# Can anyone explain Marxism in the most simplistic terms possible?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [March 1, 2015, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923 "2015-03-01T12:20:36Z")
**Posts on this page:** 17
**Page:** 3
### Author:  [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)
#### Post date: [March 1, 2015, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/41 "2015-03-01T23:45:31Z")
> [@Kropotkin](#):
>
> Though he did understand that human needs (and nature) were not static, and that desires could become needs. He might also see such consumerism as a sign of alienation: unable to meet our real needs, we distract ourselves with consumption.
Well, I can’t agree or disagree because I am just started studying Marx. The part I mentioned came from late in this lecture, sorry I don’t know the exact time, it’s twoards the end. The lecture is an hour long but very interesting:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FosfvOdXrrw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FosfvOdXrrw)
---
### Author:  [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)
#### Post date: [March 2, 2015, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/42 "2015-03-02T00:06:56Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#):
>
> I am still unable to comprehend completely the idea of Marxism and materialism and dialectical materialism etc, I find some of the terminology verbose and unnecessarily complex, can anyone explain it in more simple layman like terms?
The two best sources for a quick introduction to Marx are:
\*\*Communist Manifesto
\*\*[https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/)
Sparknotes
[http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/marx/section2.rhtml](http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/marx/section2.rhtml)
Wikipedia
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Communist\_Manifesto](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto)
**Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844**
[https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/preface.htm](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/preface.htm)
Sparknotes
[http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/marx/section1.rhtml](http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/marx/section1.rhtml)
Wikipedia
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic\_and\_Philosophic\_Manuscripts\_of\_1844](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_and_Philosophic_Manuscripts_of_1844)
---
### Author:  [@Kropotkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kropotkin)
#### Post date: [March 2, 2015, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/43 "2015-03-02T00:14:28Z")
If you want to read Marx, the section on alienation in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts is a good start, and you might try Wage Labour and Profit, where he sets out his economic ideas in relatively straightforward language. No oral sex references though.:rolleyes: The Manifesto is readable and interesting, but was written as a political pamphlet early in his life, not an explication of his economic ideas. It is very common for people to take an enthusiastic overstatement from the Manifesto and use it as a straw man. Here endeth the sermon!
---
### Author:  [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)
#### Post date: [March 2, 2015, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/44 "2015-03-02T01:11:55Z")
> [@Kropotkin](#):
>
> If you want to read Marx, the section on alienation in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts is a good start, and you might try Wage Labour and Profit, where he sets out his economic ideas in relatively straightforward language. No oral sex references though.:rolleyes: The Manifesto is readable and interesting, but was written as a political pamphlet early in his life, not an explication of his economic ideas. It is very common for people to take an enthusiastic overstatement from the Manifesto and use it as a straw man. Here endeth the sermon!
thanks!!! I am just starting into the topic so thanks for the reccomendation
---
### Author:  [@Robert163](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robert163)
#### Post date: [March 2, 2015, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/45 "2015-03-02T01:19:23Z")
> [@Kropotkin](#):
>
> If you want to read Marx, the section on alienation in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts is a good start, and you might try Wage Labour and Profit, where he sets out his economic ideas in relatively straightforward language. No oral sex references though.:rolleyes: The Manifesto is readable and interesting, but was written as a political pamphlet early in his life, not an explication of his economic ideas. It is very common for people to take an enthusiastic overstatement from the Manifesto and use it as a straw man. Here endeth the sermon!
Do you mean a chapter in Wage Labor and Capital called Wage Labor and Profit or are you referring to the whole book/essay? (Wage Labor and Capital)
---
### Author:  [@Kropotkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kropotkin)
#### Post date: [March 2, 2015, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/46 "2015-03-02T01:33:31Z")
> [@Robert163](#):
>
> Do you mean a chapter in Wage Labor and Capital called Wage Labor and Profit or are you referring to the whole book/essay? (Wage Labor and Capital)
My mistake, it’s been a long day:o yes, the whole book (it’s pretty slender) Wage Labor and Capital. Value, Price, and Profit is good too. Both display Marx trying to write for a general audience. Capital often reads like it was written for a PhD committee and he was trying to show off. The section on Primitive Accumulation is a good place to start with that tome.
