What do you think?
Rate this book
Selected Writings
Featuring the most important and enduring works from Marx's enormous corpus, this collection ranges from the Hegelian idealism of his youth to the mature socialism of his later works. Organized both topically and in rough chronological order, the selections (many of them in the translations of Loyd D. Easton and Kurt H. Guddat) include writings on historical materialism, excerpts from Capital, and political works.
338 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1977
127 people are currently reading
1571 people want to read
About the author
Karl Marx
2,720 books6,105 followersWith the help of Friedrich Engels, German philosopher and revolutionary Karl Marx wrote
The Communist Manifesto
(1848) and
Das Kapital
(1867-1894), works, which explain historical development in terms of the interaction of contradictory economic forces, form many regimes, and profoundly influenced the social sciences.
German social theorist Friedrich Engels collaborated with Karl Marx on The Communist Manifesto in 1848 and on numerous other works.
Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin in London opposed Communism of Karl Marx with his antithetical anarchy.
Works of Jacques Martin Barzun include Darwin, Marx, Wagner (1941).
The Prussian kingdom introduced a prohibition on Jews, practicing law; in response, a man converted to Protestantism and shortly afterward fathered Karl Marx.
Marx began co-operating with Bruno Bauer on editing Philosophy of Religion of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (see Democritus and Epicurus), doctoral thesis, also engaged Marx, who completed it in 1841. People described the controversial essay as "a daring and original piece... in which Marx set out to show that theology must yield to the superior wisdom." Marx decided to submit his thesis not to the particularly conservative professors at the University of Berlin but instead to the more liberal faculty of University of Jena, which for his contributed key theory awarded his Philosophiae Doctor in April 1841. Marx and Bauer, both atheists, in March 1841 began plans for a journal, entitled Archiv des Atheismus (Atheistic Archives), which never came to fruition.
Marx edited the newspaper Vorwärts! in 1844 in Paris. The urging of the Prussian government from France banished and expelled Marx in absentia; he then studied in Brussels. He joined the league in 1847 and published.
Marx participated the failure of 1848 and afterward eventually wound in London. Marx, a foreigner, corresponded for several publications of United States.
He came in three volumes. Marx organized the International and the social democratic party.
Marx in a letter to C. Schmidt once quipped, "All I know is that I am not a Marxist," as Warren Allen Smith related in Who's Who in Hell .
People describe Marx, who most figured among humans. They typically cite Marx with Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, the principal modern architects.
Bertrand Russell later remarked of non-religious Marx, "His belief that there is a cosmic ... called dialectical materialism, which governs ... independently of human volitions, is mere mythology" ( Portraits from Memory , 1956).
More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bi...
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/...
http://www.historyguide.org/intellect...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/...
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/t...
German social theorist Friedrich Engels collaborated with Karl Marx on The Communist Manifesto in 1848 and on numerous other works.
Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin in London opposed Communism of Karl Marx with his antithetical anarchy.
Works of Jacques Martin Barzun include Darwin, Marx, Wagner (1941).
The Prussian kingdom introduced a prohibition on Jews, practicing law; in response, a man converted to Protestantism and shortly afterward fathered Karl Marx.
Marx began co-operating with Bruno Bauer on editing Philosophy of Religion of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (see Democritus and Epicurus), doctoral thesis, also engaged Marx, who completed it in 1841. People described the controversial essay as "a daring and original piece... in which Marx set out to show that theology must yield to the superior wisdom." Marx decided to submit his thesis not to the particularly conservative professors at the University of Berlin but instead to the more liberal faculty of University of Jena, which for his contributed key theory awarded his Philosophiae Doctor in April 1841. Marx and Bauer, both atheists, in March 1841 began plans for a journal, entitled Archiv des Atheismus (Atheistic Archives), which never came to fruition.
Marx edited the newspaper Vorwärts! in 1844 in Paris. The urging of the Prussian government from France banished and expelled Marx in absentia; he then studied in Brussels. He joined the league in 1847 and published.
Marx participated the failure of 1848 and afterward eventually wound in London. Marx, a foreigner, corresponded for several publications of United States.
He came in three volumes. Marx organized the International and the social democratic party.
Marx in a letter to C. Schmidt once quipped, "All I know is that I am not a Marxist," as Warren Allen Smith related in Who's Who in Hell .
People describe Marx, who most figured among humans. They typically cite Marx with Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, the principal modern architects.
Bertrand Russell later remarked of non-religious Marx, "His belief that there is a cosmic ... called dialectical materialism, which governs ... independently of human volitions, is mere mythology" ( Portraits from Memory , 1956).
More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bi...
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/...
http://www.historyguide.org/intellect...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/...
