What would be some of Marx and Engels most significant works?

[Idealism]

So ive been planning on actually reading more books by Marx and Engels, what would be significant ones worth reading? i dont quite think id be ready to read things such a "Das Kapital" (though i dont much about, i could be wrong) but for getting a better understanding of Marxism overall, what would be the best works by them to read?

[Communist Theory]

I'm going out on a limb and saying the Communist Manifesto.

[Idealism]

I'm going out on a limb and saying the Communist Manifesto.

I was hoping to make a list, based on the fact that that book cant be there only work worth reading.

[teenagebricks]

Capital (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/index.htm) is extremely significant, but extremely complex in some parts, probably best to leave it until you're ready for hardcore economics. The Condition Of The Working Class In England (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/condition-working-class/) is easy reading and one of Engles' best known and most widely read works. The Communist Manifesto (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm) is an obvious one and makes for an obvious starting point provided you understand the basics of communism, if you don't, The Principles Of Communism (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm) is a good introduction, after you're done with that I'd suggest reading Socialism: Utopian And Scientific (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/index.htm).

[Idealism]

Capital (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/index.htm) is extremely significant, but extremely complex in some parts, probably best to leave it until you're ready for hardcore economics. The Condition Of The Working Class In England (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/condition-working-class/) is easy reading and one of Engles' best known and most widely read works. The Communist Manifesto (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm) is an obvious one and makes for an obvious starting point provided you understand the basics of communism, if you don't, The Principles Of Communism (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm) is a good introduction, after you're done with that I'd suggest reading Socialism: Utopian And Scientific (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/index.htm).

So:
1. Principals of communism
2. Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
3.Communist Manifesto
4. The Condition of the working class in England
Is that the right order in which to read them?

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

This book:

Socialism: Utopian And Scientific

is excellent in places, but where it strays off into philosophy (to be more specific, 'dialectics') it is worse than poor.

[ZeroNowhere]

'Capital': Try Volume 1 first, of course. The first three chapters may be too complex for you to grasp immediately, so just browse through them, or skip them if you can't. Still, after you read the rest, go back to them and re-read them until you get them. Try reading the book fairly slowly to absorb everything, it's not especially complex. Before that, you can try reading 'Wage Labour and Capital' and 'Value, Price and Profit', though be aware that he changed some of his views expressed in those works in 'Capital'.

Critique of the Gotha Program: An interesting work, it's pretty easy to read, so check it out.

Notes on Adolph Wagner: Worth reading. Covers quite a bit of territory.

More for interest than learning:
Engels' Introduction to Class Struggle In France. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1895/03/06.htm)
Engels' works on trades unions and the system of wage labour. 1 (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/05/21.htm) and 2 (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/05/28.htm).

On the Commie Manifesto: The problem with it is that it's so easy to misinterpret, especially the ten planks. So, on that, they did not mean that the ten planks described socialism, they were clear that it was a form of capitalism, and an unstable form at that (Engels criticized Heinzen for treating them as an ends rather than a means). Basically, the workers were to use their political power and force to enforce these, and their unstability would require them to be further outstripped until capitalism was abolished altogether. They later abandoned this, with Marx referring to it as "antiquated." He still put forward a list of reforms, but here it was to be fought for by the workers under capitalism as per usual, with the struggles uniting and strengthening them. Thus, the demands were said to have 'spontaneously arisen out of the labour movement', though he did state that he disapproved of a few. Engels later stated, "Our first plank is the socialisation of all the means and instruments of production. Still, we accept anything which any government may give us, but only as a payment on account, and for which we offer no thanks."

[Vincent P.]

Try Wage Labour and Capital and Wages, Price and Profit. They're kind of easy Das Kapital summarized in 40 pages.

Though not every socialist agree with Marx on communism, all of us agree with him on capitalism. These are works for Marxist and non-marxists alike.

[Bilan]

Capital, The Civil War in France, Critique of the Gotha Programme, The Poverty of Philosophy.
Wouldn't recommend the Communist Manifesto. It's okay, but archaic and out of date. Though, some very emotive and powerful language in it, but it doesn't give you a very indepth analysis (like the above listed) of capitalism, etc. It's more of a gloss than the others.

[Glenn Beck]

Are some people embarrassed that Marx actually endorsed a political program once? Read the damn manifesto, it's short and gives an easy example of a political work by Marx and Engels, rather a theoretical one. It's illustrative to see how they thought to translate theory into practical analysis of a contemporary situation, regardless of the controversy over the obsolescence/simplicity of the ten planks. It also reads well imo

Otherwise I basically endorse teenagebricks and Bilan's recommendations. Also the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts are pretty easy reading I found, and not very long, though some don't like them because they are as the name implies more philosophical and Marx wrote them relatively early in his career.

