Capital Reading List

[Buffalo Souljah]

Summer's here!

That means, a shortage of work-related impositions on us tied to the lower strata of academia (of course, for tenured and nontenured faculty, it's a different thing, but nonetheless)! In other words: freedom!

Short of being melodramatic, I'm trying to put together a reading list of material that will introduce me (and allow me to introduce others) to the main tenets (structurally, socially, economically) of Marxism, nondogmatically. I had begun, last Christmas, reading marxists.org's version of the first volume of Capital, and am roughly eight chapters into the book, but need some stimulation and motivation to get back into the swing of things, and also would be interested in some broad contextualizations of Marx's (economic political, etc.) work.

Here's what I know:

I'm familiar with David Harvey's work (I paractically lived at www.davidharvey.com (http://www.davidharvey.com) last Christmas), so I know of his works on Capital. He has several books (one which just came out recently actually) that appear to be informative and helpful in coming to terms with the relations of production, capital, exchange, surplus value, etc. I've also just come across Andrew Kilner's more "orthodox" (as I've heard it put) Reclaiming Marx. Which of these (or others) should I pick up and read alongside Marx himself? Do I need a travelling companion, or can I brave the straits myself? Have things changed considerably to make a historical analysis of Capital necessary (from my perspective, the answer is "no", but I would never turn down a chance to do more learning)?

Discuss (please)!

[Belisarius]

Reading Lenin would also be a good start (it works for me), especially his book on imperialism gives you a good analysis of how globalised economy works.

[Rusty Shackleford]

You will probably want to read Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/index.htm) by V.I. Lenin the book covers finance capital and modern capitalism. ITs like reading about modern banking institutions and global power.

Since you are very familiar with Capital (which i still need to read, but i have nightmares about it after i gave up a few months ago :blushing:) im guessing you wont need to read Wage Labour and Capital (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/index.htm) or The Principles of Communism (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm).

apparently Karl Kautsky had a good book on Capital but i forgot the name.

For a new video source Brendan Mcooney (http://www.youtube.com/user/brendanmcooney) on Youtube has some good videos. i think its an ongoing project though.

[Buffalo Souljah]

Ooh, I know for a fact that Lenin himself was not very much a fan of Kautsky: he calls him out as a reformist in The State and Revolution (which I was introduced to through this site). The two certainly did not see eye-to-eye about everything. That's not to say they disagreed about the nature of economic relations, but nonetheless, you wouldn't want to turn the lights out on them!

Anyway guys, thanks for the suggestions. I'm sure I'll be busy into the foreseeable future, but that goes without saying.

[ed miliband]

This is a pretty interesting read: http://www.generation-online.org/p/fpalthusser11.htm

I've heard this point repeated by quite a few people:


36. I will sum up my advice as to how to read Capital, as follows:
1. Leave Part I, to begin with.
2. Begin with Part II.
3. Read Parts II, III, IV, VII and VIII, with the greatest attention. (Leave Part V for later reading.)
4. Then try to read Part I by itself knowing that it is extremely difficult and requires much detailed explanation.

I've got a set of books to read on Irish history, but I'd also like to give Capital a go this summer.

[graymouser]

Ooh, I know for a fact that Lenin himself was not very much a fan of Kautsky: he calls him out as a reformist in The State and Revolution (which I was introduced to through this site). The two certainly did not see eye-to-eye about everything. That's not to say they disagreed about the nature of economic relations, but nonetheless, you wouldn't want to turn the lights out on them!
Politically, Lenin viewed Kautsky as one of the best defenders of orthodox Marxism right up until 1914 when Kautsky joined the German Social Democrats in supporting Germany in World War I. He'd admired Kautsky up until then and the venom directed at him in the later writings is spurred primarily by this betrayal.

In any case, have you read Marx's shorter works on economics? Wage Labour and Capital, Value Price and Profit, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, Poverty of Philosophy? (I'd provide links but my post count isn't high enough.) Those might help. Also, Ernest Mandel was a revisionist when it came to Trotskyism but he wrote some very good things on economics. His Introduction to Marxist Economic Theory (available on Marxists.org) is good; also if you buy the Penguin edition of Capital, Mandel provided a thorough introduction. The Penguin version also has a better literary translation than the one you'll find on Marxists.org.

[ZeroNowhere]

I would say that if you wish to read volume 1 of Capital, you would be best off reading the Fowkes translation (the Penguin edition), as it is much better. Although I would advise not reading any exegeses of the work before and while reading it (and this includes Mandel's introduction), because they will generally not add anything to the work, and quite possibly take something away. I also agree with Althusser on something, for once, in that generally just browsing the first three chapters of Capital initially is perhaps a good idea if you find them hard to get through.

[S.Artesian]

FWIW

Read the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts before vol 1, then after vol 1, reread them and see if you can get a sense of the continuity between the "young" and the "mature" Marx.

I can't recommend enough reading Theories of Surplus Value, intended to be volume 4 of the Capital quartet, before reading vol 2.. so you can get an idea of the development of Marx's exposition through critique and exactly how he differs from even the "radical" political economy of the 18th and 19th century.

And.....if you want to read historical materialism in action... no better place to do that than his Class Struggles in France 1848-1850 and The 18th Brumaire....