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/t...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews
March 9, 2023
Selected Writings ~ Karl Marx (On the Jewish Question, Alienation of Labor, The German Ideology)
A philosophical inversion of Hegel, very interesting and also depressing: I am a wage-slave, a cog in the wheel of society. There is still much that is true here. As I read this time around, I reflected on how the historical conditions at the time that Marx was writing were such that, had there been no Marx, the subsequent clash was nevertheless inevitable. If not Marx, then some other would have taken up the cry of freedom, and raised the banner in the name of communism. Considering this in the light of Hegel, we can observe that even after successful communist revolutions (succesful meaning that the former sovereigns were overthrown and private property was abolished), man was not yet truly emancipated from his condition of slavery. Man is not yet everywhere free. Stalingrad was only a first clash between the Hegelians of the left and of the right, and a new synthesis has not yet emerged from this opposition between left and right.
But Marx sets up his materialist philosophy in opposition to Hegel's. His materialist conception overturns Hegel’s concept of the unfolding evolution of Spirit that we observe in the phænomenal world. Stated in simple terms: For Hegel, Spirit becomes matter; for Marx the material world determines spirit. The most interesting piece in this volume of Selected Writings was for me the one on The German Ideology. Really to appreciate Marx, however, requires that one should first have read Hegel.
The inter-textual dialogue between Marx & Hegel is fascinating. According to Hegel history has evolved to the point where men are no longer slaves, as man, the subject of the Persian king, for example had been, and the Hegelian Idea that all men are, qua man, free, has been in the world since the age of the Christianized medieval Germans, but communism has not been successful in truly freeing all men in the world today. Instead, it places tremendous power in the hands of the politicians, who always rise to power by promising to liberate the unhappy masses in exchange for votes. This is at least as old as Caesar. There must be something more, but what? What comes next? How will freedom come to all men?
Perhaps only a poet, like Walt Whitman, can be free.
Though we now see that communism (having been tried) has been found wanting, I cannot tell whether Hegel or Marx has better explained history. I find myself caught between the two as I had once been caught between Ptolemy’s description of the cosmos, and Copernicus's. Does the sun revolve around the earth, or the earth around the sun? Both the Ptolemaic system and the Copernican explain all of the observations, and there is no conclusive evidence to force one to accept the truth of one or the other system, until Newton writes his Principia Mathematica. Who is the Newton to settle in the realm of political philosophy and the nature of history the question between Hegel’s vision of world history, and Karl Marx?
Marx saw the tragedy that the alienation of labour had produced in the lives of workers, and he had great hopes of changing the world for the better. But when he writes the following, that
"In communist society. . .where nobody has an exclusive area of activity and each can train himself in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production, making it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, breed cattle in the evening, criticize after dinner, just as I like, without ever becoming a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critic." (pg. 119)
one cannot but be impressed by his tremendous naivety. The experience of friends who have escaped communism does not reflect anything like the idyllic promises of pastoral tranquility that Marx would hope for. Instead one graduates from school #313 and is assigned to factory #9 where one will make zippers for pants for the rest of one's life. How has communism succeeded in rescuing man from the alienation of labour? It has not. It has merely succeeded in taking private property away from those who have worked for it, and given tremendous power to the politicians who assisted in this grand-scale theft. Marx did not live to see the outcome of his ideas as these were played out on the stage of world history, and I wonder what he would think if he were able to see how his ideas led directly to the death of millions of people.
Again, the clash was inevitable, and Marx was right about a lot of things that he observed in the world. Here is a short brilliant Karl Marx cartoon by the BBC in their series on the history of the world’s ideas.
Those who are interested in Karl Marx, should first read Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and Hegel’s Philosophy of History. All of these books are worth the time that they demand.
A philosophical inversion of Hegel, very interesting and also depressing: I am a wage-slave, a cog in the wheel of society. There is still much that is true here. As I read this time around, I reflected on how the historical conditions at the time that Marx was writing were such that, had there been no Marx, the subsequent clash was nevertheless inevitable. If not Marx, then some other would have taken up the cry of freedom, and raised the banner in the name of communism. Considering this in the light of Hegel, we can observe that even after successful communist revolutions (succesful meaning that the former sovereigns were overthrown and private property was abolished), man was not yet truly emancipated from his condition of slavery. Man is not yet everywhere free. Stalingrad was only a first clash between the Hegelians of the left and of the right, and a new synthesis has not yet emerged from this opposition between left and right.
But Marx sets up his materialist philosophy in opposition to Hegel's. His materialist conception overturns Hegel’s concept of the unfolding evolution of Spirit that we observe in the phænomenal world. Stated in simple terms: For Hegel, Spirit becomes matter; for Marx the material world determines spirit. The most interesting piece in this volume of Selected Writings was for me the one on The German Ideology. Really to appreciate Marx, however, requires that one should first have read Hegel.
