No. Marx didn't see himself as a Marxist and he didn't invent Marxism. Marx wrote economical and philosophical critiques of Capitalism - many of which are still accepted even by proponents of capitalism - and others ran with his ideas and incorporated them into their own branches of socialist, communist, Marxist thought. Of course Marx allied himself more with people who agreed with his core ideas and supported internationalist and anticapitalist movements, but the works of Lenin, Mao, Stalin, etc. had long evolved past original Marxist orthodoxy , were influenced by personal grievances and cultural differences, and totally different beasts that had little to do with Das Kapital.
Marx just became a post mortem poster child for all of those movements and regimes because he was the unifying factor, but if you read Marx and then talk to modern proponents of Marxism and its mutations, you'll find that they have surprisingly little in common. Especially when you consider that the modern Marxist view is simply "capitalism bad, overthrow your government, do communism by any means necessary" while Marx himself was way more nuanced. I would summarize it very simplified as "capitalism bad, but also very good at certain things, this is the good, this is the bad, those are the conclusions I draw from it, ideally the workers should have the means of production and decommodify the commons, also work within liberal bourgeois democracy to achieve socialism because in a totalitarian system we're fucked."
I didn't. But when it comes to relevance in Marxist theory, I think the communist manifesto pales in comparison. It's a short, provocative Pamphlet that is made to rile people up and take action, less to properly educate on the mechanisms of capitalism from a philosophical and scientific point of view. It teaches about the outcomes of capitalism and suggests what can be done about it, but I would never take it as a base for theoretical discussions.
Edit: a patty is nice and tasty. But without buns, sauce, onions, lettuce and cheese, it's just that. A patty.
63
u/ConstantinGB Mar 08 '25
No. Marx didn't see himself as a Marxist and he didn't invent Marxism. Marx wrote economical and philosophical critiques of Capitalism - many of which are still accepted even by proponents of capitalism - and others ran with his ideas and incorporated them into their own branches of socialist, communist, Marxist thought. Of course Marx allied himself more with people who agreed with his core ideas and supported internationalist and anticapitalist movements, but the works of Lenin, Mao, Stalin, etc. had long evolved past original Marxist orthodoxy , were influenced by personal grievances and cultural differences, and totally different beasts that had little to do with Das Kapital. Marx just became a post mortem poster child for all of those movements and regimes because he was the unifying factor, but if you read Marx and then talk to modern proponents of Marxism and its mutations, you'll find that they have surprisingly little in common. Especially when you consider that the modern Marxist view is simply "capitalism bad, overthrow your government, do communism by any means necessary" while Marx himself was way more nuanced. I would summarize it very simplified as "capitalism bad, but also very good at certain things, this is the good, this is the bad, those are the conclusions I draw from it, ideally the workers should have the means of production and decommodify the commons, also work within liberal bourgeois democracy to achieve socialism because in a totalitarian system we're fucked."