# What is/was Marx's legacy? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 28, 2013, 9:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859 "2013-09-28T09:18:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/41 "2013-09-30T07:55:11Z")
> [@Malden\_Capell](#): > > I think his greatest contribution is his emphasis on history as something deserving scientific study, rather than as most people before him had done, present history as a series of great men doing great deeds alone. Rather, I’d say he’s the person who’s most often associated with the “great forces” view of history: there had previous attempts to look at it scientifically (with research, documents, archeological studies, rather than just a gloss of how good and great King Whatever had been), but always from an “individuals doing stuff” point of view. He looked at it in terms of whole-forests rather than trying to follow specific trees. The problem with this kind of analysis comes when people forget that “the market” is still formed of individuals, same as “the company” or “the government”. > [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > You forgot ‘stupid’. No matter how much labor you put into a mud-pie, it’s still a mud-pie, value zero. Potters through the ages disagree with you. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2013, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/42 "2013-09-30T17:18:06Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > The great evil of Marxist governments that failed is that they were simply tyrannical in the forcing of their “ism”. Just like nationalism and imperialism can lead to great evil and horrific wars, or racism or religious or ethnic purity. The difference is that Marxism produces horrible catastrophes whenever it is tried regardless of how tyrannical the government is. Communists use tyranny to impose marxist economics on countries and then the economy is destroyed. Julius Nyere was not a monster like most communist leaders were but his policies left Tanzania unable to feed itself. That is a recurring theme in Marxist economies, the Ukraine, China, Ethiopia, and North Korea have all had huge famines that killed millions of people and they were all using marxist economics. If the marxists ever took over Saudi Arabia, they would have shortages of sand. There is a reason marxism attracts monsters such as, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, Kim, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, Guevera, and Mengistu. The reason is that marxism is monstrous. ---
**Author:** ![Enterprise](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/76d3ee/32.png) [@Enterprise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enterprise)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2013, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/43 "2013-10-01T06:05:34Z")
> [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > You forgot ‘stupid’. No matter how much labor you put into a mud-pie, it’s still a mud-pie, value zero. Bless your heart, but maybe you should look into _Kapital_ one of these days, and discover how the labor theory of value works–or, perhaps, give it some quick thought yourself. Does Marx say value comes from putting labor into things? As you point out, that would be the height of foolishness. Marx is fully aware that for the kind of value he is talking about here (exchange, as opposed to use value) happens only when someone wants what you have (and then, by the way, even your mud-pie has value; that’s something even Adam Smith would have agreed with). Marx’s question was, instead: if you are given a piece of cotton and some thread, and make a sheet out of it, adding, in the process, to the sale-value of the piece, where does the additional value come from? Marx’s answer is socially necessary labor time: which makes a good deal of sense, since that is all that is “expended,” as it were. Much develops from there, which you may find in the often surprisingly entertaining _Kapital_. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2013, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/44 "2013-10-01T22:51:44Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > Saying Marx killed people because people read his books is like saying Jesus started the Crusades and all the religious wars in his name because of the Sermon on the Mount and its naivete. I don’t think anyone is saying that Marx killed people. The worst thing he personally did was mooch off Engels (actually, the worst thing he did was write that jerky note when Engel’s mistress died, but. . .). But the question isn’t what Marx did or didn’t do. The question is what his legacy was, and part of his legacy is what his followers did with his teachings, just like part of Jesus’s legacy is the crusades and the religious wars and the other stuff his followers did with his teachings. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 7:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/45 "2013-10-02T07:27:16Z")
