do with military state power than previously thought. (If anyone reading this is legitimately interested please read Debt by David Graeber (Half as long as capital and thoroughly 5 Stars))
The primary target of this book is the "commodity fetish" or, in the words of Adam Smith, the invisible hand. The metaphysical assumption that commodities cum capital have their own inclinations should strike us as dubious, especially when the politically powerful are evoking those inclinations to tell us to go against our own. We still haven't really figured this out in the west and with disastrous consequence.
The major political byproduct of this book, so called "Marxist-Leninism", ultimately rested on a kind of historical power fetish, that, through the oppressive rule of the formerly oppressed proletariat, the state would "wither away". Again, this kind of wishful thinking leads to disastrous consequences. (See the origins of totalitarianism, the gulag archipelago, the possessed, life and fate, etc.)
What Marx fails to consider is "Marx Fetishism" or the need of unattractive, unoriginal sophomores to find ways to get laid by evoking the name of Marx without actually reading/thinking critically about Marx first. Now that the sophomores have graduated it seems socialism is on the rise here in America, consequences unknown...
Bottom line: History and human affairs are not a scientifically determined process. There are no "universal laws of nature" governing how you should act. Humans have agency and our choices matter. Abnegating personal responsibility to "the inevitable tide of history" or "the invisible hand" makes you a cuck for whoever happens to be politically powerful at the moment and if there's anything we've learned about political power since Marx's death, it's that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
This book is basically universally misunderstood: It is not a book of polemics against the wealthy class; it is not a revolutionary manifesto; it is not a history of the industrial transformation of England from the 15th-19th century; it is not a treatise of a political economist; it is all of those things.
It's also not an anthropological history of the emergence of Money, despite the fact that Marx (among every other economist of his day) are happy to promulgate the same myth from Aristotle: that money emerged bottom up to simplify societies reliant on barter. The real origin of money is much more violent and, in a turn that would absolutely not have surprised Marx, has a lot more to do with military state power than previously thought. (If anyone reading this is legitimately interested please read Debt by David Graeber (Half as long as capital and thoroughly 5 Stars))
The primary target of this book is the "commodity fetish" or, in the words of Adam Smith, the invisible hand. The metaphysical assumption that commodities cum capital have their own inclinations should strike us as dubious, especially when the politically powerful are evoking those inclinations to tell us to go against our own. We still haven't really figured this out in the west and with disastrous consequence.
The major political byproduct of this book, so called "Marxist-Leninism", ultimately rested on a kind of historical power fetish, that, through the oppressive rule of the formerly oppressed proletariat, the state would "wither away". Again, this kind of wishful thinking leads to disastrous consequences. (See the origins of totalitarianism, the gulag archipelago, the possessed, life and fate, etc.)
What Marx fails to consider is "Marx Fetishism" or the need of unattractive, unoriginal sophomores to find ways to get laid by evoking the name of Marx without actually reading/thinking critically about Marx first. Now that the sophomores have graduated it seems socialism is on the rise here in America, consequences unknown...
Bottom line: History and human affairs are not a scientifically determined process. There are no "universal laws of nature" governing how you should act. Humans have agency and our choices matter. Abnegating personal responsibility to "the inevitable tide of history" or "the invisible hand" makes you a cuck for whoever happens to be politically powerful at the moment and if there's anything we've learned about political power since Marx's death, it's that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
October 5, 2026
Even the lucky dogs of the new Holy German-Prussian Empire will get a lesson in dialectics.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews