The Portable Karl Marx

by Karl Marx, Eugene Kamenka (Introduction)

Includes the complete Communist Manifesto and substantial extracts from On the Jewish Question, the German Ideology, Grundrisse, and Capital, a broad representation of his letters, and lesser-known works, especially his long-unavailable, early works.

Genres: Philosophy, Politics, Economics, Nonfiction, History, Sociology, Essays

606 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1983

About the author

With 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...

Reviews

[Jacob Aitken · Rating 3 out of 5]

Marx, Karl. The Portable Karl Marx. ed. Eugene Kamenka. New York: Penguin Books, 1983.

Even though Marx was completely demonized, this is a lucid volume and well organized, though that probably speaks more of the editor than of Marx. This book is like one of God’s spies stole Satan’s battle plan and now we get to read it.

Marx’s style is often criticized. Kapital has the reputation of being one of the worst books ever written. Actually, his transitional writings are usually quite lucid and forceful. His journalistic writings are mostly bombastic nonsense--much like journalism today. They can be safely ignored.

TRANSITIONAL WRITINGS

“1844 Manuscripts.” By not owning the means of production, the worker is alienated from his labor. He only has an external relationship to it; hence, he is alienated from it. This labor is “self-sacrifice” (Marx 136). This alien labor now becomes an alien power that confronts me.

Theses on Feuerbach

Marx is aware of the limitations in earlier materialism. If we’re just atoms bumping around, then we really can’t speak about much. Marx takes it a step further: materialism is now defined as praxis (155). While he takes the standard line that truth = power, he draws a different conclusion. If truth is power, then it can only be demonstrated in praxis.

Ominously, he defines man as the aggregate of social relations (thesis VI).

Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy

Social relations determine man’s consciousness (160). It’s at this point that Marx rejects Hegel. For Hegel, essence determines existence. For Marx, it’s the other way around.

German Ideology

Marx gives a relatively accurate account of the division of labor (almost certainly copying from Adam Smith). There isn’t much to disagree with here. The division of labor is a necessary development. Unfortunately, it cleaves man’s relation in two. Marx sees this as alienation. What he doesn’t see is that it allows man to produce more food and not starve to death.

He pauses his analysis to talk about consciousness again. Our “mental intercourse” is “the direct efflux of [our] material behavior” (169). Consciousness is just conscious existence. It is a “social product” (174). I could be wrong, but I don’t think Marx completely rejects (at least here) the idea of a nonphysical consciousness. He could be simply saying that consciousness supervenes on the physical. That’s still wrong, but it is a bit more sophisticated.

Division of labor now becomes “an alien force existing outside them” (177). Alienation, as a result, renders men propertyless.

On History: history develops by opposing forces clashing into each other, which generates a new contradiction. Specifically, it is a contradiction between productive forces and social community (192). This provides the sharpest contrast with Christianity: the Church sees society held together by the bonds of love (Augustine, Book 19, City of God). Marx sees society’s essence as the clash of forces and contradiction.

Grundrisse

Here is Marx’s famous (and debunked) labor theory of value. Value is “proportional quantities in which it is exchanged for other quantities” (Marx 401). If I want to exchange wheat for iron, I must refer both to some third term which is neither (cf. 439). For Marx this is labor. When I produce a commodity, a certain amount of labor goes into it. This crystallization of social labor is a commodity’s value. Indeed, it is a “social substance contained in it” (396).

A profit, therefore, is a surplus to my labor. This profit doesn’t come back to me, though. Boss Man, according to Marx, has literally taken my substance.

It is not necessary to continue this discussion. This is the heart of his system. If this is false, then everything he says is flawed.

Das Kapital

Famous discussion of labor’s being the 3rd term in exchange value. The quantity A being exchanged for B must be equal to labor, C.

Human labor is a substance which is embodied in production (441). Marx then abstracts labor-value from use-value. Upon further abstractions, the human person is eclipsed altogether. Marx sees a “homogenous mass of labor power” (442). This isn’t all that different from the grim and chilling term “human resources.”

I’m not overanalyzing Marx. He reifies labor, calling “commodities congealed labor-time.” Labor is almost a physical substance, whereas the human person, for Marx, is simply the result of social forces.

Then it gets weird. Marx gives labor and value an almost magical creating-power. He writes, “It is value, rather, that converts every product into a social hieroglyphic” (449). And: “The character of having value, when once impressed upon the products, obtains fixity only by reason of their acting and re-acting upon each other as quantities of value” (450). This sounds very similar to medieval and alchemical grimoires, instead of lead we have humans, and instead of the sulphur we have the re-acting agent of value. What he has completely missed is that it is humans who act, not abstract concepts.

Places where Marx almost gets it right

Marx sees a world-market existing with propertyless workers (179). These workers are cut off from capital.

Criticisms

Labor theory: while sociologists and journalists might praise the labor theory of value, few economists take it seriously. First, as Bohm-Bawerk notes, Marx rests upon Aristotle’s theory of equality in exchange. Aristotle said that goods of equal value are traded in an exchange. Marx agrees but puts labor as one of the terms. But if that’s true, then there is no reason to even exchange anything. Nothing would disturb the equilibrium (Bohm-Bawerk 2007:70).

Further, Bohm-Bawerk continues, some goods that are exchanged do not involve any labor time: such as the soil, wood in trees, water power, coal beds, stone quarries, petroleum reserves, mineral waters, gold mines, etc.”

Böhm-Bawerk, Eugen v. 2007. Karl Marx and the Close of His System. Auburn: Mises Institute.

Evaluation

Given the attacks on liberty today, understanding Marx is essential. The reader should familiarize himself/herself/ximself/zixself with the philosophical writings. That is where the attack is coming from. Class consciousness is being weaponized. True, socialism is on the rise, but it is more of a “gimme free stuff” than it is a serious analysis alienation and labor.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this as part of a course on Marx and Dialectics. It is important to realize that Marx' communism is not that of any iteration of the Soviet Union, or any other modern "communist" state. This is fundamental political theory. It incorporates the very critical component of history, and utilizes the dialectical method of analysis.

This book includes a comprehensive compilation of Marx' works. Letters, Capital, Communist Manifesto... Original material, but not difficult to read. Excellent book on political theory!

[Charlotte]

Did we finish this in class? Absolutely not. I’m still marking it as finished.

[Seth · Rating 5 out of 5]

*shameless shilling for the Viking Portable Library*

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I give 4 stars to the collection, not necessarily to Marx's thought.
This is a fabulous selection of his massive works. The editing hand is light, but deft. The choices are all defensible. Having come to this having just read 3 books on Marx, I was familiar with much of the ideas, but what truly strikes you is how great a political writer this man was. His 18th Breaumaire is filled with such marvelous invective, such trenchant analysis. Similarly, the German Ideology, with which I was most familiar before I read it again here, is quite well written philosophy. Compared, say, to Kant, Marx is a pleasure to read, and while he's not quite as much fun as Nietzsche or Schopenauer, he's not obscure...

Until you get to economics. Das Kapital, here only selectively used, is heavy slogging. Easily the most challenging part of the book. Plus, the part in which I had the greatest doubt that Marx was even close to right. His economics seems fundamentally flawed at its core, with his misunderstanding of value, his sole focus on labor as source of value, and his naive faith that supply and demand resolve to some sort of intrinsic value. (and that we can largely ignore temporary shifts in supply and demand until equilibrium is reached?)
The Communist Manifesto shows yet a fourth Marx, the revolutionary writer. It flows well, but lacks the depth of much of the rest. Still, there is a great deal more continuity in it than I expected. He didn't dumb it down THAT much for the masses.
One useful aspect of reading Marx in this book is you see the transformation of the man and his views and ambitions. Paired with the fine short biography at the start, you see him move in his views from a liberal German reformer, with a touch more atheism than the norm, to a radical still committed to democratic change, to a revolutionary, to a bitter frustrated revolutionary, to a bitter frustrated revolutionary taking capitalism apart piece by piece, in words because deeds failed him.
It is common to say that Marx combined French politics, British economics, and German philosophy. One wishes he had spent a bit more time on classical American politics, because the naivety in his late writings on the Paris commune are so sad in retrospect. They mirror, of course, his early enthusiasm for the worst parts of the French Revolution, so at least he's consistent in his willingness to concede all power to a single authority, so long as it is a revolutionary one. He has no use for parliamentary restraints, they are all tools of the strong capitalists. Many Marxists seek to absolve their prophet from all the crimes that his followers committed. Sometimes, he is in fact innocent. But his inability to see that the Paris Commune was a) doomed b) impractical and c) headed for dictatorship had it not crumbled illustrates how attenuated his grasp of limited government was.
Still, very much worth reading.

[Brady · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great compilation of Marx. Do yourself a favor and flip to the very end of the book and read the 'Readers Guide' first to get an excellent high-level understanding of Marx's views and the terms frequently used before reading the rest of the book. The first section on his early views I would not consider must-read but it's interesting to see just how much Hegel inspired him and how his views ultimately linked into German Idealism. Everything within the sections 'Political Writings', 'Economic Writings', and the 'Future of Socialism' is a must-read.

[Benjamin Maiale · Rating 5 out of 5]

Important quotes from the anthology:

“ in the course of this work, the conflict between what is and what ought to be emerged in a very disturbing fashion” p 12

“ in contrast with this, when we express concretely the living world of thought, that of law, the state, nature, philosophy as a whole, we must observe the object in its development, we cannot inject arbitrary classifications. The rationale of the thing itself must appear before us with all these contradictions and find an internal unity” p 13

“The practice of philosophy is itself theoretical. It is criticism, which measures individual existence against essence, particular reality against the idea” p 81

“Inasmuch as philosophy as will turns toward the world of appearances, the philosophical system is reduced to an abstract totality and thus becomes one side of the works confronted by another side” p 81

“The world’s becoming philosophical is at the same time philosophy’s becoming worldly” p 81

“The relation involved in the realization of philosophy in opposition to the world implies that these individual self consciousnesses always have a double edged demand, one edge turning against the world and the other against philosophy itself” p 82

“One of these directions is the liberal party, which takes as its mainstay adherence to the concept and to the principle of philosophy; the other adhere to its having no concept, to taking the element of reality as its mainstay” p 82

“According to its content, the liberal party, the party of the concept, can bring about real progress, while positive philosophy can achieve only demands and tendencies whose form contradicts their meaning” p 83

“The legislator has to regard himself as a scientist. He does not make laws, he does not invent them, he only formulates them, he expresses as conscious positive laws the inner laws of intellectual and spiritual relationships “ p 84

“In monarchy, we have the people of the constitution, in democracy, we have the constitution of the people” p 88

“It is self evident that all forms of state have democracy as their truth, and are therefore untrue in so far as they are not democratic” p 90

“Bureaucracy is the state’s consciousness, the state’s will, the state’s power as made into a corporation, hence into a particular, closed society within the state” p 90

“Bureaucracy sees itself as the ultimate final purpose of the state” p 91

“Authority is therefore the principle of the bureaucracy’s knowledge, and the deification of authority is its sentiment” p 91

“ just as religion is the table of contents of the theoretical struggles of mankind, so the political state is that of the practical ones” p 95

“ the perfected political state is in its essence the species-life of man in opposition to his material life. All the suppositions of this egoistic life remain in civil society as properties of civil society outside the sphere of the state” p 102

“ where the political state has reached its true form man leads a double life, a heavenly life and an earthly one, not only in thought, in consciousness, but in reality, in life itself” p 102

“ Man emancipates himself from religion, politically by banishing it from the sphere of public law into that of private right” p 103

“ civil society does not rise above egoism through the concept of security. Security is rather the guarantee of its egoism” p 109

“ the only bond that keeps men together is natural necessity, need and private interest, the preservation of their property and of their egoistic person” p 109

