Talk:Marxism

Template:Communism Portal selected

Marxist Economics

I just arrived at this article redirected from 'Marxist Economics'. Surely that should redirect here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxian_economics

Forgot Daniel Deleon in People list

Forgot Daniel Deleon in People list.

New Union Party Socialist Labour Party of America

Working Definition of the term

Given that Marx died without seeing the Russian Revolution, two world wars, Stalin, Mao etc. what does it realistically mean to call oneself a Marxist in the 21st century? Are there a core set of beliefs? If so what are they?

Criticism

I have always favoured that as opposed to a criticism section, some of the better articles fit criticism into the whole. So I have been bold and done this here. I have incorporated what is approproate into the article itself.

I saw this at an article and its very appropriate here:

Q6: Why isn't there a criticisms/controversies section?[hide] A6: Because a section dedicated to criticisms and controversies is no more appropriate than a section dedicated solely to praise and is an indication of a poorly written article. Criticisms/controversies/praises should be worked into the existing prose of the article, per the Criticism essay.

That is how we should work at this article, based on this principle. I have removed some of the criticism totally because it is simply an unsourced statement of opposing ideology. It is already implied that opposed ideologies will think that Marxism will not work, and the reasons given are very common and found in more appropriate articles elsewhere, exponed in more detail and actually sourced. Thanks for reading. ValenShephard (talk) 17:14, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed splitting off "Marxist schools of thought" as it's own page

Proposed splitting off "Marxist schools of thought" as it's own page in order to get down to a more acceptable page size. Thoughts and suggestions? Financestudent (talk) 18:55, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I have now split that section off. Marxist schools of thought needs improvement but I am sure there are people who would be interested. Financestudent (talk) 22:31, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure that three days discussion in which no other editor has participated, represents adequate consensus for a split, and I'm sure that other editors will make their views known in due course. Rodhullandemu 22:38, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to move it cut it or mess with it, I won't reverse whatever is done to it in relation to the split after this point, but the page is created if anyone wants to mess with it. I can't help that no one replied but I reasoned if it was controversial people would have spoken up considering the amount of people who watch this page and it's talk. Financestudent (talk) 22:56, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

You're right, it's up to people to voice their objections. I don't have any problem. As long as we can always re-consider or re-configure later if people complain. la gaie (talk) 23:04, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

I propose this link be added

• Marxism Unmasked: From Delusion to Destruction Lectures on Marxism & Socialism by Ludwig Von Mises —Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeMclynn (talk • contribs) 04:52, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

What is your rationale for wanting to add this particular link over the thousand of other potential links that could be added on Marxism? You may have a good reason, but since you don't explain, it's impossible to know. In particular, I'm concerned that this is published by the Foundation for Economic Education, which according to it's Wikipedia article researches and promulgates free-market, classical liberal, and libertarian ideas, and as such is hardly a neutral source of information on Marxism. -Lilac Soul ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 06:39, 6 October 2010 (UTC)