The inter-textual dialogue between Marx & Hegel is fascinating. According to Hegel history has evolved to the point where men are no longer slaves, as man, the subject of the Persian king, for example had been, and the Hegelian Idea that all men are, qua man, free, has been in the world since the age of the Christianized medieval Germans, but communism has not been successful in truly freeing all men in the world today. Instead, it places tremendous power in the hands of the politicians, who always rise to power by promising to liberate the unhappy masses in exchange for votes. This is at least as old as Caesar. There must be something more, but what? What comes next? How will freedom come to all men?
Perhaps only a poet, like Walt Whitman, can be free.
Though we now see that communism (having been tried) has been found wanting, I cannot tell whether Hegel or Marx has better explained history. I find myself caught between the two as I had once been caught between Ptolemy’s description of the cosmos, and Copernicus's. Does the sun revolve around the earth, or the earth around the sun? Both the Ptolemaic system and the Copernican explain all of the observations, and there is no conclusive evidence to force one to accept the truth of one or the other system, until Newton writes his Principia Mathematica. Who is the Newton to settle in the realm of political philosophy and the nature of history the question between Hegel’s vision of world history, and Karl Marx?
Marx saw the tragedy that the alienation of labour had produced in the lives of workers, and he had great hopes of changing the world for the better. But when he writes the following, that
"In communist society. . .where nobody has an exclusive area of activity and each can train himself in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production, making it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, breed cattle in the evening, criticize after dinner, just as I like, without ever becoming a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critic." (pg. 119)
one cannot but be impressed by his tremendous naivety. The experience of friends who have escaped communism does not reflect anything like the idyllic promises of pastoral tranquility that Marx would hope for. Instead one graduates from school #313 and is assigned to factory #9 where one will make zippers for pants for the rest of one's life. How has communism succeeded in rescuing man from the alienation of labour? It has not. It has merely succeeded in taking private property away from those who have worked for it, and given tremendous power to the politicians who assisted in this grand-scale theft. Marx did not live to see the outcome of his ideas as these were played out on the stage of world history, and I wonder what he would think if he were able to see how his ideas led directly to the death of millions of people.
Again, the clash was inevitable, and Marx was right about a lot of things that he observed in the world. Here is a short brilliant Karl Marx cartoon by the BBC in their series on the history of the world’s ideas.
Those who are interested in Karl Marx, should first read Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and Hegel’s Philosophy of History. All of these books are worth the time that they demand.
July 3, 2018
This was on the whole pretty disappointing. While I had no expectation of becoming a Marxist upon (finally) reading Marx, I thought I would be more challenged. So much of Marx's analysis depends on a labor theory of value that is now discredited. This matters because it led him to predict that workers will always only be paid the bare necessary wages that could sustain a meager life and reproduction. This, along with his hostility to the division of labor, had a rather short shelf life and it's a little surprising that Marx is still so influential.
I like Marx's conception of "species-being", whereby a fully human life requires the freedom to develop one's capacities as an individual within a harmonious social context. You get something similar from, say, the capabilities approach of Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum. But unlike the latter case, Marx's conception seems unrealizably romantic. There's little sense of the hard stops of human limitations. Work, for example, must be what the fully realized individual really wants to do with their time. This is lovely if you can achieve it, but in the real world it seems inevitable that there will be tasks that need to be done that no one wants to do, and thus that these tasks should be well-remunerated and the persons who perform them should have ample other options. That any unenthusiastically chosen work should constitute alienated labor (or slavery) is unhelpful and unilluminating.
I like Marx's conception of "species-being", whereby a fully human life requires the freedom to develop one's capacities as an individual within a harmonious social context. You get something similar from, say, the capabilities approach of Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum. But unlike the latter case, Marx's conception seems unrealizably romantic. There's little sense of the hard stops of human limitations. Work, for example, must be what the fully realized individual really wants to do with their time. This is lovely if you can achieve it, but in the real world it seems inevitable that there will be tasks that need to be done that no one wants to do, and thus that these tasks should be well-remunerated and the persons who perform them should have ample other options. That any unenthusiastically chosen work should constitute alienated labor (or slavery) is unhelpful and unilluminating.
May 24, 2017
The writings of a misguided idealist who quite nearly destroyed the planet in his ignorance.
May 3, 2017
Read it long ago and as Karl Mark ideas of communism is out dated and didn't work so this book is also not good and i read it just to know different perspectives.
October 3, 2024
A real barn burner. Great introduction for whoever or whatever is considered a modern Marxist. Has all the big quotes in here, and some neat introductory/contextual editorials.
Shout out to Lars for getting me a first edition of this book - thank you Lars :)
“Hence Mr. Bakunin deduces that the proletariat should rather do nothing at all… and just wait for the day of universal liquidation - the Last Judgement…”
Shout out to Lars for getting me a first edition of this book - thank you Lars :)
“Hence Mr. Bakunin deduces that the proletariat should rather do nothing at all… and just wait for the day of universal liquidation - the Last Judgement…”
September 12, 2023
My guy Karl. Hard to read overall. Super philosophical and was always questioning why I was actually reading it. But overall, I did learn a lot about his way of seeing the world and how degrading capitalism has been to our society.
