so

>>9123615
>why terry eagleton was wrong

>>9123615
This really triggers my alt-right sensibilities and frogman mentality

>>9123615
marx is cool but eagleton is an english department hack pretending to be a philosopher

>>9123667
this basically but Eagleton does accidentally say interesting things from time to time

>>9123615
So what OP?

>>9123615
wrong

File: F9YTEf6.jpg (47KB, 500x750px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 500x750px

>>9123615
No. Marx was wrong because Equality is a False God.

>>9123750
This. There is no way women or ethnic minorities are equal to me. WIsh more people would understand this

>>9123750
>Marx
>equality

confirmed illiterate

>>9123615
Piketty does well in his ultimate dismissal:

>Marx’s dark prophecy came no closer to being realized than Ricardo’s. In the last third of the nineteenth century, wages finally began to increase: the improvement in the purchasing power of workers spread everywhere, and this changed the situation radically, even if extreme inequalities persisted and in some respects continued to increase until World War I. The communist revolution did indeed take place, but in the most backward country in Europe, Russia, where the Industrial Revolution had scarcely begun, whereas the most advanced European countries explored other, social democratic avenues—fortunately for their citizens. Like his predecessors,

>Marx totally neglected the possibility of durable technological progress and steadily increasing productivity, which is a force that can to some extent serve as a counterweight to the process of accumulation and concentration of private capital. He no doubt lacked the statistical data needed to refine his predictions. He probably suffered as well from having decided on his conclusions in 1848, before embarking on the research needed to justify them. Marx evidently wrote in great political fervor, which at times led him to issue hasty pronouncements from which it was difficult to escape. That is why economic theory needs to be rooted in historical sources that are as complete as possible, and in this respect Marx did not exploit all the possibilities available to him.8 What is more, he devoted little thought to the question of how a society in which private capital had been totally abolished would be organized politically and economically—a complex issue if ever there was one, as shown by the tragic totalitarian experiments undertaken in states where private capital was abolished.

>>9123750
equality is a bourgeoisie concept

so many pseuds talking out of their asses ITT

>>9123791
sounds like a pseud thing to say

>>9123615
So what?

File: lilypad4.jpg (37KB, 537x391px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 537x391px

>>9123803
>as
Its going to be AWSOME!

>>9123865
[multiple citations needed]

>>9123615
Wow a book title agrees with me so I must be right

You should probably read some real books. Pic related.

File: images-17.jpg (27KB, 306x475px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 306x475px

>>9123948

I tried reading this, but it was quite bad. Eagleton doesn't provide any substantial engagement with Marx, and quickly dismisses such fundamental ideas like historical materialism as wrong. Oftenthe book is more likely to dissuade you from reading Marx than proving how he was correct. Overall not worth it, try McLellan's biography of Marx or Singer's Very Short Introduction.

>>9123615
So?

>>9123615
Nice try OP but you can't fool me with that image. Marx was left not right

Why is the intelligentsia so obsessed with Marx?

>>9124026
Why are you?

>>9123615
SO

>>9123615
shit book. read these instead
Clarke - Marx, marginalism and modern sociology
Fine - Macroeconomics/Microeconomics
Kliman - Reclaiming Marx's Capital
Roberts - The long depression
>in b4 replace shit with more shit

>>9123615
Marx was a crypto-capitalist. It's not surprising bourgeois edgelords adore him.