[ContrarianLemming]

I think you will want to make a list of books not from the 19th century, they are shockingly dry. There are modern versions of all these books, far clearer, lively and relevant to our era.

[BAM]

One of the most helpful books on Marx's Capital that I have found is Isaak Illich Rubin's Essays on Marx's Theory of Value (http://www.marxists.org/archive/rubin/value/index.htm).

[LimitedIdeology]

Louis Althusser and Etienne Balibar, especially Reading Capital.

[Buffalo Souljah]

I've got a set of books to read on Irish history, but I'd also like to give Capital a go this summer.
[/SIZE][/FONT]

You should join the group we started last Christmas: Reading Marx's Capital Vol I (http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=324); we haven't really got off the ground other than my singlehanded summaries of the first few chapters, but your contributions could surely change that. Also, now that it's summer, most of the people in the group would probably feel more motivated to read along with whoever took up the "slack", so to speak.


Should we make this thread a sticky? I'm a bit apprehensive, since we already have the "Introductory Reading List", but, since political economy is central to a radical interpretation of social relations, it might be of some use/consequence to do so.

[Buffalo Souljah]

In any case, have you read Marx's shorter works on economics? Wage Labour and Capital, Value Price and Profit, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, Poverty of Philosophy?

Aside from bits and pieces of the German original of Value, Price & Profit, I haven't read any of those books. THanks for the suggestions, I'll surely check into them, time allowing.

[BAM]

Louis Althusser and Etienne Balibar, especially Reading Capital.

I wouldn't recommend Althusser to a beginner. They are likely to get very confused by his misleading approach, and for that reason I don't find much to advise reading in Althusser at all. The more advanced student of Marx might like to read him for the purposes of understanding some historical debates and weighing up his influence, but that's as far as it goes.

[Belisarius]

I wouldn't recommend Althusser to a beginner. They are likely to get very confused by his misleading approach, and for that reason I don't find much to advise reading in Althusser at all. The more advanced student of Marx might like to read him for the purposes of understanding some historical debates and weighing up his influence, but that's as far as it goes.
i don't really agree. i think althusser is very interesting to get a more philosophical approach to marxism. i haven't read "reading capital" itself, but "ideology and idelogical state apparatuses" is probably one of the best essays around in marxist literature.

[Zanthorus]

i don't really agree. i think althusser is very interesting to get a more philosophical approach to marxism.

I think the main problem here is that "marxism" is noticeably different to the actual ideas of Karl Marx.

[BAM]

i don't really agree. i think althusser is very interesting to get a more philosophical approach to marxism.

Why would that be a good thing? What does a lot of philosophical obfuscation add to Marx's analysis? How does it make it clearer?


i haven't read "reading capital" itself, but "ideology and idelogical state apparatuses" is probably one of the best essays around in marxist literature.

Not only does Althusser add a lot of unnecessary jargon, I find it difficult to see how Althusser's conception of history as "a process without a subject", "ideological state apparatuses", etc., etc., has much to do with Marx's theory. Indeed, you might argue that for Althusser, "ideology", "structure" play the unintended role of an Hegelian Geist.

[Belisarius]

Why would that be a good thing? What does a lot of philosophical obfuscation add to Marx's analysis? How does it make it clearer?



Not only does Althusser add a lot of unnecessary jargon, I find it difficult to see how Althusser's conception of history as "a process without a subject", "ideological state apparatuses", etc., etc., has much to do with Marx's theory. Indeed, you might argue that for Althusser, "ideology", "structure" play the unintended role of an Hegelian Geist.
althusser introduced such words as ideology to understand history, which was alos marx's aim. hegel and althusser are more oppisites than equals. gehel's geist is an idealist notion, but althussers ideology is materialist. ideology only functions in ideological acts, which he calls interpellation. i see ideology more as the superstructural form of marx's more economically oriented historical materialism.

you say althusser is obscure, but believe me, he is really understandable. it doesn't take that much of an effort to read his essays. marx's analysis itself is imbedded in philosophy, so certainelly philosophy can add something to it.

[BAM]

althusser introduced such words as ideology to understand history, which was alos marx's aim. hegel and althusser are more oppisites than equals. gehel's geist is an idealist notion, but althussers ideology is materialist. ideology only functions in ideological acts, which he calls interpellation. i see ideology more as the superstructural form of marx's more economically oriented historical materialism.

you say althusser is obscure, but believe me, he is really understandable. it doesn't take that much of an effort to read his essays. marx's analysis itself is imbedded in philosophy, so certainelly philosophy can add something to it.

Yes, but Althusser departs from Marx in significant ways. For Althusser, only structure has agency.

[Proletarian Ultra]

Harry Cleaver's Reading Capital Politically is an interesting New Left-ish take. Copies are hard to find but it's online somewheres.

There's sort two kinds of books on Capital - ones that try to make it simpler (and hopefully not too much less interesting) and ones that try to make it more complicated (and hopefully more interesting). Althusser is the second type; I like Jason Read's Micro-Politics of Capital personally - but anyway that's not what you're asking about.

The real magic bullet would be a book that makes it simpler and more interesting! Let me know if you find it.

EDIT: This is a pretty neat essay (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/smith-cyril/works/articles/cyril.htm) on what Marx was doing in Capital. (It's short).