4/5.
*not because it was like such a great read, but because I actually learned some things
4/5.
*not because it was like such a great read, but because I actually learned some things
July 20, 2020
Report: Karl Marx - Selected Writings
By Karl Marx, compiled and with introductions by David McLellan
Approaching a great thinker's thought for the first time is intimidating - or at least should be. One is aware that a lot of people make a big racket, both positive and negative, about so and so and one probably already has some preconceived notions about so and so. Marx is especially polarising. I know people from all walks who consider him a saint and an equal number who regard him as a charlatan or even a demon. Either way, this combined with his great and tangible influence on world affairs, made approaching Marx very intimidating; where is one supposed to begin? The Mannifesto perhaps? Or is one better off sitting down to tackle ‘Das Kapital’ without looking back. Fortunately, David McLellan answered for me, at the beginning. McLellan has painstakingly compiled not what I would consider a definitive collection of Marx’s work, but certainly a masterful crash course, with minimal analysis and maximum words from the horse's mouth in a not too overwhelming 650 odd pages.
I was immediately struck by how Marx is truly a philosopher. Many names for what his ideas represent and deal with are attached to him, sociologist, economist, revolutionary, journalist and while he of course wears these hats; at root he is a philosopher. One can recognise this immediately, from the first selections, a letter to his father and Marx’s PHD thesis. One is given an intimate window into young Karl’s development and understands how firmly rooted in philosophy he was and where his metaphysics come from. The letter in particular provides a close window into young Marx that many so-called Marxists who have only read the Manifesto might be unaware of: ‘I translated Aristotle’s rhetoric … during my illness I got to know Hegel from beginning to end … In hope that by and by the clouds that surround our family will retreat and that I might be allowed to suffer and weep with you’. Those who consider Marx a monster will doubtless be surprised at the intimacy and warmth with which he addresses his father; those who wish to see him as a champion of the working class will probably dislike discovering that he was a dedicated scholar of classical philosophy, intimately linked with the bourgeoisie. Marx’s PHD thesis is on the philosophies of Epicurus and Democritius, metaphysical philosophers concerned with the nature of the material world rather than what is to be done with it; Marx is as much mind as he is matter. He comes down on the side of Epicurus and his atomistic metaphysics. From this first section, Early Writings, his articles and ‘On the Jewish Question’ are of special note as well. Marx was of course Jewish, and his argument’s that one cannot expect one culture to be subsumed into another unless that other abandons its own unique qualities hold true today. His articles give us access to his early economic thought.
While I personally did not find the next section, ‘The Materialist Conception of History’, near as compelling or interesting; McLellan has succeeded in curating the ideas in chronological order and with concise enough introductions, that anyone can read effectively how Marx’s early formulations of the backbone of his philosophy developed. The most significant selections are from ‘The German Ideology’. McLellan is blunt in his introduction about why he has included part rather than the whole of it ‘it sets out the materialist conception of history with a force and detail that Marx never afterwards surpassed … The section on Stirner, on the other hand, takes up more than two thirds of the book and is extremely tedious’.
Perhaps the most important section is ‘1848 and after’. Here we have the Manifesto and in my opinion the most compelling of all Marx’s writings: ‘The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte’. McLellan is keen to place the Manifesto in its historical context: ‘By the time it was published in February 1848, the series of revolutions that marked that year had broken out’. The Manifesto is commonly seen as a document for all time, but McLellan shows, both in his introductions and with obscure speeches Marx himself made, that in fact the Manifesto was and is a deeply flawed document. In Marx’s speech to the Central Committee of the Comunist League one reads: ‘A German nationalist point of view was substituted for the universal outlook of “the Manifesto” … The materialist standpoint of the ‘Manifesto’ has given way to idealism … the revolution is seen not as the product of the realities of the situation but as the result of a mere effort of will’. It is important to understand this for a true interpretation and understanding of Marxism; for Marx did not believe the revolution could be caused by will but instead believed that we would have to wait for capitalism to create such great inequality, that a revolution becomes essential. In his ‘Speech on Free Trade’, we read that he personally advocated free trade, anathema to socialism, not because it is right; but because it would hasten the onset of the revolution through the damage it would do to the proletariat. In this section we also encounter ‘The 18th Brumaire’, Marx's most fiery and philosophical political writing, detailing the coup of 1851 Louis Bonaparte made against the Second French Republic. It is complex and readable at once. He outlines a theory that we are trapped by history into cycles of repetition, often with disastrous consequences. The first time as tragedy, for no one could be expected to know the result and the second time as farce, because we really ought to have known better. Finally, for this section, a special acknowledgement must be made for a newspaper article Marx wrote, ‘the Future Results of British Rule in India’. Here Marx accurately predicts that the very infrastructure the British built to control India, will be what allows the Indian’s to unite, expel the British and throw off the yoke of the Raj.