“ throwing off the political yoke meant at the same time, throwing off those bonds which had held fast the egoistic spirit of civil society. Political emancipation was at the same time the emancipation of civil society from politics, from the appearance even of a universal content” p 113

“ theory is capable of taking hold of the masses as soon as it makes its demonstrations ad hominem, and it makes its demonstrations ad hominem when it becomes radical. To be radical is to take things by the root. The root for man, however, is man himself” p 119

“ the criticism of religion ends in the teaching that man is the highest being for man, hence in the categorical imperative to overthrow all those conditions in which man is a debased, enslaved, abandoned, contemptible being” p 119

“ what does a partial, merely political revolution rest on? On the fact that a part of civil society emancipates itself and obtains universal dominion, on the fact that a specific class undertakes the general emancipation of society on the basis of its particular situation” p 121

“ for one class to be the class of emancipation, another must conversely be the obvious class of oppression” p 121

“ from political economy itself, and its own words, we have shown that the worker sinks to the level of a commodity, and, indeed, of the most miserable commodity; that the worker’s misery is inversely proportional to the power and scope of his production” p 131

“ political economy proceeds from the fact of private property. It does not explain private property. It expresses the material process through which private property actually passes in general abstract formulas, and then takes these formulas to be laws” p 131

“ let us not go back to a fictitious primordial state as the political economist does when he tries to explain. Such a primordial state explains nothing” p 132

“ for on this premise, it is clear that the more the worker exhausts himself, the more powerful the alien world of objects which he creates over and against himself becomes the poorer, he and his inner world becomes, the less there is that belongs to him as his own” p 134

“ the same is true and religion. The more man puts into God, the less he retains in himself. The worker puts his life into the object, but now it no longer belongs to him, it belongs to the object” p 134

“ in these two respects, therefore, the worker becomes a slave to his object: first, in that he receives an object of labor, that is, he receives labor, and second, in that he receives the means of subsistence. The first therefore enables him to exist as a worker and the second as a physical subject” p 135

“ man creates according to the laws of beauty” p 140

“ where there are political parties, each finds the cause of every evil in the fact that it’s antagonist, instead of itself, is at the helm of the state” p 152

“ the state and the organization of society are not, from the political standpoint, two different things. The state is the organization of society” p 152

“ the state is based on the contradiction between public and private life, between universal interest and special interests. The administration therefore has to confine itself to formal and negative action, for where civil life and its work begins, there the power of the administration ends” p 153

“ The state and slavery of antiquity - open classical antitheses - were not more closely welded together than the modern state and the modern world of bargaining - sanctimonious Christian antitheses” p 153

“ if the state wanted to overcome and transcend the impotence of its administration, it would have to overcome and transcend the present mode of private life” p 153

“ all social life is essentially practical. All the mysteries which lead theory into mysticism find their rational solution in human practice, and in the comprehension of this practice” p 157

“ philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways. The point is to change it” p 158

“ the mode of production of material life determines the social, political and intellectual life process in general. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness” p 160

“ men have arranged their relationships according to their ideas of God, of normal man. The phantoms of their brains have gained the mastery over them. They the creators have bowed down before their creatures. Let us liberate them from the chimeras, the ideas, dogmas, imaginary beings under the yoke of which they are pining away. Let us revolt against the rule of thoughts” p 162

“ men can be distinguished from animals by consciousness, by religion, or anything else you’d like. They begin to distinguish themselves from animals as soon as they begin to produce their means of subsistence, a step which is conditioned by their physical organization. By producing their means of subsistence, men are indirectly producing their actual material life” p 164

“ what they are, therefore, coincides with their production, both with what they produce, and with how they produce. The nature of individuals thus depends on the material conditions determining their production” p 164

“ the relations of different nations among themselves depend upon the extent to which each has developed its productive forces, the division of labor, and internal intercourse” p 164

“ the division of labor inside a nation leads it first to the separation of industrial and commercial from agricultural labor, and hence to the separation of town and country, and the clash of interests between them” p 165

