Talk:Marxism
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Marxism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 40 days |
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
Template:Communism Portal selected
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Marxism. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Marxism at the Reference desk. |
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Since the external publication copied Wikipedia rather than the reverse, please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Marxism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 40 days |
Lead section
This page currently opens: Marxism is a socio-economic and political worldview or inquiry based on a materialist interpretation of historical development, a dialectical view of social transformation, an analysis of class-relations and conflict within society. Marxist methodology informs an economic and sociopolitical enquiry applying to the analysis and critique of the development of capitalism and the role of class struggle in systemic economic change.
These sentences are inaccessible. While I see that this has been brought up in the archive, users who raise this concern seem to either be ignored or told that there's no problem.
First, "a socio-economic and political worldview or inquiry" is linguistically vague - what clauses are the "or" connecting? Is our choice between a socio-economic and political worldview or an inquiry? Is it between worldview that is both socio-economic and political or an inquiry? Or is it just a choice between the political worldview or an inquiry?
Furthermore, what does "socio-economic" mean in this context? Is this distinct from the political? Doesn't a list which includes "an analysis of class-relations and conflict within society" imply both of these descriptors anyway?
We then learn that Marxist methodology (methodology relating to what? practice? action? what is a Marxist method? why is methodology being discussed in the second sentence when it isn't mentioned again until the last paragraph of the entire article?) informs an "economic and sociopolitical 'enquiry'". So once the reader has wrapped their head around the "socio-economic and political... inquiry," they are then instructed to comprehend an "economic and sociopolitical" approach. Is this supposed to be significant? I have absolutely no idea.
I believe the opening paragraph should follow in the footsteps of Kantian ethics - describe Marxism as an influential economic and political theory put forth by Karl Marx in the first sentence and provide a very brief summary of major concepts (historical materialism, dialectics, class conflict, critique of capitalism). Thoughts? I don't feel that opening unclear prose and barrage of jargon is something that blue links can successfully satisfy. --Lunar Jesters (talk) 17:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
- Indeed. Like many wiki articles, the lead is full of jargon and does not satisfy the conditions set out at wp:lead : "the lead should be written in a clear, accessible style". Too many big words. Poujeaux (talk) 18:24, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
"Libertarian socialists"?!
The section about "communism" contains this funny little oxymoron. I'd like to ask the editors to remove it, as it's factually wrong, and completely meaningless. Libertarianism is an ideology in and of itself, and is in total opposition with any form of communism or socialism. The word the writer must have been seraching for is "anarcho-communist", or, if we're talking about mainstream social democrats, "democratic socialists". There is no such thing as a libertarian socialist. 64.134.152.35 (talk) 18:52, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Are you sure? --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 19:07, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Noam Chomsky would disagree with you.[1] RolandR (talk) 21:20, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- I think most theorists would disagree with him, if not just for his absurd simplification of two hugely complicated concepts--Drowninginlimbo (talk) 21:28, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Noam Chomsky would disagree with you.[1] RolandR (talk) 21:20, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
General improvements
Is there anyone who would be opposed to a complete rewrite of the article? →Σσς. (Sigma) 07:00, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
- Considering that it was selected as a high quality article on the Communism portal, you should probably make a specific case for rewriting it. 74.128.43.180 (talk) 20:10, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- C-Class politics articles
- High-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- C-Class socialism articles
- Top-importance socialism articles
- WikiProject Socialism articles
- C-Class sociology articles
- High-importance sociology articles
- C-Class Economics articles
- High-importance Economics articles
- WikiProject Economics articles
- C-Class Soviet Union articles
- Top-importance Soviet Union articles
- WikiProject Soviet Union articles
- C-Class Russia articles
- High-importance Russia articles
- High-importance C-Class Russia articles
- C-Class Russia (science and education) articles
- Science and education in Russia task force articles
- C-Class Russia (history) articles
- History of Russia task force articles
- WikiProject Russia articles
- C-Class Philosophy articles
- High-importance Philosophy articles
- C-Class social and political philosophy articles
- High-importance social and political philosophy articles
- Social and political philosophy task force articles
- C-Class Continental philosophy articles
- High-importance Continental philosophy articles
- Continental philosophy task force articles
- Wikipedia controversial topics