I am going to start reading Das Capital for the first time, any advice?

[UltraWright]

I am starting to read Das Capital and have set a year period to get done with that project. I come from a mathematics/logic background, so I do not know how hard it is going to be.

So, do you have any advice for me? Something like "it gets better around the third chapter, just hang in there" would be really appreciated!

[Manic Impressive]

it gets better around the third chapter, just hang in there :D

real advice get a good accompanying book I used A companion to Marx's Capital by David Harvey. It took me 18 months but I see no reason why you couldn't get it done in a year or less.

[ZeroNowhere]

If you understand the first chapter, then that chapter's enjoyable. If you don't, the rest of the book may be somewhat enjoyable, but ultimately you probably won't get the full point of it, and hence won't enjoy it as much (in addition, doing such is probably a cause of much of the moralistic and annoying Marxism which goes on and on about exploitation and how lazy and bad capitalists are, using platitudes to fill the void left by ignorance). If you don't get the first chapter, then you'll probably not get the third anyway. As such, reread the first chapter a bit before going on to the rest, and I'd be willing to discuss things if you have any doubts about what Marx is saying, and I'm sure that some others would too.

You probably should try to avoid any exegeses (including introductions such as Mandel's) or companion books, and try to understand the book by itself. Firstly, they're generally pretty bad, and secondly when reading Marx it's pretty important to read Marx by himself and not through the lens of another's view of Marx. The main obstacle to understanding Marx is generally thinking that one understands Marx when one doesn't, and as such it's much better to be doubtful about something and think it over than look for answers in a book by somebody who isn't Marx.

Really, the first book is a lot of fun for me, given that Marx has a subtle sense of humour which I appreciate. It can be a bit dull for some parts of the empirical presentations, but in any case the theoretical sections don't drag at all, and form the more important section of the book. In the second book, they can drag a bit, due to Marx not having edited it because of death and such, but it's still a good idea to read the books in order, and there's still a fair bit to learn in the second book (especially the sections on the cycle of capital and how the total social capital is reproduced). The main problem can be the parts where a single section is gone over rather exhaustively, but sometimes there does end up being a good reason for this. The third book isn't as well-written as the first one, probably again due to lack of editing, but nonetheless it's pretty dense theoretically, and it doesn't really let up much, so that's not much of an obstacle.

[Volcanicity]

If you have'nt already read it try reading Marx's "Value,price and profit" which is basically a watered down version of Capital volume 1.

[Armchair War Criminal]

If the first chapter makes perfect sense without any exegesis, then let it "speak for itself," sure. Personally I was too dumb (or just too young) to get it the first time around, and Fine and Saad-Filho's book, and Harvey's lectures, were invaluable. If, like I did, you're coming in with a background in neoclassical economics and not much classical at all, a lot of the terms and assumptions Marx uses are going to subtly throw you, like reading Portugese when all you know is Spanish.

I also agree that Karl has a great sense of humor, though Capital is probably his driest book by far.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

A good assistance would be to watch David Harvey's videos on the book.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBazR59SZXk

Plus the companion by David Harvey is the best one you will find.

I'm reading Capital myself, so it is gonna get difficult and it takes a while to master all the terms and everything.Perhaps we could collaborate and help each other?

[Nikolay]

I've also started reading Capital (I plan on reading all Volumes in two years (I'm a slow reader)). And I'm going to be honest, I'm struggling quite a bit.. I think somebody should set up a group where everyone can help each other out or something? That would help a lot of people! :D

[Dave B]

I agree with Zeronowhere do not read anything from anybody on Capital especially not Mandel.

Depending on how much background you have; you might want to read the opening chapters of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, which quite easy to read, just to get into the general idea whilst anticipating that Karl is going to develop that it.

The opening chapter is critical.

The Rosseta stone to understanding it appears early on and is in my opinion;


All that these things now tell us is, that human labour power has been expended in their production, that human labour is embodied in them. When looked at as crystals of this social substance, common to them all, they are – Values.


http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm


As a scientist you may have the disadvantage of not being used to the kind of language that is used to present the argument, but you should have an advantage of being familiar with the kind of logic that underpins it.

[Aurora]

The main obstacle to understanding Marx is generally thinking that one understands Marx when one doesn't
This, so much this. When i first started reading Marx i ended up trying to find justification for what i thought i already knew about communism, which led me to accepting the stalinist view of socialism for an embarrassingly long time. Big fuckin mistake.

Read Marx by himself and throw any preconceived ideas out the window, Marx writes pretty clearly and in great detail, that should be enough.

[Turinbaar]

Read the 1844 manuscripts first, especially "estranged labour," "private property and communism" and his critique of hegelianism. These will familiarize you with the basics of revolutionary change within classes, and between them, the role of technological innovation in these revolutions, as well as a very good working definition of alienation and its relation to private property. It will also familiarize you with hegel's philosophy and its marxist critique. Once you've gotten these basics down, reading marx's work isn't quite so laborious as people say.