As an economic historian, Marx had many good insights. However, his predictions about the evolution of economies failed. His "value theory"has been discredited, and he ignored the role of markets. So, he is another 19th century philosopher whose work is of mainly academic interest, today. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/46 "2013-10-02T14:28:20Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > He emphasized the notion that history is primarily based on economics, which has proved to be a valuable insight. But that fact spells death for [historicism](http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Historicism), for any attempt to form a deterministic general predictive theory of human history, Marx’ or anyone else’s. Because one of the principal drivers, probably the principal driver, of economic change is technological change – and **technological change is inherently unpredictable.** We can predict technological progress will continue to happen so long as the incentives, resources and funding for R&D are there, but we cannot predict its directions. Marx might have imagined such things as telephones and automobiles and airplanes, but he had no real way of knowing whether they could actually be made to work or not, let alone their full economic and social effects. Old issues of _Popular Mechanics_ – written mostly by techies, who at least have a grip on reality in this area – are full of conceived inventions that might have changed the world, only for one reason or another they proved impractical. Controlled fusion and strong AI and genetic engineering and nanotech and neural-electronic interfaces might change the world – or they might all prove to be dead ends, impossible to make any practical use of. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/47 "2013-10-02T16:48:28Z")
Death, suffering, oppression. > [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > Both Gummo and Zeppo were out of the act very early on. They’d be the Marxist Apocrypha. [catholic nitpick] Deuterocanonicals [/catholic nitpick]😃 > [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > Modern conservatism wants to make workers desperate and to die early as a supply of labor for industry. As a liberal I find that monstrous. As a modern conservative I can assure you that this sentence is absolutely untrue. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/48 "2013-10-02T17:49:00Z")
> [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](#): > > Groucho was a master of the snappy comeback. > …what? \*honk!_honk!_ ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/49 "2013-10-02T20:28:05Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > \*honk!_honk!_ That’s nice…that’s fine…go wait for me in the car. Down by the viaduct. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/50 "2013-10-02T22:15:59Z")
> [@Edible\_Hat](#): > > People often forget that he had a profound effect on methodology. His materialist conception of human history brought a new scientific rigor to the study of history and effectively laid the groundwork for the modern study of sociology, anthropology, political science, and economics. All social sciences are indebted to him. And modern psychology is heavily indebted to Freud. Even though, today, most psychologists seem to agree that he was either wrong or unoriginal about nearly everything that made his reputation. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/51 "2013-10-02T22:25:16Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > In essence, what Marx declared is that societies have the equivalent of a subconscious; a set of _real_ reasons for having the values they do, often held unwittingly, which are ultimately based on “material necessity”- how society has to be structured in order for life to carry on. This basic idea, that the tenets of society can be deconstructed as to true motive, is alive and well today even among non-Marxists. Jared Diamond for example uses a similar technique when analyzing societies of the past and present. And yet Randians persist in denying that there is such thing as a “collective brain.” Of course there is. A civilization is a collective brain. A society is a collective brain. A legislature is a collective brain. A committee is a collective brain. An organization is a collective brain. A good **marriage** is a collective brain. N.B.: The IQ of a collective brain is neither the sum nor the average of its member-neurons’ IQ points. (There would have to be some more complex formula.) > [@Lumpy](#): > > The biggest legacy of Marx today is that industrial societies have in fact reformed from the Dickensian/ robber baron capitalism of the 19th century- quite possibly as the result of conscious awareness of Marxist and Socialist doctrine. If Marx and his communist contemporaries had never put their analyses down on paper, something like the worker’s revolution might actually have eventually come to pass. I recall that old-crank-lady at a Town Hall on the ACA, asking Barney Frank how he could support such a “Nazi policy.” He responded by comparing her to a table, to be ignored, which was fair. But he might better have pointed out that while Germany had UHC under the Nazis, it also had it **before** the Nazis. It was introduced by Bismarck. And he was no socialist. He introduced UHC, and universal-old-age pensions, to **prevent** socialism in Germany, to take some of the momentum out of the socialist movement there by pre-empting a couple of its least-radical demands. In the same way, FDR’s New Deal, intentionally or unintentionally, did take some wind out of the sails of the American Socialist Party and the Communist Party USA (both much bigger deals, then, than most now remember). ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/52 "2013-10-02T22:36:05Z")
