Scan barcode
kosr's review against another edition
1.0
2021 Edit: having started to actually read Marx and try to understand his ideas, revisiting this has really brought to light that this book is borderline propaganda for discrediting Marxism. As someone who doesn't even identify as a Marxist - merely interested in understanding Marxism itself - I still found myself almost shocked at the falsities the 10 points stipulated at the beginning of this book, let alone the 10 at the end. I cannot recommend this in the slightest. Its practically asinine in its concoction.
--------
A reader of this will enjoy the concise and interesting history that this book delivers. However, through its pages, I found myself at times, questioning the narrative the authors were pushing. Without a larger knowledge of Marx, I couldn't form a critisicm, as such I would warn readers of how much is omitted from these pages, especially with reference to later post-Marxism introductions. However, the authors decide to pen a 10 point criticism of Marxism in this Post-Modern world (already the post-modern is a subjective opinion) and this I DID find slightly repulsive and sweepingly dismissive of revolutionary rhetoric and action. The blatant dismissal of class as a remotely unifying force for revolutionary change had alarm bells ringing in my mind particularly. By mentioning that some later critics of Marx noticed that we should be more detailed about oppression (a black woman has different grivences compared to a white factory working male for example) is absolutely not a reason to dismiss working for a society that better accommodates all these oppressions; and yet that's exactly what this book does.
Not only this, but the fact that the books narrative decides to end with a good chunck of space devoted to post-Marxists who, upon reading about their ideas in this very book , I found to be borderline flirting with free market fundamentalism. How on earth such people can be given such conclusive space at the end of the book is beyond me. I won't list the rest here, but if you pick this up, feel free to have a look at the back to make your own mind up.
This is mainly why I choose to try and read Marx myself, I am simply too untrusting of others telling me, or summerise for me, whether his ideas are still relevant or not. In many cases it feels that although Marxism is tolerated as an idea to learn about, certain intellectuals will do what they can - consciously or unconsciously - to de-fang and obfuscate the tradition. I feel this book is no different in trying to present Marxism as a dustbin concept that's better left to be read as an old idea worth studying for purely historical interest. The fact the authors make the claim "socialism does not work and neither does any other grand narrative..." is enough to have me suspicious. Not because I'm a diehard Marxist, so much as because I can sense when an agenda is present.
My current feeling is postmodernist thinkers tend to do a good job of making certain unifying ideas absolutely incomprehensible.
--------
A reader of this will enjoy the concise and interesting history that this book delivers. However, through its pages, I found myself at times, questioning the narrative the authors were pushing. Without a larger knowledge of Marx, I couldn't form a critisicm, as such I would warn readers of how much is omitted from these pages, especially with reference to later post-Marxism introductions. However, the authors decide to pen a 10 point criticism of Marxism in this Post-Modern world (already the post-modern is a subjective opinion) and this I DID find slightly repulsive and sweepingly dismissive of revolutionary rhetoric and action. The blatant dismissal of class as a remotely unifying force for revolutionary change had alarm bells ringing in my mind particularly. By mentioning that some later critics of Marx noticed that we should be more detailed about oppression (a black woman has different grivences compared to a white factory working male for example) is absolutely not a reason to dismiss working for a society that better accommodates all these oppressions; and yet that's exactly what this book does.
Not only this, but the fact that the books narrative decides to end with a good chunck of space devoted to post-Marxists who, upon reading about their ideas in this very book , I found to be borderline flirting with free market fundamentalism. How on earth such people can be given such conclusive space at the end of the book is beyond me. I won't list the rest here, but if you pick this up, feel free to have a look at the back to make your own mind up.
This is mainly why I choose to try and read Marx myself, I am simply too untrusting of others telling me, or summerise for me, whether his ideas are still relevant or not. In many cases it feels that although Marxism is tolerated as an idea to learn about, certain intellectuals will do what they can - consciously or unconsciously - to de-fang and obfuscate the tradition. I feel this book is no different in trying to present Marxism as a dustbin concept that's better left to be read as an old idea worth studying for purely historical interest. The fact the authors make the claim "socialism does not work and neither does any other grand narrative..." is enough to have me suspicious. Not because I'm a diehard Marxist, so much as because I can sense when an agenda is present.
My current feeling is postmodernist thinkers tend to do a good job of making certain unifying ideas absolutely incomprehensible.
eviec123's review against another edition
challenging
medium-paced
1.5
i bought this as i’m relatively new to the left and wanted to read something that breaks down complex concepts simply. if that’s what you want, save your money and don’t get it.
to start, it was fairly ok but after about half way through, i was already getting frustrated as it says some things that are clearly the authors own opinions with no reasoning (eg markets are the most efficient way to distribute resources) or just none issues, and also says some things that are blatantly incorrect no argument about it (eg it gets the dates karl leibknecht was alive just wrong? if i hadn’t already had some background knowledge on the spartacists then i wouldn’t have known this, so i won’t be surprised if there are more examples of this, with things that matter more in underpinning the arguments made, that i haven’t picked up on. really made me question the reliability of the book).
i only finished it really so i could leave a fairer review and all i can really say is that it got worse. the second to last sentence in the book literally says that anti-imperialism has had is day… yeah give this a skip. i’m just glad i got it half price
(the main reason i tagged it as challenging was just because it was hard to get through all the bullshittery. some bits were just poorly explained too though)
to start, it was fairly ok but after about half way through, i was already getting frustrated as it says some things that are clearly the authors own opinions with no reasoning (eg markets are the most efficient way to distribute resources) or just none issues, and also says some things that are blatantly incorrect no argument about it (eg it gets the dates karl leibknecht was alive just wrong? if i hadn’t already had some background knowledge on the spartacists then i wouldn’t have known this, so i won’t be surprised if there are more examples of this, with things that matter more in underpinning the arguments made, that i haven’t picked up on. really made me question the reliability of the book).
i only finished it really so i could leave a fairer review and all i can really say is that it got worse. the second to last sentence in the book literally says that anti-imperialism has had is day… yeah give this a skip. i’m just glad i got it half price
(the main reason i tagged it as challenging was just because it was hard to get through all the bullshittery. some bits were just poorly explained too though)
thepavand's review against another edition
2.0
An introductory book should be judged on two merits:
1. It should be simple and lucid in explaining the breadth of the topic, and
2. it should not be inaccurate or give space for misconstruing the subject.