[Pioneers_Violin]

I also am working on Das Capital and also find it a surprisingly slow read. Much harder than Communist Manifesto. Normally, I'm an extremely fast reader with good comprehension.

The first three chapters of Capital make sense, though Marx seems to drive many points repeatedly.

Thanks for the recommended read list... perhaps I'll do those first.

PV

[Zanthorus]

In addition to ZeroNowhere's post, what really helped me to overcome the initial stumbling blocks was reading other presentations which Marx had written of the same ideas. Most notably, the first three chapters of Capital, the ones which are usually regarded as the most difficult, are an altered version of Marx's 1859 work 'A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy'. Marx himself says in the first three chapters of Capital that there are things missing in the first three chapters which are better elaborated in 'A Contribution...', conversely he regarded some parts of his exposition in Capital to be better than those of 'A Contribution...', so really the two texts are complimentary. One of the things which was stripped out of the first three chapters of Capital is Marx's historical notes on the development of the theory, which is where he actually counterposes his views in detail to those of previous political economists, which depending on your style of learning might be more useful than simply Marx going on about his own ideas.

[ZeroNowhere]

The first three chapters of Capital make sense, though Marx seems to drive many points repeatedly.
And people tend to miss them repeatedly, so I think it's excusable.

[Leftsolidarity]

I only read the first volume or whatever it was called from Marxists.org

It was torture and I basically re-read it about 6 times before I think I understand it. I probably don't though.

I would try to read as many others things by Marx before you try to read Capital.

[Die Rote Fahne]

Read it with David Harvey!

http://davidharvey.org/reading-capital/

[Rooster]

There are a few guides you can read along but I think it would be better if you just read through Capital and trying not to get bogged down. If you do get stuck or something confuses you, then ignore it for now and just keep reading. Much of it refers back to the start which makes it clearer to understand. Harvey is good, in my opinon, if you already have an understanding of marxist economics.

Also, as with any book, I find it helpful to make notes of things you find interesting, or you can make notes to help you clarify a point in your own language. You can keep this in a note book seperate or you can just pencil it in into your own copy of capital in the margins.

[Jose Gracchus]

Harvey rejects Marx's theory of value. Hardly an aside when reading Capital.

[REVLEFT'S BIEGGST MATSER TROL]

basically;

mandel sucks yo

harvey sucks yo

read it yourself yo

dialetics sucks yo

its gonna be confusing and there are many differnet intrepreations so its gonna require a lot of thought and research and consultation of differnet opinions so read it with an open mind and try as far as possible not to let any previous intrepreations or thoughts about marx's theories colour your reading. Yo.

[ZeroNowhere]

dialetics sucks yoIf we're talking about what Marx (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/mathematical-manuscripts/index.htm) believed, which I believe is the main point of not reading exegeses and also one's first concern when reading 'Capital', then this would also count as an unhealthy preconception. I don't disagree on the other two, though.

[Reznov]

Could I suggest reading the Communist Manifesto first before reading Kapital?

I think it explains where Marx stands, and the way things were seen as leftists from that time, at least at an introductory level.

[Skammunist]

Good point. I'd always recommend reading the Communist Manifesto first. It's easier to read a short book in a few days rather than read an encyclopedia in a year. Let's face it, it pretty much is the length of an encyclopedia, just for leftists, haha!

[Vanguard1917]

Good point. I'd always recommend reading the Communist Manifesto first. It's easier to read a short book in a few days rather than read an encyclopedia in a year. Let's face it, it pretty much is the length of an encyclopedia, just for leftists, haha!

Yes, although the CM is a pamphlet of propaganda, and not an introduction to Capital.

[cu247]

And is there seriously anyone here who hasn't read the manifesto? And now I think I'll do like you guys and start reading Capital. I wanted to last year, but I wasn't really ready and it was too much for me back then. But I think I'm ready now.

P.S. It's true that the manifesto is more of a short propaganda pamphlet, but I still think it is an useful read.

[Skammunist]

True, the Manifesto may be a short pamphlet, but it does mention some pretty important Marxist concepts. For example, it mentions historical materialism, the importance of class consciousness, as well as the difference between the utopian socialism of the day and Marx's scientific socialism.

[Landsharks eat metal]

I've been trying to read Capital for a few months now. It's very hard to work through, but can make you feel very smart. If you have your own copy, I would recommend going through with a pencil or other writing implement and underlining anything you deem to be important. That has helped me slow down in my reading, not let my eyes skim over the page, and make sure I understand everything.

[S.Artesian]

I am starting to read Das Capital and have set a year period to get done with that project. I come from a mathematics/logic background, so I do not know how hard it is going to be.