> [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](#): > > That’s nice…that’s fine…go wait for me in the car. > > Down by the viaduct. Ya wanna buy a duck? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/53 "2013-10-02T22:41:55Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > As an economic historian, Marx had many good insights. However, his predictions about the evolution of economies failed. His "value theory"has been discredited, and he ignored the role of markets. > So, he is another 19th century philosopher whose work is of mainly academic interest, today. Wait, how did he ignore the role of markets? Isn’t his theory mostly **about** the role of markets? ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/54 "2013-10-02T22:49:01Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Wait, how did he ignore the role of markets? Isn’t his theory mostly **about** the role of markets? No,its about the "means of production"and the "value of labor"and surplus value.’ Marx ignored the real function of markets-that of transmitting information between buyer and seller. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/55 "2013-10-02T22:49:23Z")
> [@Enterprise](#): > > Bless your heart, but maybe you should look into _Kapital_ one of these days, and discover how the labor theory of value works–or, perhaps, give it some quick thought yourself. Does Marx say value comes from putting labor into things? As you point out, that would be the height of foolishness. Marx is fully aware that for the kind of value he is talking about here (exchange, as opposed to use value) happens only when someone wants what you have (and then, by the way, even your mud-pie has value; that’s something even Adam Smith would have agreed with). BTW, the [labor theory of value](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value), right or wrong, goes back at least to John Locke and arguably to Aquinas. Smith embraced it, and Marx made no innovations there AFAIK. [The subjective theory of value](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value), now more widely accepted, likewise goes back in some form to the Middle Ages – but, among economists, only to the late 19th Century. “It’s worth what was put into it!” “It’s worth what you can find somebody to pay for it!” They **both** sound like very common-sense evaluations, don’t they? But from subtly different angles. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/56 "2013-10-02T22:52:10Z")
> [@Enterprise](#): > > Much develops from there, which you may find in the often surprisingly entertaining _Kapital_. Is it?! I once read that the Tsar’s censors allowed it to be imported into Russia because they judged it too dull to be dangerous. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/57 "2013-10-02T22:55:53Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > The difference is that Marxism produces horrible catastrophes whenever it is tried regardless of how tyrannical the government is. Communists use tyranny to impose marxist economics on countries and then the economy is destroyed. Julius Nyere was not a monster like most communist leaders were but his policies left Tanzania unable to feed itself. That is a recurring theme in Marxist economies, the Ukraine, China, Ethiopia, and North Korea have all had huge famines that killed millions of people and they were all using marxist economics. If the marxists ever took over Saudi Arabia, they would have shortages of sand. > There is a reason marxism attracts monsters such as, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, Kim, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, Guevera, and Mengistu. The reason is that marxism is monstrous. Actually, things ain’t been **too** horrible in Cuba. Thinnest guy at Fat Camp, as it were. As for Venezuela, too soon to tell, including whether it even counts. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/58 "2013-10-02T22:57:55Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > Government is and should be of, by and for the people, not economics. True, but, in many irreducible aspects, **human life** is of, by, and for economics. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/59 "2013-10-02T23:09:39Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Marx failed to appreciate the fundamental contradiction in his beliefs. He said that capitalism was flawed because of the unbridgeable divide between the bosses and the workers - the bosses were unanswerable to the workers and shared no interests with them so the bosses would ruthlessly exploit the workers. > > But Marx’s political system essentially duplicated this flaw. The Communist Party would in theory be running the country on behalf of the citizens. Was that his theory? Did Marx even envision such an institution, as a governing as opposed to revolutionary organization? ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2013, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859/60 "2013-10-02T23:25:23Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Actually, things ain’t been **too** horrible in Cuba. Thinnest guy at Fat Camp, as it were. > > As for Venezuela, too soon to tell, including whether it even counts. Really? Cholera and dengue fever are now present in Havana-diseases that disappeared in Pre-Castro Cuba in 1900. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-was-marxs-legacy/669859.md?page=4)