“ the social structure and the state are continually evolving out of the life process of definite individuals but of individuals, not as they may appear in their own or other people’s imaginations, but as they really are; i.e. as they are effective, produce materially, and are active under definite material limits, presuppositions and conditions independent of their will” p 169

“ men are the producers of their conceptions and ideas - real, active men as they are conditioned by a definite development of their productive forces and of the intercourse corresponding to these, up to it’s furthest forms” p 169

“ the history of humanity, must always be studied and treated in relation to the history of industry and exchange” p 173

“Language is as old as consciousness, language is practical consciousness, as it exists for other men, and for that reason is really beginning to exist for me personally” p 173

“Consciousness is therefore from the beginning a social product, and remains so as long as men exist at all” p 174

“All struggles within the state … are merely the illusory forms in which the real struggles of the different classes are fought out among one another” p 177

“This crystallization of social activity, this crystallization of what we ourselves produced into an objective power above us, growing out of our control,… Is one of the chief factors in historical development up until now” p 177

“ history is nothing but the succession of the separate generations, each of which exploits the materials, the forms of capital, the productive forces handed down to it by all preceding ones, and thus on the one hand continues the traditional activity in completely changed circumstances and on the other modifies the old circumstances with a completely changed activity” p 180

“ it shows that history does not end by being resolved into self consciousness, but that in it at each stage there is found a material result: a sum of productive forces, a historically created relation of individuals to nature and to one another, which is handed down to each generation from its predecessor” p 182

“ a mass of productive forces, capital, funds, and conditions, which on the one hand is indeed modified by the new generation but also on the other prescribes for it it’s conditions of life and gives it a definite development, a special character” p 182

“ it shows that circumstances make men just as much as men make circumstances” p 182

“ real private property began with the ancients as with modern nations with personal movable property” p 183

“ everywhere there is very soon an end to taking, and when there is nothing more to take, you have to set about producing. From this necessity of producing, which very soon asserts itself, it follows that the form of community adopted by the settling conquerors must correspond to the stage of development of the productive forces they find in existence” p 188

“ the reality which communism is creating, is precisely the real basis for rendering it impossible that anything should exist independently of individuals in so far as things are only a product of the preceding intercourse of individuals themselves” p 189

“ in the previous substitutes for the community personal freedom has existed only for the individuals who developed within the relationships of the ruling class, and only in so far as they were individuals of this class” p 193

“ individuals have always built on themselves, but naturally on themselves within their given historical conditions and relationships, not on the pure individual in the sense of the ideologists” p 194

“The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles” p 203

“But not only has the bourgeoisie forged the weapons that bring death to itself; it has also called into existence the men who are to wield those weapons - the modern working class - the proletariat” p 211

“The modern working class - a class of laborers who live only so long as they find work, and work only so long as their labor increases capital” p 211

“All property relations in the past have continuously been subject to historical change consequent upon the change in historical conditions” p 219

“The distinguishing feature of communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property” p 219

“Property in its present form is based on the antagonism of capital and wage labor” p 219

“Capital is not a personal, it is a social power” p 220

“By freedom is meant, under the present bourgeois conditions of production, free trade, free selling and buying” p 221

“Does it require deep intuition to comprehend that man’s ideas, views, and conceptions, in one word, man’s consciousness, change with every change in the conditions of his material existence, in his social relations and in his social life” p 225

“The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class” p 225

“One fact is common to all ages, viz., the exploitation of one part of society by another” p 226

“ a part of the bourgeoisie is desirous of addressing social grievances in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society. To this section belong economists, philanthropists, humanitarians improvers of the condition of the working class, organizers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole and corner reformers of every imaginable kind” p 235

“ The whole population shall be armed. Armies in the future are at the same time to be armies of workers, so that the military will not merely consume as it did in the past, but will produce even more than the cost of its upkeep” p 242

“ for us it cannot be a question of changing private property, but only of destroying it, not of smothering class antagonisms, but only of wiping out classes, not of improving existing society, but of founding a new one” p 250

“ the political influence of the smallholders is therefore finally expressed in the subordination of society to the executive authority” p 312

“ cruelty, like every other thing has its fashion, changing according to time and place” p 354

[Mr. · Rating 5 out of 5]

There is little question that Marx was the most important economic/political theorist of the modern era. The question then, is how to present an overview of his thought in a single volume.

