Working my way through the Commie Manifesto finally. I got the Penguin Classics version...

Working my way through the Commie Manifesto finally. I got the Penguin Classics version. It has a few hundred pages of introductory material, historical background, analysis, etc.

Should I bother or just jump straight in? Or read it afterwards?

Attached: marx.jpg (220x316, 13K)

This thras is so cringey. Holy shit get your GED first or actually go to college. Fucking weeblet brainlet who goes on Veeky Forums, gets brainwashed by posts, and somehow thinks reading Ulysses is going to make him into something. No.... You are damn useless.

Attached: C24C9B54-992D-4967-AE67-930AA6F6494D.jpg (500x501, 22K)

It's not bait. People post Nazi shit here all the time. Is there something wrong with someone wanting to study the book that arguably had the biggest effect on the last century?

You guys are such fucking dorks.

It's a pamphlet, very superficial. Read the background stuff, you should get more out of it that way. Also I think you're confusing its effect on thought with Das Kapital which you will never read

This. The manifesto is a comfy read though

Capital is on my list for the year. I will read it, or at least an abridged version. Thanks for the advice tho.

>buys the propaganda pamphlet he wrote for the barely literate working class
>annotated

Attached: 1518216846824.png (1200x1721, 1.62M)

Read all the other material in the book, its very important in understanding the content. I told that to my wife's boyfriend and it helped him a lot.

Spousal socialism, nice!

Never read the introductory stuff. Don't let other people dictate your way of looking at things

Read everything but the manifesto.
It's a fucking phamplet that it's outdated anyway.
Then read lenin

>a non sequitur

It's known as "a community of women". If you read the Manifesto you'd understand.

Keep in mind Labour theory of value is flawed but Marx's dorkiness makes up for it.

What theory of value do you consider the best? Honest question, I'm new to economics.

Labor theory of value has been the most popular value theory for most of the history of economics, but in the 20th century marginalism took hold

>Marginalism
Thanks! Any recommended bibliography?

Shakespeare wrote for barely literate plebs and most plebs today still don't notice it's all dick jokes.Language changes fampai
Also Marx is a huge nerd, so a lot of it is written in fairly poetic language which could sound alien to a modern reader.

Damn it I'll never be a successful marxist. I guess I'll just go buy some properties and rent control them

I'm not that user, Economic marginality is what I'm reading right now. CAUTION: economics gets extremely mathematical from this point forwards. If you aren't fluent in calculus, derivatives, basic geometrical relations of hyperbolas etc. don't even bother.

Carl Menger - Principles of Economics
Leon Walras - Elements of Pure Economics
Irving Fisher - Mathematical Investigations into the Theory of Value and Price
Vilfredo Pareto - Manual of Political Economy

I don't really know too much about this last one, it's the book I'm GOING to be reading. But the first three are basically all about nothing but marginal economics. Walras' book is all you need to know. Walras is one hell of an economist. Basically man you are in for a rollercoaster of a journey through derivatives and mathematical expressions of utility through different definitions and components of value. I can honestly say Walras' expressions of how bimetallism would theoretically be a more efficient stabilizer than a managed monetary unit were some of the most interesting things I've ever read regarding economics in my life.

Pic related, it's Irving Fisher's price machine. A machine that uses hydrodynamics to represent economic equilibrium and marginal economics.

It's all fascinating, m8 (Carl Menger is all words, but a very informative read, even so; he was the only good Austrian economist and influenced Keynes vastly)

Attached: Price-Machine.jpg (332x400, 27K)

I'm a math major, but I've ignored economics thus far. Thanks a lot, user!

Yeah mathematics is fascinating to me. The parallels are obvious. All the great mathematical economists were very well versed in mathematics.

Being all around well versed in everything is perfectly fine. There are academic truths one can know, of course, without becoming a burden on anything else. And the amount of academic truths which are apparent is surprisingly smaller than you would think.

One of those is marginal economics, of course. And it has helped explain a lot of different problems regarding economics, including to help create Keynesian theories, which are some of the most complex economic theories to date. I always laugh whenever I saw the plebs with Keynes book on their reading list, as if they could learn Keynes alongside other things.

I focus on mathematics and economics myself, friend. But I primarily read primary texts, only the mightiest of people can do that. Most brainlets go straight for the textbook. But in order to understand the theories, one must understand the basic foundation of the thoughts of the economists themselves. Good luck on your journeys, user, and may you find what you were looking for. Late 19th century/early-mid 20th century economics is fascinating. It's when the science was just beginning. I believe there we will find some of the answers we are looking for in regards to economics.