So, do you have any advice for me? Something like "it gets better around the third chapter, just hang in there" would be really appreciated!


Just do it.

[Book O'Dead]

I am starting to read Das Capital and have set a year period to get done with that project. I come from a mathematics/logic background, so I do not know how hard it is going to be.

So, do you have any advice for me? Something like "it gets better around the third chapter, just hang in there" would be really appreciated!

Someone already may have suggested this so apologies for the echo.
My advice:

TAKE NOTES.

I mean, get a nice legal pad and set it nearby while you read. Write down whatever thoughts (comments, questions, objections, etc.) come to mind as you read. Simply enumerate each point by the corresponding page number in the book to keep some order to your notes and for possible future reference.

Tried and tested.

In response to a similar question I made to a friend he, my friend, said: "Capital is never read, it is studied!"

[Book O'Dead]

Oh, and one more thing: You might try "Wage Labour And Capital" and "Value, Price & Profit" by Marx before you enter full speed on Capital.

When you see the actual copy of the above-mentioned titles you'll understand why I make this suggestion.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Harvey rejects Marx's theory of value. Hardly an aside when reading Capital.

I don't think it matter what Harvey himself thinks about Capital.The point is he explains the function of the book for an audience that would otherwise be lost.

He is a teacher: the point is that you learn about the content of capital, and not what Harvey himself thinks.He essentially says as much in the beginning of the introduction.

[ZeroNowhere]

I don't think it matter what Harvey himself thinks about Capital.The point is he explains the function of the book for an audience that would otherwise be lost.

He is a teacher: the point is that you learn about the content of capital, and not what Harvey himself thinks.He essentially says as much in the beginning of the introduction.I think that it'd be pretty relevant, as it suggests that his understanding of 'Capital' is deficient.

[Jose Gracchus]

I don't want to get taught by a physics teacher who believes in the aether.

[S.Artesian]

Really. Forget Harvey. What he doesn't understand about capital, Marx, and Capital would fill volumes.

He does not explain Marx's Capital. Knock out the labor theory of value, and you knock out surplus value. Knock out surplus value, and you knock out the organization of labor as a commodity, as wage-labor. Knock out wage- labor and you have no capital. You have no social relationship of production, no social organization of labor that drives capital through its circuits, metamorphoses, expansions, contractions-- that drives accumulation, and forces capital up the inside of the cage of accumulation it has fashioned for itself.

[Coggeh]

I've also started reading Capital (I plan on reading all Volumes in two years (I'm a slow reader)). And I'm going to be honest, I'm struggling quite a bit.. I think somebody should set up a group where everyone can help each other out or something? That would help a lot of people! :D

Started a group a while back, that was supposed to function that way but it kinda of fell apart plus i had a permissions thing on that i didn't know how to turn off so that probably turned people away:blushing:

Should start a new one or try and reinvent the one thats there :http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=217

Its open to all ideologies in the sphere of leftism so anything such as marx,lenin,bakunin,trotsky,stalin anything is more than welcome as a suggestion for reading towards gaining a fuller understanding of marxism, anarchism, maoism etc for people.

Though Capital wouldn't be on the list for reading cause its a beginners group. anyway if people want to join feel free would be good to get it going again.

[The Idler]

Surprised no-ones mentioned Ben Fine and Alfred Saad-Filho's Companion to Capital or the graphic guide Marx's Capital for Beginners. Updated Consolidated Learning FAQ with the following (among other resources). Dunno if its any use.

Brendan McCooney's Kapitalism101


Econ101- commodities, value, exploitation

Law of Value- The Series! (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/law-of-value-the-series/)
Commodities- remix (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/commodities-remix/)
DIY exploitation (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/diy-exploitation/)
What Transformation Problem? (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/what-transformation-problem/)

Transformation?- Math supplement (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/transformation-math-supplement/)


Who is exploited? (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/who-is-exploited/)
Where does profit come from? (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/where-does-profit-come-from/)


Econ 202- Capital, Credit, Money

What is Capital? (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/what-is-capital/)
What is capitalism? (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/what-is-capitalism/)
What is Credit? (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/what-is-credit/)
What the hell is money? (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/what-the-hell-is-money/)
The Federal Reserve is going to eat you… or is it? (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/the-federal-reserve-is-going-to-eat-you-or-is-it/)


Econ 303- Crisis Theory

Crisis! – Overaccumulation (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/crisis-overaccumulation/)
The Falling Rate of Profit (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/the-falling-rate-of-profit/)
Consume! (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/consume/)
Felix the Cat and Capitalist Competition (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/felix-the-cat-and-capitalist-competition/)
Capitalist Equilibrium? (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/capitalist-equilibrium/)

Math supplement to “Capitalist Equilibrium?” (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/math-supplement-to-capitalist-equilibrium/)


Crisis Theory- an outline (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/crisis-theory-an-outline/)