This collection includes sections from Marx's earlier more philosophical period as a gradute student. It includes his dissertation on democritus and Epicurus as well as the famous essay 'On the Jewish Question.'

Additionally, there is the great 'German Ideology,' 'Gundrisse,' and the Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (one of the most important works on political revolution in the entire literature. Of course you will also find the Manifesto, and selections from Capital (though far from comprehensive) as well as the Economic-Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844.

I was also pleased with the editor's inclusion of several letters of Marx between him and friends and family, mostly Engels. Also, there are report cards from the young Marx while he was in school, a fun extra.

The Portable Marx is a good way to begin to immerse yourself in Marx, though only a thorough reading of Capital will really allow you to appreciate the depth and range of his genius.

[sologdin · Rating 2 out of 5]

decent selection of texts. it must be a fairly daunting task, the attempt to reduce the 50-volume MEGA down to one slim volume. that said, editor's marginal contributions are effective.

[Hamza Abdullah · Rating 4 out of 5]

This short sneak peak book offers a powerful condensation of Marx’s intellectual force: his moral outrage at exploitation, his structural analysis of capitalism, and his insistence that economic arrangements shape not only material life but consciousness itself. Read in this form, Marx appears less as an ideologue and more as a diagnostician of historical suffering — someone attempting to give language to the silent violence embedded in systems of production, class hierarchy, and alienation. His work compels the reader to see that injustice is not merely personal or accidental, but systemic, patterned, and reproducible. In this sense, the book succeeds not as a political manual, but as an ethical and analytical provocation.

It also reveals Marx’s limits. Human beings in his framework are primarily economic actors, and the inner life — psyche, symbol, spirituality, longing, and moral struggle — is largely reduced to reflections of material conditions. The result is a vision of suffering that is sharp but incomplete: it explains how people are constrained, but not how they endure, resist inwardly, or transform. For a reader attentive to psychological depth and spiritual meaning, Marx’s analysis feels necessary but insufficient — a map of external structures without an account of the inner world that must live within them.

[Julio The Fox · Rating 5 out of 5]

What does this PORTABLE collection add to our knowledge of Marx? Plenty, as it turns out. Eugene Kamenka, the editor, tells us in his Introduction that Marx the scientific thinker "coincided with a quite petty man who constantly involved himself in sectarian squabbles". Both sides are on display in THE PORTABLE KARL MARX. Marx's mind was constantly roving for new information. In one letter he modestly asks Engels to send him documentation on "electricity in agriculture, as I do not understand this topic". Elsewhere we find Marx at odds with his own ideological creation, the German Social Democratic Party (yes, it really was Marxist once), and how that led to his famous polemic, CRITIQUE OF THE GOTHA PROGRAM. Kamemka bemoans the fact that "no collected, definitive edition of the complete works of Marx exists in any language" and notes drily that the first serious student to attempt this task "disappeared under Stalin". Ah, the perils of being a Marxist scholar.

[safavid dreamer · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’m not a left winger or Marxist. But I will say I did enjoy reading this and I do think it is a interesting lens to look at society. I don’t agree with how he uses Labour theory of Value (LTV) to show how capitalists are stealing unpaid labour from the workers. But I think his points on society I.e that the mode of production in a given society influences its laws, culture and politics is absolutely valid. As a RWer his critique of capitalism as this revolutionary force that breaks down traditional societies is definitely worth taking on board.

I also did enjoy reading about his dialectical materialism (given I just recently read Hegels philosophy of history) about how history is can be understood through modes of production changing through the dialectical method.

