Here is a list of books by Marxists that have stood the test of time. I am being impressionistic and probably idiosyncratic. I am more interested in analysis of what is than political organizing. What should be added? Removed?
- Frederick Engels, Anti-Dühring, 1877. I think German comrades learned Marxism during the second international more from this thick tome. I recommend other works for introductions these days.
- Vladimir Lenin, What is to be Done?, 1902. Lenin lays out a strategy and defines a vanguard party. And the Bolsheviks are in power at the end of 1917.
- Rosa Luxemburg, The Accumulation of Capital, 1913. Luxemburg argues that capitalism needs a less advanced sector (or maybe military purchases from the state) to provide demand. Growth paths can be defined by Marx's scheme for expanded reproduction, but why would capitalists make these invevestments?
- Rudolf Hilferding, Finance Capital, 1910. I have not read this one. Hilferding recognizes that joint stock companies and financial institutions have changed capitalism from the era of small business.
- Nikolai Bukharin, Economic Theory of the Leisure Class, 1919. Extends the approach of Marx's Theories of Surplus Value to analyze works of the marginal revolution. Where does Bukharin have the time for scholarly work?
- Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1971. Originally written in Mussolini's prisons. Argues that in advanced societies, communists must first change civil society before obtaining state power.
- Paul A. Baran and Paul Sweezy, Monopoly Capital, 1966. How should Marx's analysis be updated for the world of modern corporations? The editors of Monthly Review have ideas.
- Piero Sraffa, The Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities, 1960. Minimalist, as in modern art. I think many have still not absorbed this.
- Guy Debord, The Society of the Spectacle, 1967. This is more Marxist than I expected. Builds on the idea of commodity fetishism. I could learn more about the situationists in Paris in May 1968.
But I do not want to get into current events.
Posts
2 comments:
A few comments...
"Vladimir Lenin, What is to be Done?, 1902. Lenin lays out a strategy and defines a vanguard party. And the Bolsheviks are in power at the end of 1917."
What happened in 1917 is not really related to the 1902 text -- in practice, the Bolsheviks in 1917 were not following "What is to be Done?" but once in power, the party was reshaped to reflect the book (with bad results). Subsequent (official) writing glorified the book and ignored the messy reality of 1917 (see here details). However, the assumptions of "What is to be Done?" definitely impacted negatively on the outcome of the Revolution, giving the ideological justification for party power and then party dictatorship.
"Rudolf Hilferding, Finance Capital, 1910. I have not read this one. Hilferding recognizes that joint stock companies and financial institutions have changed capitalism from the era of small business."
Doug Henwood in Wall Street has some choice words on this book and is well-worth reading. It can be found here and I would recommend reading it.
"Paul A. Baran and Paul Sweezy, Monopoly Capital, 1966. How should Marx's analysis be updated for the world of modern corporations? The editors of Monthly Review have ideas."
Paul Mattick (a council communist and leading Marxist economist) was not impressed, as shown in this review.
Iain
An Anarchist FAQ
I go back and forth on whether Lenin really stuck to his strategy. I do not think his success, if so, is enough to justify creating vanguard parties else where.
I prefer my attempts to set up equations for prices of production with market power to Baran and Sweezy. I am not sure how one would empirically apply my approach. I understand that Baran and Sweezy's 'surplus' is not Marx's 'surplus value'.
Post a Comment