What books should i read before i read the communist manifesto

>>8311640
No, it's very simplistic, just as is its philosophy

Considering how much Karl Marx hated Max Stirner you should read The Ego and His own. Its a better ideology but thats besides the point

> manifesto complicated

It's literally marx dumbing his ideas down so that proles can understand it.

File: 12509.jpg (63KB, 400x410px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 400x410px

The manifesto is very easy, it's also outdated and not essential at all.
If you want an introduction to Marx you could read Why Marx Was Right by Terry Eagleton or A Very Short Introduction to Marx by Peter Singer.

You could also ask /leftypol/

Nothing. But don't act like a marxist or that you know what that even means after you've.

Don't be a bitch. Read Capital. But only after you've read Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Hegel (sorry), Aristotle, and maybe one of the french utopians socialists.

>but I thought marx was a lazy neet
No he's a really hard thinker that's why only academics actually read his substantial works.

>>8311640
The manifesto is really straightforward and simple, all the actual arguments and propositions are put forward in Das Kapital, which I haven't read and don't know the required reading for

>>8311702

>formalizing what every Tom dick and cherry knows in his heart of hearts instinctively into a philosophy
>better ideology

whatever you say, loser.

>>8311776
>Peter Singer
yeah, read a book from the guy who wrote Animal Liberation and is only a vegan when 'it's not too hard'

>>8311640
Read some Bakunin to get you out of your silly ideology then read Anarchy State and Utopia.

>>8311796
The Map is not the Territory. As soon as you recognize that the ideology falls apart.

The manifesto is literally a pamphlet designed for easy understanding by commoners.

>>8311640
Brush up on the history of communism. I'm sure it went great

File: frog stirner.png (120KB, 735x657px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 735x657px

>>8311802
this

https://libcom.org/library/karl-marx-anti-bourgeois-or-neo-bourgeois-max-nomad

Marx didn't want to abolish the difference between the poor and rich, marx was just carrying on the programme of adam smith and viewed class simply as the antagonism between the interests of waged-labour and profit in general. He just wanted to make everyone employees of a monopolized "peoples" capital and seriously thought intellectuals/technicians would have class interests with ditch diggers and didn't have their own vested interests they would want to further.

The first world "working class" today doesn't have "noting to lose but their chains" they have pension plans and investments that a revolution from bellow would destroy.

Marx and Engels hated the real lower revolutionary class who they wanted to exterminate or have forcefully controlled by a labour aristocracy:

>The lumpenproletariat, this scum of the decaying elements of all classes, which establishes headquarters in all the big cities, is the worst of all possible allies. It is an absolutely venal, an absolutely brazen crew. If the French workers, in the course of the Revolution, inscribed on the houses: Mort aux voleurs! (Death to the thieves!) and even shot down many, they did it, not out of enthusiasm for property, but because they rightly considered it necessary to hold that band at arm’s length. Every leader of the workers who utilises these gutter-proletarians as guards or supports, proves himself by this action alone a traitor to the movement.
- Engels from "The Peasant War in Germany"

>>8311802
>>8311839
But don't bother with Robert Nozick, he's a liberal totalitarian who wanted to impose slavery, look into Max Nomad if you want real revolutionary insights