[Jo · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good selection of texts from the greatest thinker of the 19th century. I've never read these portable editions before, and they are very solid. Dozens of letters from Marx's life are included, and it reveals a bit more of Marx the man, rather than Marx the theorist - a familiarity in a philosopher's personal life assists greatly in understanding their view of the world. Also included are selections from Kapital, Grundrisse, and the 1848 manuscripts. Probably essential reading for anyone on the left.

[Jesse]

Didn't read the whole thing since I took a college course on economics and went over Kapital, but I was interested in the young Marx, with his more metaphysical and philosophical approach to economics, anthropology, and history (not naturalistic like his later work, from my interpretation). This book had a good collection of his earlier works.

[Susan Gosselin · Rating 5 out of 5]

A remarkably well curated introduction to Marx’s work. Rather than reducing his ideas to slogans, this collection presents the breadth of his writing, philosophy, economics, history, and politics with valuable editorial context that makes the material far more accessible. An essential starting point for anyone interested in reading Marx firsthand.

[Krista · Rating 5 out of 5]

**Read for Class**

[Stanley Sharkey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really good selection of works, I need to re-read so I can make a better review though.

[Israel Castillo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great introduction to Marxism. The selected material in this book is of great use to the reader. Highly recommend! I still use this book to read back certain topics for a quick reference.

[Vic u · Rating 5 out of 5]

call me an uneducated Marxist now

[April Strickland · Rating 4 out of 5]

Written by a supporter. It's an education.

[gaverne Bennett · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very enjoyable.

[Nick Van · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read manuscripts "Alienation of Labor" and "Private Property & Communism" as well as selections from volume 1 of Capital...Some of it feels very outdated

[vernon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty good selection of Marx's work, gives a good overview of his life. Kinda hard to rate this lol

[DJ · Rating 3 out of 5]

Marx's descriptions of many of the problems of society are brilliant. But his solutions are not practical. He does not seem to understand that some of his proletariat soon become the bourgeoisie.
I read this to learn why Marx is the star of Communism. After reading it I have difficulty understanding why any intelligent person would pay him any attention.

[Joe · Rating 5 out of 5]

Interested in Marx's work, but not just the "Communist Manifesto" or (god forbid) "Capital Vol. 1?" Enter "The Portable Karl Marx," a comprehensive compendium of his personal letters and major works, which include entire reproductions of "Wage-Labour and Capital," the "Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844," his musings on the French Revolution and its capacity for proletariat modeling, and so much more. It's absurd how much is in a mere 720 pages; I plan on reading each major contribution again (perhaps more than once) on its own just to be sure I absorb the most I can from it. One of those books that anyone with an interest in socialism, communism, economic and political theory, or Marx the historical figure can appreciate and gain immense value from. I'm a better person-- and have gained a better mind-- for having made my way through it just the once.

[Shawna Hunter · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really wanted to understand the man listed as a founder of critical theory during my sociological studies at Guelph University and found this at a book sale. Although I feel his fundamental misunderstanding is apparent in many of his works (he confuses money with power) there is a lot to learn about his philosophy that can only be found in his actual works and not those of the communists who really seem to have bastardized what he said.

[Nicole Gervasio · Rating 4 out of 5]

I didn't actually read the whole thing, but I got through enough of it to feel quite competent by the time I took a literature course on the general strike with a well-known postcolonialist this past spring. I definitely recommend it for anyone with very little exposure to Marx and very little time to catch up.

[Jey · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is definitely a book I'm going to have to re-read at some point. Strange stuff. My favorite part was when he said something to the effect of: freedom is slavery. I didn't think doublespeak was real!!!

[Brian Napoletano]

I'm enjoying this book, but there's far too many topics covered for me to consider sitting down and reading it straight through like I do most other books. Instead, I'm reading different chapters at different times.

[Robert · Rating 1 out of 5]

I was a fan of the "portable" series of philosophers back at college. Somehow, it was cool. Of course, I was far more left than I am today, so I guess Marx fit in . . . or not. I know I read his big political writings, but I am not certain I read anything else.