Following are selections from Marx’s great economic works, particularly ‘Das Kapital’ and ‘Grundrisse’. McLellan perhaps perceives that most readers are not well versed in economics - this is the first serious economic writing I have ever read. Only about twenty pages from the 800 pages of the unfinished ‘Grundrisse’ and 100 from the even longer ‘Das Kapital’, for a newcomer to economic theory this is enough to be getting on with. Of all the sections, this is the one where McLellan’s introductions were most helpful to me. I do not pretend to fully understand Marx’s economics, but I do understand their importance and his critique of commodity fetishism is particularly potent. What seems to me most impressive is that he was able to see how commodities became prized not for their use or merit but simply for their novelty early on and long before anyone else. I hope to approach Capital again in more detail and with a better general understanding of economics in the future.
The final section is perhaps the least important. ‘Later Political Writings’, takes us up to Marx’s death in 1882. I found his margin scribblings from his copy of Bakunin’s ‘Statism and Anarchy’ and his letters to Engels on Ireland to be of particular interest. More than anything the selections seem to illustrate that Marx spent his final years tinkering with and editing his earlier ideas rather than developing new ones. Another interesting selection from this segment is Marx’s letter to an exiled Russian revolutionary who is an admirer of him but is distressed by his pessimism for revolution in Russia. ‘Letter to Vera Sassoulitch’ is itself rather kurt and short. However, Marx seems to have grappled with her questions and much longer drafts of more complex and expansive responses he considered sending expose his deeper thoughts on the subject. This is a prime example of how McLellan curates obscure writings many might not otherwise even hear of, let alone read.
These selected writings of Marx are varied, powerful and well written. McLellan is concise and seems to have made good selections. Perhaps the only criticism one could make is that by curating the selections he is able to bread crumb trail you into following his lines of thought on Marx and marxism. While this may well be, almost all the actual pages are full of Marx’s own words and ideas. If one is concerned about the compilation and introductions provided by McLellan I can only suggest that you keep reading Marx and his other admirers and critics. This selection is an excellent crash course and brought me closer to Marx than many of those I know who sing his praises, as well as those who condemn him. At a party recently I met a young politics student who claimed to be a dedicated marxist, when I asked him if he’d read the ‘18th Brumaire’ he replied that he had never read anything by Napoleon. I made sure to recommend to him this selection of Marx’s work.
By Karl Marx, compiled and with introductions by David McLellan
Approaching a great thinker's thought for the first time is intimidating - or at least should be. One is aware that a lot of people make a big racket, both positive and negative, about so and so and one probably already has some preconceived notions about so and so. Marx is especially polarising. I know people from all walks who consider him a saint and an equal number who regard him as a charlatan or even a demon. Either way, this combined with his great and tangible influence on world affairs, made approaching Marx very intimidating; where is one supposed to begin? The Mannifesto perhaps? Or is one better off sitting down to tackle ‘Das Kapital’ without looking back. Fortunately, David McLellan answered for me, at the beginning. McLellan has painstakingly compiled not what I would consider a definitive collection of Marx’s work, but certainly a masterful crash course, with minimal analysis and maximum words from the horse's mouth in a not too overwhelming 650 odd pages.
I was immediately struck by how Marx is truly a philosopher. Many names for what his ideas represent and deal with are attached to him, sociologist, economist, revolutionary, journalist and while he of course wears these hats; at root he is a philosopher. One can recognise this immediately, from the first selections, a letter to his father and Marx’s PHD thesis. One is given an intimate window into young Karl’s development and understands how firmly rooted in philosophy he was and where his metaphysics come from. The letter in particular provides a close window into young Marx that many so-called Marxists who have only read the Manifesto might be unaware of: ‘I translated Aristotle’s rhetoric … during my illness I got to know Hegel from beginning to end … In hope that by and by the clouds that surround our family will retreat and that I might be allowed to suffer and weep with you’. Those who consider Marx a monster will doubtless be surprised at the intimacy and warmth with which he addresses his father; those who wish to see him as a champion of the working class will probably dislike discovering that he was a dedicated scholar of classical philosophy, intimately linked with the bourgeoisie. Marx’s PHD thesis is on the philosophies of Epicurus and Democritius, metaphysical philosophers concerned with the nature of the material world rather than what is to be done with it; Marx is as much mind as he is matter. He comes down on the side of Epicurus and his atomistic metaphysics. From this first section, Early Writings, his articles and ‘On the Jewish Question’ are of special note as well. Marx was of course Jewish, and his argument’s that one cannot expect one culture to be subsumed into another unless that other abandons its own unique qualities hold true today. His articles give us access to his early economic thought.