[Bilan]

I don't reject them having a political platform or anything, but I question the importance of it in comparison to their theoretical works - especially for someone who wants a greater understanding of Marx's analysis of capitalism, etc. Capital, and so forth, give a much more thorough analysis (Even if its only the beginning of what I think people should read to develop their understanding).
If you want to read The Manifesto, then by all means, but don't expect to get much out of it except for archaic goals and powerful language.
I think the Manifesto is much better at getting an understanding of the development of the communist programme (one thing I think Communism Vol. 1 (ICC) explained and analyzed very well).

[ZeroNowhere]

Capital, The Civil War in France, Critique of the Gotha Programme, The Poverty of Philosophy.
Wouldn't recommend the Communist Manifesto. It's okay, but archaic and out of date. Though, some very emotive and powerful language in it, but it doesn't give you a very indepth analysis (like the above listed) of capitalism, etc. It's more of a gloss than the others.
Actually, yes, 'The Civil War in France' is also worth reading, as is the 18th Brumaire.
Also, the Conspectus of Bakunin's 'Statism and Anarchy' is also good for dispelling some myths and making some things clearer (a full version is on libcom as a pdf, the part where Marx adds his comments is on marxists.org, and the full version doesn't really have much extra other than Marx translating large sections from Bakunin's book to practice Russian), and 'The German Ideology' is worth reading somewhere down the line. You can also check out the 'Ethnographical Notebooks', but, again, it's not as important as 'Capital' and such.

[Die Neue Zeit]

More and more I'm beginning to think that The Civil War in France, Gothakritik, and the Programme of the French Workers Party are Marx's most important programmatic works.

[ZeroNowhere]

Before the OP is drowned in books, I'll just recommend something else. I. I. Rubin's essays on Marx (http://www.marxists.org/archive/rubin/value/index.htm). It's very helpful, and I would advise reading it either alongside or, probably preferable, after Volume 1 of Capital. It's described by Perlman thusly, "Rubin's book is a comprehensive, tightly argued exposition of the core of Marx's work, the theory of commodity fetishism and the theory of value. Rubin clarifies misconceptions which have resulted, and still result, from superficial readings and evasive treatments of Marx's work."

[Tower of Bebel]

The German Ideology: theses on Feuerbach!

[Gracchvs]

I would say that it is quiet limiting to ask for just Marx's stuff. But hey, it seems like most here have assumed that includes Engels as well, so...

Critique of the Gotha Programme
Manifesto of the Communist Party (which is only antiquated IN PART: Specific demands, criticism of opponents that no longer exist, and so on, and yes: The ten points)
The Civil War in France
The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonapart (my favourite non-fiction work)
And just for some awesome snark and sarcasm: The Holy Family.

These works are not picked based on importance or anything. Just my liking and such.

[Idealism]

'Capital': Try Volume 1 first, of course. The first three chapters may be too complex for you to grasp immediately, so just browse through them, or skip them if you can't. Still, after you read the rest, go back to them and re-read them until you get them. Try reading the book fairly slowly to absorb everything, it's not especially complex. Before that, you can try reading 'Wage Labour and Capital' and 'Value, Price and Profit', though be aware that he changed some of his views expressed in those works in 'Capital'.

Critique of the Gotha Program: An interesting work, it's pretty easy to read, so check it out.

Notes on Adolph Wagner: Worth reading. Covers quite a bit of territory.

More for interest than learning:
Engels' Introduction to Class Struggle In France. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1895/03/06.htm)
Engels' works on trades unions and the system of wage labour. 1 (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/05/21.htm) and 2 (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/05/28.htm).

On the Commie Manifesto: The problem with it is that it's so easy to misinterpret, especially the ten planks. So, on that, they did not mean that the ten planks described socialism, they were clear that it was a form of capitalism, and an unstable form at that (Engels criticized Heinzen for treating them as an ends rather than a means). Basically, the workers were to use their political power and force to enforce these, and their unstability would require them to be further outstripped until capitalism was abolished altogether. They later abandoned this, with Marx referring to it as "antiquated." He still put forward a list of reforms, but here it was to be fought for by the workers under capitalism as per usual, with the struggles uniting and strengthening them. Thus, the demands were said to have 'spontaneously arisen out of the labour movement', though he did state that he disapproved of a few. Engels later stated, "Our first plank is the socialisation of all the means and instruments of production. Still, we accept anything which any government may give us, but only as a payment on account, and for which we offer no thanks."

Does this mean the "principals of communism" is also easy to misinterpret?

[Hit The North]

If you want to read The Manifesto, then by all means, but don't expect to get much out of it except for archaic goals and powerful language.


This has to be a joke. The first section of the CM, Bourgeois and Proletarians, is unrivalled as an introduction to Marx and Engels understanding of the genesis of capitalism, its inherent tendencies and the logic behind the claim that the proletariat are the first class in history to be in a position to abolish class society. In a nutshell, it remains the clearest expression of the core of the Marxist view. I'd recommend it wholeheartedly.

You're right about the powerful language, though; and this is another reason to recommend it to beginners.