Important Marxist Texts

[Ocean Seal]

So I'm taking the time to catch up on some of my Marxist reading, and I've read a few texts recently.
Mainly Marx and Engels stuff, so I was wondering if anyone had any recommendations. Heavy stuff is good Left-Marxist as well as Leninist stuff is what I want to read. I've read a little bit of Lenin, DeLeon, and Pannekoek so far as well. Does anyone have any recommendations?
People that I would like to look into
Luxemburg
Stalin
Connolly
Trotsky
Bordiga
and any others whom you think are worth reading.
Short pamphlets are good but I guess canonical works are okay too. If there's any texts which really stand out to you as particularly convincing please post them here.
Post plentiful texts comrades! I'm pretty eager to get my read on!

[Caj]

You probably already know this, but you can find tons of Marxist texts at http://marxists.org.

[svenne]

Luxemburg is a pretty easy read, although i haven't touched her work about economics. Her most important works is Organizational questions of the russian social democracy (you should propably read the Lenin text she critizises too) and The Mass Strike. Also, try to find a text or two from the italian operaists. I'd love to recommend you one or two good and short, but it's been a while since i last looked at those texts. Something in the back of my head says that Lenin in England (http://libcom.org/library/lenin-in-england-mario-tronti) is the thing to begin with, but hey, can't swear on it.

[Astarte]

This is an interesting piece I found about a week ago, here is the wikipedia description of it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiers_of_History
and here is the link
http://scientificsocialist.org/Histo...tle%20Page.htm

Soviet publications before the revelation of documents in Nazi–Soviet Relations had avoided discussing the Soviet–German pact.[3] Accordingly, Falsifiers is novel because it is a first frank Soviet discussion of the German–Soviet pact in a publication.[3] In addition, because Falsifiers was personally and extensively edited by Stalin, at the very least, it provides unique insight into the view of events that he was keen to publicize.[13]
The book provides insight into Stalin's thinking and calculations in the autumn of 1940.[14] In analyzing the text of Falsifiers surrounding Soviet–German talks regarding the potential entry as the Soviet Union as an Axis Power, historian Geoffrey Roberts argues that there is no reason that Stalin would not have signed a four-power pact if Germany accepted his November offer.[19]
Some accusations made by Stalin in this book are however today supported by western historians[who?], in particular the role played by France and England in the failure of a tripartite alliance with USSR before 1940.[20]

[∞]

The Luxemburg reader has all her works.

[rvp]

I would recommend reading "State and Revolution" written by Lenin

[∞]

Was that the one where he responds to rosa?

[∞]

Grundisse is good.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

All available online:

Marx Value, Price and Profit
Pannekoek Workers Councils
Mattick Reform or Revolution
Mattick The New Capitalism and the Old Class Struggle
Cyril Smith Marx at the Millenium

[Rooster]

Anything by Hal Draper would be a good read. Particularly this description of neo-stalinism and this, The Two Souls of Socialism. They're all reasonably straight forward expositions with little in the way of complicated language.

Also, possibly anything by Tony Cliff. His more famous work is State Capitalism in Russia.

[Thirsty Crow]

As far as Stalin is concerened, I'd go for his texts on Leninism and socialism in one country.

Try reading On the Draft Constitution of the USSR: http://www.marxists.org/reference/ar...1936/11/25.htm
Also, here's a short text that could give insight into the portarayal of differences between Stalin's center and the Left Opposition, in relation to the issue of achieveing socialism in USSR: http://www.marxists.org/reference/ar...1926/02/10.htm

And here's the "cannonical" text in which "Leninism" takes shape (Concerning Questions of Leninism): http://www.marxists.org/reference/ar...1926/01/25.htm

Also, I'd suggest that you take a look at Marx's political writings, especially the "Civil War in France" where he takes up the issue of the Paris Commune (you can also dig up many of the drafts for the final version of this piece of writing), if you hadn't already done so. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx...ance/index.htm

[piet11111]

Lenin's imperialism

http://www.marxists.org/archive/leni.../1916/imp-hsc/

Really relevant these days.

[Caj]

The Luxemburg reader has all her works.

Rosa Luxemburg Speaks is a better collection.

[svenne]

Rosa Luxemburg Speaks is a better collection.

What's the difference?

[Caj]

What's the difference?

It's longer, has some semi-important works that The Rosa Luxemburg Reader leaves out, and it has responses to Luxemburg's works by Leon Trotsky and Vladimir Lenin.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

His more famous work is State Capitalism in Russia.

That is one of the worst attempts at "State Capitalism" theory in history. It is incredibly awful.

Don't let that stop you from reading it though.

[The Idler]

A compact Marxist library of the socialist classics as primary sources for under $100 would be good. Some of us have limited space and more importantly limited budget.

[thefinalmarch]

That is one of the worst attempts at "State Capitalism" theory in history. It is incredibly awful.

What would you recommend on state capitalism (or any similar theory)? Or really anything relating to class society and relations in the USSR, et al.?

[KurtFF8]

What would you recommend on state capitalism (or any similar theory)? Or really anything relating to class society and relations in the USSR, et al.?

There's a good book called Western Marxism and the Soviet Union that deals with conflicting Marxist notions of the nature of the USSR (although it doesn't really contain the Marxist-Leninist tendency unfortunately).

I would personally argue that the "State Capitalist" theory is itself quite bankrupt and not very helpful. That book helped me come to that conclusion but it contains many different arguments so perhaps you'll come to a different one.

[Rooster]

I would personally argue that the "State Capitalist" theory is itself quite bankrupt and not very helpful.

Why don't you think it's useful?