While I personally did not find the next section, ‘The Materialist Conception of History’, near as compelling or interesting; McLellan has succeeded in curating the ideas in chronological order and with concise enough introductions, that anyone can read effectively how Marx’s early formulations of the backbone of his philosophy developed. The most significant selections are from ‘The German Ideology’. McLellan is blunt in his introduction about why he has included part rather than the whole of it ‘it sets out the materialist conception of history with a force and detail that Marx never afterwards surpassed … The section on Stirner, on the other hand, takes up more than two thirds of the book and is extremely tedious’.
Perhaps the most important section is ‘1848 and after’. Here we have the Manifesto and in my opinion the most compelling of all Marx’s writings: ‘The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte’. McLellan is keen to place the Manifesto in its historical context: ‘By the time it was published in February 1848, the series of revolutions that marked that year had broken out’. The Manifesto is commonly seen as a document for all time, but McLellan shows, both in his introductions and with obscure speeches Marx himself made, that in fact the Manifesto was and is a deeply flawed document. In Marx’s speech to the Central Committee of the Comunist League one reads: ‘A German nationalist point of view was substituted for the universal outlook of “the Manifesto” … The materialist standpoint of the ‘Manifesto’ has given way to idealism … the revolution is seen not as the product of the realities of the situation but as the result of a mere effort of will’. It is important to understand this for a true interpretation and understanding of Marxism; for Marx did not believe the revolution could be caused by will but instead believed that we would have to wait for capitalism to create such great inequality, that a revolution becomes essential. In his ‘Speech on Free Trade’, we read that he personally advocated free trade, anathema to socialism, not because it is right; but because it would hasten the onset of the revolution through the damage it would do to the proletariat. In this section we also encounter ‘The 18th Brumaire’, Marx's most fiery and philosophical political writing, detailing the coup of 1851 Louis Bonaparte made against the Second French Republic. It is complex and readable at once. He outlines a theory that we are trapped by history into cycles of repetition, often with disastrous consequences. The first time as tragedy, for no one could be expected to know the result and the second time as farce, because we really ought to have known better. Finally, for this section, a special acknowledgement must be made for a newspaper article Marx wrote, ‘the Future Results of British Rule in India’. Here Marx accurately predicts that the very infrastructure the British built to control India, will be what allows the Indian’s to unite, expel the British and throw off the yoke of the Raj.
Following are selections from Marx’s great economic works, particularly ‘Das Kapital’ and ‘Grundrisse’. McLellan perhaps perceives that most readers are not well versed in economics - this is the first serious economic writing I have ever read. Only about twenty pages from the 800 pages of the unfinished ‘Grundrisse’ and 100 from the even longer ‘Das Kapital’, for a newcomer to economic theory this is enough to be getting on with. Of all the sections, this is the one where McLellan’s introductions were most helpful to me. I do not pretend to fully understand Marx’s economics, but I do understand their importance and his critique of commodity fetishism is particularly potent. What seems to me most impressive is that he was able to see how commodities became prized not for their use or merit but simply for their novelty early on and long before anyone else. I hope to approach Capital again in more detail and with a better general understanding of economics in the future.
The final section is perhaps the least important. ‘Later Political Writings’, takes us up to Marx’s death in 1882. I found his margin scribblings from his copy of Bakunin’s ‘Statism and Anarchy’ and his letters to Engels on Ireland to be of particular interest. More than anything the selections seem to illustrate that Marx spent his final years tinkering with and editing his earlier ideas rather than developing new ones. Another interesting selection from this segment is Marx’s letter to an exiled Russian revolutionary who is an admirer of him but is distressed by his pessimism for revolution in Russia. ‘Letter to Vera Sassoulitch’ is itself rather kurt and short. However, Marx seems to have grappled with her questions and much longer drafts of more complex and expansive responses he considered sending expose his deeper thoughts on the subject. This is a prime example of how McLellan curates obscure writings many might not otherwise even hear of, let alone read.
These selected writings of Marx are varied, powerful and well written. McLellan is concise and seems to have made good selections. Perhaps the only criticism one could make is that by curating the selections he is able to bread crumb trail you into following his lines of thought on Marx and marxism. While this may well be, almost all the actual pages are full of Marx’s own words and ideas. If one is concerned about the compilation and introductions provided by McLellan I can only suggest that you keep reading Marx and his other admirers and critics. This selection is an excellent crash course and brought me closer to Marx than many of those I know who sing his praises, as well as those who condemn him. At a party recently I met a young politics student who claimed to be a dedicated marxist, when I asked him if he’d read the ‘18th Brumaire’ he replied that he had never read anything by Napoleon. I made sure to recommend to him this selection of Marx’s work.
