I have a copy of Capital: A Critique of Political Economy by Karl Marx sitting on my shelf, and I am long overdue to read it. This is a Modern Library edition published by Random House, and it bears a copyright of 1906.
As an American who grew up at the end of the Cold War, I saw negative depictions of Marxism everywhere in media and politics even though I wasn't really politically aware in any real sense until well after the Soviet Union dissolved. In the years since, I have heard many explanations for the collapse. Self-professed Marxists often argue the USSR betrayed the principles of socialism, and Stalin was more of a state capitalist than a revolutionary comrade. Others blame reactionaries for causing the noble venture to rot from within before it could blossom into a true worker's paradise. The jingoistic insist Ray-Gun's militarism called the Soviet bluff, and they had to fold. Some say it was grassroots subversion via samizdat, bootleg movies, smuggled blue jeans, and rock & roll that weakened the power of the State over the individual. Others describe the destructive economic and political outcomes as inherent flaws in central planning.
My prejudice leans toward the explanations and criticisms put forth by Austrian economists like Ludwig von Mises. I suspect Marx is largely correct in identifying flaws in 19th century European society. The Prussians, the Austrians, the French, the British, the Russians, and even the Dutch were all vying for imperial power. Monarchy was still the predominant political system, and mercantilism defined imperial economic policies. Where I suspect I will find fault with Marx is more in his diagnosis of cause and his proposed solutions. As in modern political discourse, problems are easy to see, but cause and remedy are hotly disputed.
I do not intend to criticize Marx for his personal faults. I would like to address the idea, not the man. I also intend to do my best to avoid taking quotations out of context or mischaracterizing the arguments in question. I am also well aware that I may misunderstand the arguments presented, and something may have been lost in translation when this was published in English. But this is supposed to be written for the common man, is it not?
Do you think this is a worthwhile venture? Would you like to get your own copy and follow along for discussion and debate? It appears Google has a digital version of my edition. Please comment below if this piques your interest!
Expect the first proper entry... eventually. I make no promises as to a schedule.