I am only vaguely acquainted with the central tenets of Marxism and so, I am capable of judging the book fairly only based on the first point.
It's a graphic guide and has a picture-a-page structure with the same picture repeated with minor changes within a topic for several topics. The pictures are black and white mostly depicting various philosophers, chiefly Marx, professing their views in speech bubbles. In some cases, a dialogue format is used to illustrate conflicting ideas. This may an appealing way to drive the ideas home, but it is not necessarily more effective pedagogically, to someone who is already interested to learn about Marxism. On the flip side, it severely restricts the page space available to some of the more dense arguments of Marxism. (Based on popular perception, Marxism seems unnecessarily full of these.)
While I cannot judge on the accuracy of the ideas accurately, and while I liked the beginning 3/4th of the book, I think the whole 'post-Marxism' bit was incongruous with the rest of the book, and Marxism in general, and makes this book useless, considering how much space was allocated to that subject. How can something that advocates that "nothing should be done. revolution is impossible. our job is only to build 'narratives' of what is happening and since our narratives are always subjective, they are pretty much useless to do anything with." be even remotely compatible with Marxism, let alone be termed an 'extension of Marxism'? It could have worked, at most, as a criticism of Marxism, and, probably, a good one at that. To borrow Marxist lingo, it seems completely reactionary. Their ideal state is free-market with limited government, for god's sake.
If the final argument of the book has any sense at all, it doesn't show it. No criticism of post-Marxism is even included. It just feels like the author's paternalistic condescension was at work here. "Oh no! What happens if the impressionable young minds are seduced by this ideology and start taking it seriously? I must never let that happen."
1. It should be simple and lucid in explaining the breadth of the topic, and
2. it should not be inaccurate or give space for misconstruing the subject.
I am only vaguely acquainted with the central tenets of Marxism and so, I am capable of judging the book fairly only based on the first point.
It's a graphic guide and has a picture-a-page structure with the same picture repeated with minor changes within a topic for several topics. The pictures are black and white mostly depicting various philosophers, chiefly Marx, professing their views in speech bubbles. In some cases, a dialogue format is used to illustrate conflicting ideas. This may an appealing way to drive the ideas home, but it is not necessarily more effective pedagogically, to someone who is already interested to learn about Marxism. On the flip side, it severely restricts the page space available to some of the more dense arguments of Marxism. (Based on popular perception, Marxism seems unnecessarily full of these.)
While I cannot judge on the accuracy of the ideas accurately, and while I liked the beginning 3/4th of the book, I think the whole 'post-Marxism' bit was incongruous with the rest of the book, and Marxism in general, and makes this book useless, considering how much space was allocated to that subject. How can something that advocates that "nothing should be done. revolution is impossible. our job is only to build 'narratives' of what is happening and since our narratives are always subjective, they are pretty much useless to do anything with." be even remotely compatible with Marxism, let alone be termed an 'extension of Marxism'? It could have worked, at most, as a criticism of Marxism, and, probably, a good one at that. To borrow Marxist lingo, it seems completely reactionary. Their ideal state is free-market with limited government, for god's sake.
If the final argument of the book has any sense at all, it doesn't show it. No criticism of post-Marxism is even included. It just feels like the author's paternalistic condescension was at work here. "Oh no! What happens if the impressionable young minds are seduced by this ideology and start taking it seriously? I must never let that happen."
amyrhoda's review against another edition
4.0
I didn't study politics at any point during my formal education, so handy illustrated guides like this are invaluable for putting names and structure around ideas I've already encountered.
There is lots of rich, juicy goodness in this book — a couple of times I had to put it down and think after reading just a page or two. The book covers Marxism as well as the problems with Marxism, and how thinking has developed towards post-Marxism.
I appreciate these little graphic guides because they treat their topics seriously and their readers with respect. This one has a glossary, further reading, and an index, making it a useful reference as well as a primer.
There is lots of rich, juicy goodness in this book — a couple of times I had to put it down and think after reading just a page or two. The book covers Marxism as well as the problems with Marxism, and how thinking has developed towards post-Marxism.
I appreciate these little graphic guides because they treat their topics seriously and their readers with respect. This one has a glossary, further reading, and an index, making it a useful reference as well as a primer.
clarxvizconde13's review against another edition
4.0
If you want a simple brush through with Marxism, then this is the book for you. It briefly takes you on a journey on how Marxism came to be, its core concepts, how it unfolded, and how it continues to develop in the present. The book encourages the reader to pursue other materials for reading.
ellieodole's review
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
This books makes it very easy to get a basic understanding of Marxist philosophy and the format of a graphic novel makes it very accessible.
joecam79's review against another edition
4.0
This useful introduction to Marxism provides a concise but quite comprehensive overview of the subject, explaining both its historical development and the main tenets of Marxist (and post-Marxist) thought.