December 3, 2024
Very interesting works in here. there's not a lot to say about marx that has not been said specify favorite work was honestly on the Jewish question. It really explained what Marxs thoughts in the base and the super sucturtre were and for me really got fill in alot of gaps. It has basically all of marxs early works and as someone who had only read the 18th brumaine before its pretty all asescpaible. Of course this went in tandem with class discussion and such but still even on ones own I think for a primary start to Marx its a good collection
March 14, 2024
does communist revolution necessarily have to be bloody? i don't think we have it in us
February 10, 2013
Good book full of Marx's scary, irrational ideas, but a good book nevertheless. If you are looking for an introduction to Marx I would recommend, "The Marx-Engels Reader", ISBN 039309040X, as it is more detailed with more material tho not everything overlaps. I have read both and do recommend this book.
September 22, 2013
My teacher provided me some pages for one of my elective courses; Victorians and material culture.
This text, at least the pages provided (pp.421-443), doesn't make sense to me. Maybe I am not smart enough. But for me he kept going around I'm circles about the same thing over and over.. Dreadful.
This text, at least the pages provided (pp.421-443), doesn't make sense to me. Maybe I am not smart enough. But for me he kept going around I'm circles about the same thing over and over.. Dreadful.
July 31, 2023
pure joy (not really)
March 10, 2025
Reading this collection of Marx’s works was an unfiltered look at the ramblings of an intellectual—rather than seeing the soundbites and bumper-stickers that have shaped his legacy. It’s fascinating just how much we can take a couple of words and think we clearly know what was meant without reading the whole thing – just like Clausewitz, his contemporary. Written in the prose of mid-to-late 1800s, plowing through this collection was not an easy task. Marx uses the Hegelian dialectic at times too – conveying one idea before taking a sharp 180 and coming at it from the other side. That, and the made this a slog.
But in the current changing environment, understanding Marx is important. This book, full of curated excerpts and essays, including The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital, offers a chance to engage with Marx directly. Whether or not you agree with his conclusions, his influence on modern political and economic thought is undeniable. It continues to shape our world today.
But politics and economics was not why I picked this up. I endured it because of Marx’s influence on the study of history and historiography. Before him, historians generally chronicled epic events focused on the key people that made them. It was a focus that we controlled the world around us in spite of chance. The strong did what they wanted, and the weak did what they must. It was the general on the battlefield that brought success or failure…few looked through the eyes of the weary soldier. The past was the result of people’s actions, but that control is an illusion. Events often take on a character of their own…ask anyone who’s faced combat or catastrophe. This new approach was about understanding where we are today, was the result of where we came from. Our past shapes our present even when we are flush with agency.
Marx’s view of history was also deterministic. He saw history as a series of unalterable events – a cycle of power shifts, where one class overthrows another, only to establish a new hierarchy. This big history was explanatory; it explained why things were the way they were. In this sense, it was predetermined…ever watch the new Battlestar Galactica? ‘All of this happened before, and all of this will happen again.’
While some of his predictions haven’t played out exactly as he imagined, many of his critiques of capitalism remain relevant. His solution never solved those problems…but those problems exist, nonetheless. Love him or hate him, Marx wasn’t just theorizing about economics—he was trying to understand the forces shaping society and where they might lead. Engaging with his ideas firsthand is worth the effort, if only to see why his work continues to provoke debate today.
But in the current changing environment, understanding Marx is important. This book, full of curated excerpts and essays, including The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital, offers a chance to engage with Marx directly. Whether or not you agree with his conclusions, his influence on modern political and economic thought is undeniable. It continues to shape our world today.
But politics and economics was not why I picked this up. I endured it because of Marx’s influence on the study of history and historiography. Before him, historians generally chronicled epic events focused on the key people that made them. It was a focus that we controlled the world around us in spite of chance. The strong did what they wanted, and the weak did what they must. It was the general on the battlefield that brought success or failure…few looked through the eyes of the weary soldier. The past was the result of people’s actions, but that control is an illusion. Events often take on a character of their own…ask anyone who’s faced combat or catastrophe. This new approach was about understanding where we are today, was the result of where we came from. Our past shapes our present even when we are flush with agency.
Marx’s view of history was also deterministic. He saw history as a series of unalterable events – a cycle of power shifts, where one class overthrows another, only to establish a new hierarchy. This big history was explanatory; it explained why things were the way they were. In this sense, it was predetermined…ever watch the new Battlestar Galactica? ‘All of this happened before, and all of this will happen again.’
While some of his predictions haven’t played out exactly as he imagined, many of his critiques of capitalism remain relevant. His solution never solved those problems…but those problems exist, nonetheless. Love him or hate him, Marx wasn’t just theorizing about economics—he was trying to understand the forces shaping society and where they might lead. Engaging with his ideas firsthand is worth the effort, if only to see why his work continues to provoke debate today.
