Talk:Influences on Karl Marx
Have created this page to give a more systematic treatment of the various influences on Marx and therefore Marxism without taking up too much space on either page. At this stage alot of it is still quite bare and I have had to group Adam Smith and David Ricardo, and Charles Fourier and Henri de Saint-Simon, under the same headings. However I would like eventually to see each person have their own heading, so please expand the sections! JenLouise 06:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Coming up on search
If you type influences on karl marx into the search box, this page does not come up and it does not show up in the listings of possible articles. How do I fix this? {{help}}
French Revolution section
Hi EnthusiastFR, I've noticed the stuff you added regarding the French Revolution. It is interesting information, but it does not seem to fit properly with the article which talks about what influenced Marx's work. It seems to demonstrate how the relationship between the French Revolution and Marxism, but the article is on Karl Marx, not marxism. If you think that the French Revolution influenced Marx's writing perhaps you could have a go at rewriting the article showing what influence it had on Marx (don't forget to use sources!). Otherwise perhaps it would be best to put the information on another page? JenLouise 01:57, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- Tts been nearly a month with no response, so I have removed the section as it doesn't not belong in this article in its current format. Unless it can be shown how the 1789 People's Revolution actually had an influence on what Marx thought and wrote then it doesn't belong here. Please don't re-add this section in its current state without first discussing it here. Thanks, JenLouise 00:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Darwin influence (or lack thereof)
Would it not be appropriate to include at least some information on the Darwin influence (to clarify the position)? More info in this reference material, by the way. Crimson30 22:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- I can't access the first link because I am blocked by our work server and the second link requires a subscritpion of some sort, so I can't give you my opinion on it, but if you think it should be mentioned and you haver referenced material then definitely add it. Perhaps you should present it as an influence (if there are references saying that it did influence Marx, but then follow it with the arguments of other authors who beleive that it didn't influence Marx. If there is some controversy I would think it would be best to add both sides with references, so that the reader can decide for themself. I would think that it would go in Other influences. JenLouise 00:04, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
I've been looking into the Marx-Darwin relationship from the Darwin side. This article is slightly incorrect, in that Darwin did reply to Marx, sending him a polite thank-you note for sending a copy of DAS KAPITAL. See http://darwin.gruts.com/articles/2000/marx for details. I did a search on an online version of THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO for the words DARWIN and EVOLUTION and came up zeroes. I found an online version of DAS KAPITAL and tried the same, but though it also came up zeroes I wasn't sure the search was working properly. Anyone with more knowledge of sources of DAS KAPITAL might want to give a search a shot. I would bet Darwin isn't mentioned. As far as letters and essays go, that may be another matter. Incidentally, I would wonder if Dickens wasn't an influence on Marx. Dickens, after all, was the most prominent social British social critic earlier in the century. MrG 4.225.214.162 21:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Corrected. Thanks! --Crimson30 16:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Just for completeness ... of course DARWIN and EVOLUTION aren't mentioned in COMMUNIST MANIFESTO, since ORIGIN OF SPECIES was published in 1859 and COMMUNIST MANIFESTO was published in 1848. (I must say I had a read DOH! moment when I realized that.) I did track down comments in DAS KAPITAL on Darwin, but they were short footnotes on industrial specialization.
Dubious references
I find it rather dubious to base an entire article on references to short sentences in Encarta. I've already removed Vico, since his influence isn't as "obvious" as is suggested: I've never seen Marx' view of history being described as "cyclic" as opposed to "progressive" or "teleological". Qwertyus 14:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- I have added Vico back in, but removed the word obvious. I think the similarities are obvious, but it was a bad choice of words - however the assertion that Vico influenced Marx is referenced. Perhaps its not great for the only references to be Encarta, but it is in encyclopeadia, where only approved contributors write the articles. What would help is people adding more references. I will try to see if I can find other references to all the influences (including Vico), put I have already put heaps and heaps of time into this and the Marxism and Classical Marxism articles and am just running out of time at the moment. JenLouise 02:54, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
- I've written a great deal about influences on Marx on the Dutch page about Marx, maybe I'll try to translate some of that. It has good (English language) references. Qwertyus 12:57, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Self referencing
Reference number 8 links to another WP article. I was under the impression that this was discouraged.
Perhaps linking directly to the relevant sources may be a better idea?
-AnoN —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.53.35 (talk) 15:50, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
It's true that self-referencing is a bad idea, but I checked out the referenced article and it doesn't actually have specific links for the section on Karl Marx, but the referenced line in this article is a direct quote from that article. I'm not sure who put it in this article or if they know a source for it, but I can't think of any other way of linking that line back to the article. I'm not sure but I would think that a poor reference is better than no reference at all...? JenLouise 15:10, 18 October 2007 (UTC)