Econ 404- Work, Domination and Consent

Robots vs. Luddites (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/robots-vs-luddites/)
Work (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/work/)
Manufacturing Consent (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/manufacturing-consent/)
Frederick Taylor-the biggest bastard ever (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/frederick-taylor-the-biggest-bastard-ever/)


Econ 505- super advanced shit

Kapital Volume 3 (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/kapital-volume-3/)
Marx, Time and Value (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/marx-time-and-value/)
annotated bibliography (http://kapitalism101.wordpress.com/annotated-bibliography/)

[DiaMat86]

Download the audiobook

[S.Artesian]

Read the fucking volume straight away, and don't listen to anyone who tells you differently. Everybody's overthinking this. Just do it. You're going to have to read it more than once anyway.

[Thirsty Crow]

Read the 1844 manuscripts first, especially "estranged labour," "private property and communism" and his critique of hegelianism.
Just to jump on the bandwagon, I had a similar plan: to go into detail the manuscripts and Grundrisse, after reading it discontinuously for the past 6 months, and then proceed with Capital (sort of a chronological order).

And a qzestion not-so-related to the topic at hand: do people who discard Mandel's exegesis also think that his overall grasp on Marxist critique of political economy is so weak to make his Late Capitalism a work not worth going through in detail?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Really. Forget Harvey. What he doesn't understand about capital, Marx, and Capital would fill volumes.

He does not explain Marx's Capital. Knock out the labor theory of value, and you knock out surplus value. Knock out surplus value, and you knock out the organization of labor as a commodity, as wage-labor. Knock out wage- labor and you have no capital. You have no social relationship of production, no social organization of labor that drives capital through its circuits, metamorphoses, expansions, contractions-- that drives accumulation, and forces capital up the inside of the cage of accumulation it has fashioned for itself.

In which section/video does he leave out the labor theory of value?

[S.Artesian]

I didn't say "leave out." He rejects the labor theory of value, or at least, IMO, guts it.

See:


http://libcom.org/library/review-david-harveys-limits-capital-paul-mattick-jr

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I didn't say "leave out." He rejects the labor theory of value, or at least, IMO, guts it.

See:


http://libcom.org/library/review-david-harveys-limits-capital-paul-mattick-jr

Your link doesn't negate his influence on him explaining Das Kapital to others.

I guess I should be asking you is the following: during his youtube video series (reading capital), and within his companion to Capital, does he actively try and explain to people that Marx's Labor Theory of Value is wrong, while not explaining what it actually is?

As I have said before, if he himself rejects the theory, that's fine, I honestly don't care.I'm only interested in whether or not he is misleading people when explaining capital.

[Principia Ethica]

I've been reading this thread with interest because I want to read it too. . .but decided to start with the Communist Manifesto and one of my friends suggested that I read about Marx's life so I get a good understanding about the "context" and understanding his life and the economic climate surrounding his life.

Is this a good idea or should I just try and jump in with both feet?

[S.Artesian]

Read the Manifesto, read the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, so you get the since of what Marx is always concerned with.... the conditions of labor, and then jump in.

[Common_Means]

Regardless of what others may think of Harvey's analysis, I do agree with his caution towards the structure of Capital. It is different than modern western works in that the method of argument is presented in a differing manner. This results in the reader feeling, at times, lost and confused. Take notes! Work your way through it, and you will be rewarded.

[La Comédie Noire]

Das Kapital is easier than it is given credit for. The biggest obstacle is getting used to Marx's style of writing and knowing the historical context surrounding it's writing. When I began reading Marx, god five years ago now, I knew nothing of 19th century European History.

It's a lot like swimming in the ocean, sometimes you just have to jump right in and get used to the water.

[UnknownPerson]

I suggest using Wikipedia to search for the terms which you aren't familiar with.

[Hit The North]

I've been reading this thread with interest because I want to read it too. . .but decided to start with the Communist Manifesto and one of my friends suggested that I read about Marx's life so I get a good understanding about the "context" and understanding his life and the economic climate surrounding his life.

Is this a good idea or should I just try and jump in with both feet?

It makes good research sense to investigate the wider contexts in which a piece of work was created. A good biography of Marx will offer you an overview of his intentions in writing Capital, how it fits in with his other work and the intellectual and political milieu. I'd recommend David McLellen (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Karl-Marx-His-Life-Thought/dp/0060128291/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1308759649&sr=1-8), but others might have their own favourites.

Another big help will be the correspondence between Marx and others around the writing of, and after the publication of, the work. Once again, MIA offers a good resource here (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/letters/subject/capital.htm).

A partial but very useful secondary commentary on Capital volume one is provided by Marx's closest collaborator, Fred Engels. You can download it here (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Engels_Synopsis_of_Capital.pdf).

Of course, there's no substitute for reading the actual thing for yourself.