---
### Author:  [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)
#### Post date: [March 2, 2015, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/47 "2015-03-02T02:57:40Z")
> [@Kropotkin](#):
>
> I’m afraid I don’t know what the TPC is.😕 but I do like these smileys!
V.I. Kydor Kropotkin, played by Severn Darden, was a Russian spy in [The President’s Analyst,](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062153/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1) a 1967 movie starring James Coburn and Godfrey Cambridge. Both US & Russian spooks found out their common enemy was TPC, The Phone Company, which had a monopoly in those days. TPC was more controlling, evil, and comical than all governments put together.
I just thought your screen name might be related and you would recognize the reference. Now you do.
---
### Author:  [@Kropotkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kropotkin)
#### Post date: [March 2, 2015, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/48 "2015-03-02T03:29:16Z")
> [@Musicat](#):
>
> V.I. Kydor Kropotkin, played by Severn Darden, was a Russian spy in [The President’s Analyst,](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062153/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1) a 1967 movie starring James Coburn and Godfrey Cambridge. Both US & Russian spooks found out their common enemy was TPC, The Phone Company, which had a monopoly in those days. TPC was more controlling, evil, and comical than all governments put together.
>
> I just thought your screen name might be related and you would recognize the reference. Now you do.
Ignorance fought! And a much more interesting source for my screen name than the actual one.
---
### Author:  [@CC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CC)
#### Post date: [March 2, 2015, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/49 "2015-03-02T17:41:37Z")
Is there a poster here named Walther Von der Vogelweide?
---
### Author:  [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)
#### Post date: [March 3, 2015, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/50 "2015-03-03T06:08:15Z")
> [@CC](#):
>
> It sounds as if Marx pretty accurately predicted the excesses of capitalism and the problems that are inherent in that type of system - excesses and problems that we can still see pretty clearly today. But he didn’t understand how or if the proletariat - the masses - would respond?
That’s similiar to how one of my professors put it: Marx identified the problem corrected – that the working class was getting royally screwed. But his solution was basically a load of bullshit.
(BTW,we were assigned _The Communist Manifesto_ in my Political Philosophy course. One of the most boring things I’ve ever had to read.)
---
### Author:  [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)
#### Post date: [March 3, 2015, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/51 "2015-03-03T16:12:14Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#):
>
> That’s similiar to how one of my professors put it: Marx identified the problem corrected – that the working class was getting royally screwed. But his solution was basically a load of bullshit.
>
> (BTW,we were assigned _The Communist Manifesto_ in my Political Philosophy course. One of the most boring things I’ve ever had to read.)
^^^ What she said. In both paragraphs.
Also: Marxism _does not_ assume human nature is nonselfish or altruistic or whatever. I myself tend more towards that sunny view of human nature and trust me, Marxism is not at all in that headspace. Marxism assumes that power over other people, as accomplished by possession of the resources, is inherently desirable and, hence, people oppress because they can.
The least comprehensible aspect of Marxism (to me) is the way in which it is oblivious to any form of power-over (and hence its likely incarnation as a form of oppression) other than material inequality. Therefore, as rendered in practice, the People’s Governments were (as recommended) a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, possessing absolute political power, accurately reviled by western capitalist critics as oppressive police states. Marxism had no thought for the possibility that the Dictatorship of the Proletariat would almost immediately become the Dictatorship of the Dictators, wherein the interests of the people governing would be the interest of the governing class. To a Marxist mindset that would be irrelevant unless the governors distributed wealth in a nonequal way. Utterly bewildering.
---
### Author:  [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)
#### Post date: [March 3, 2015, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/52 "2015-03-03T18:07:43Z")
Does Marx ever address the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution?
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [March 3, 2015, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/53 "2015-03-03T18:16:37Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#):
>
> Ideally the people who hated the very thought of working in a shoe factory would enjoy growing food or driving the lorries. Therefore each person working at what they are best suited for will ensure that everyone’s needs would be met. Marx was an optimist who believed that everyone would feel fulfilled through honest labor.
I am sure some people really enjoy cleaning public bathrooms.
---
### Author:  [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)
#### Post date: [March 3, 2015, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/54 "2015-03-03T22:58:11Z")
Italian Communist Party member explaining communism to local farmer:
“If a rich farmer has two horses, the state takes one and gives it to a poorer farmer.”
“OK, I understand.”
“If someone has two cows, the state takes one and gives it to a poorer farmer.”
“I understand.”
“If someone has two goats, the state takes one and gives it to a poorer farmer.”
“I don’t understand that.”
“Why don’t you understand?”
“I have two goats.”
---
### Author:  [@Kropotkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kropotkin)
#### Post date: [March 4, 2015, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/55 "2015-03-04T03:41:38Z")
> [@AHunter3](#):
>
> ^^^ What she said. In both paragraphs.
>
> Also: Marxism _does not_ assume human nature is nonselfish or altruistic or whatever. I myself tend more towards that sunny view of human nature and trust me, Marxism is not at all in that headspace. Marxism assumes that power over other people, as accomplished by possession of the resources, is inherently desirable and, hence, people oppress because they can.
>
> The least comprehensible aspect of Marxism (to me) is the way in which it is oblivious to any form of power-over (and hence its likely incarnation as a form of oppression) other than material inequality. Therefore, as rendered in practice, the People’s Governments were (as recommended) a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, possessing absolute political power, accurately reviled by western capitalist critics as oppressive police states. Marxism had no thought for the possibility that the Dictatorship of the Proletariat would almost immediately become the Dictatorship of the Dictators, wherein the interests of the people governing would be the interest of the governing class. To a Marxist mindset that would be irrelevant unless the governors distributed wealth in a nonequal way. Utterly bewildering.
It may be useful to distinguish what Marx said from what some Marxists have said. Marx argued that class divisions evolved because societies were unable to produce enough for all to have rich, fulfilled lives. Equality, in such societies, would mean sharing poverty equally and there would be little human progress. Capitalism was extremely productive and solved the problem of scarcity. That meant that class exploitation was no longer necessary.
As for the dictatorship of the proletariat, Marx wrote very little about it. When he did, he often pointed to the direct democracy of the Paris Commune as an example. He did not argue for a bureaucratic state, gulags, or secret police.
---
### Author:  [@Kropotkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kropotkin)
#### Post date: [March 4, 2015, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/56 "2015-03-04T04:22:12Z")
> [@Terr](#):
>
> I am sure some people really enjoy cleaning public bathrooms.
When Marx was asked, “so who’s going to clean shoes after the revolution,” he replied, crabbily, “You will!”
---
### Author:  [@Kropotkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kropotkin)
#### Post date: [March 4, 2015, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923/57 "2015-03-04T18:51:06Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#):
>
> That’s similiar to how one of my professors put it: Marx identified the problem corrected – that the working class was getting royally screwed. But his solution was basically a load of bullshit.
>
> (BTW,we were assigned _The Communist Manifesto_ in my Political Philosophy course. One of the most boring things I’ve ever had to read.)
It is clearly interesting to others: it is currently the bestseller among Penguin’s bargain classics reissue series [Communist Manifesto sales rise up as Penguin releases bargain classics | Penguin | The Guardian](http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/mar/04/communist-manifesto-tops-bestsellers-penguin-little-black-classics)
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-explain-marxism-in-the-most-simplistic-terms-possible/713923.md?page=2)