January 8, 2021
My first introduction to Marx's writings beyond The Communist Manifesto.
There's a variety of texts (including the Manifesto itself) that are arranged more or less chronologically, with a tiny amount of preamble by the curator of the collection. The elaborations are very helpful to get a quick glimpse into the historical context of a particular text.
As for Marx's writing itself... It's really technical in places, especially excerpts from Das Kapital, but it's never really boring, because Marx can't help it but be snarky. The percentage of these texts dedicated to critiquing (or, sometimes, just straight up roasting) other thinkers is impressive.
I definitely still need some supplemental material and a re-read to understand some parts of this book. Except the parts with Hegel, those I just give up at. I can notice though that both critiques on capitalism and of other communists outlined here are very relevant today as well.
The last part, which was a roast of Bakunin, made me realise that I still don't quite grasp the dictatorship of the proletariat, which, according to Marx, is not a s
There's a variety of texts (including the Manifesto itself) that are arranged more or less chronologically, with a tiny amount of preamble by the curator of the collection. The elaborations are very helpful to get a quick glimpse into the historical context of a particular text.
As for Marx's writing itself... It's really technical in places, especially excerpts from Das Kapital, but it's never really boring, because Marx can't help it but be snarky. The percentage of these texts dedicated to critiquing (or, sometimes, just straight up roasting) other thinkers is impressive.
I definitely still need some supplemental material and a re-read to understand some parts of this book. Except the parts with Hegel, those I just give up at. I can notice though that both critiques on capitalism and of other communists outlined here are very relevant today as well.
The last part, which was a roast of Bakunin, made me realise that I still don't quite grasp the dictatorship of the proletariat, which, according to Marx, is not a s
August 27, 2020
Excellent commentary, very well chosen structure. Read this to properly understand Marxist thought the way it was meant to be understood, as a process. Historical context is found where necessary, and the passages evolve along an understood path. This is how you should approach giant volumes like Capital and also the smaller scattered writings.
Going to be referring back to this copy often, and made a good number of notes in margins.
Going to be referring back to this copy often, and made a good number of notes in margins.
April 2, 2019
Can be a slog to get through at times, but the editor did a great job of putting together some of Marx' more salient works. Incredible insight into mankind, and economic structures. Although his predictions for the future did not prove accurate, his understanding and articulation of the injustice built into the capitalist system provides the reader with problems that should be addressed.
June 9, 2021
McLellan has done a decent job with this collection in selecting important works by Marx, that allows the reader to understand the important ideas that Marx's work posited, and the development of his thought across the decades of his intellectual life. I would recommend going through slowly and concurrently read relevant secondary literature on the topics brought up in these pieces, to gain an even fuller understanding of the different ways in which his work can be interpreted and to begin to make up your own mind on the arguments that exist within Marxism.
October 24, 2022
Just boring. I've been there - over-educated free-thinking student, rambling intellectual - but I would never be so . . . rambling and disorganised.
So, so much of this says so, so little. Before I abandon this entirely I will (I hope to) find someone's opinion of which of these writings are the "greatest". Then I can bore myself with those and get rid of this book for good.
So, so much of this says so, so little. Before I abandon this entirely I will (I hope to) find someone's opinion of which of these writings are the "greatest". Then I can bore myself with those and get rid of this book for good.
September 25, 2023
I wish I could give half stars. I always find it funny when people think the proper starting point for anything related to communism is the manifesto. This book is a great choice to get started on Marx. Digestible introductions, easy translation, and some really important passages. I can't stress this enough: start here, not the manifesto!
October 27, 2023
"Selected Writings" is truly one of the most masterful collection that offers deep insight into the evolution of the intellectual mind, and enduring relevance of one of the most influential thinkers. While the compilation is diverse, it encapsulates Marx as he was, a philosopher, economist, and (extreme) political theorist. Throughout the journey of this book, the reader is completely exposed to the entire capacity of lucid and inclusive analysis of Karl Marx.
August 2, 2018
idealistic and unconvincing.
August 11, 2018
ზე ნაგავი
July 18, 2019
Marx criticisms of Capitalism was very rational,
his solutions were not. Still, essential for an excellent education.
his solutions were not. Still, essential for an excellent education.
May 1, 2021
so when’s the revolution?!
June 4, 2021
Marx was right.
April 29, 2022
big man always right
May 5, 2022
Read parts of it.
Read
July 5, 2022Mainly just excerpts and some short writings but still ordered and split in a cohesive manner. Critique of the gotha program is a huge banger
Read
September 26, 2022Had a socialist summer 🤷♂️
March 31, 2023
A good number of writings completed by Marx but misses important works such as Das Kapital which is arguably one of his most important works.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews