Surplus value is a concept used famously by Karl Marx in his critique of political economy. Although Marx did not himself invent the term, he developed the concept. It refers roughly to the new value created by workers in excess of their own labour-cost, a value which is freely appropriated by the capitalist as gross profit, and which is the basis of capital accumulation.

For Marx, the gigantic increase in wealth and population from the 19th century onwards was mainly due to the competitive striving to obtain ''maximum surplus-value from the employment of labor'', resulting in an equally gigantic increase of productivity and capital resources. To the extent that increasingly the economic surplus is convertible into money and expressed in money, the amassment of wealth is possible on a larger and larger scale (see capital accumulation and surplus product).

In the Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels wrote:

Theory

The problem of explaining the source of surplus value is expressed by Friedrich Engels as follows:

Marx himself also put the problem as follows:

Marx's solution was to distinguish between labor-time worked and labor power. A worker who is sufficiently productive can produce an output value greater than what it costs to hire him. Although his wage seems to be based on hours worked, in an economic sense this wage does not reflect the full value of what the worker produces. Effectively it is not labour which the worker sells, but his capacity to work.

Imagine a worker who is hired for an hour and paid $10. Once in the capitalist's employ, the capitalist can have him operate a boot-making machine using which the worker produces $10 worth of work every fifteen minutes. Every hour, the capitalist receives $40 worth of work and only pays the worker $10, capturing the remaining $30 which is named surplus value. After deduction of costs (the leather, depreciation of the machine, etc.), the residual constitutes profit.

The worker cannot capture this benefit directly because he has no claim to the means of production (e.g. the boot-making machine) or to its products, and his capacity to bargain over wages is restricted by laws and the supply/demand for wage labour. Hence the rise of trade unions which aim to create a more favourable bargaining position through collective action by workers.

Definition

''Total'' surplus-value in an economy (Marx refers to the ''mass'' or volume of surplus-value) is basically equal to the sum of net distributed and undistributed profit, net interest, net rents, net tax on production and various net receipts associated with royalties, licensing, leasing, certain honorariums etc. (see also value product). Of course, the way generic profit income is grossed and netted in social accounting may differ somewhat from the way an individual business does that (see also Operating surplus).

Marx's own discussion focuses mainly on profit, interest and rent, largely ignoring taxation and royalty-type fees which were proportionally very small components of the national income when he lived. Over the last 150 years, however, the role of the state in the economy increased in almost every country in the world. Around 1850, the average share of government spending in GDP in the advanced capitalist economies was around 5%; in 1870, a bit above 8%; on the eve of World War I, just under 10%; just before the outbreak of World War II, around 20%; by 1950, nearly 30%; and today the average is around 35-40%. (see for example Alan Turner Peacock, "The growth of public expenditure", in ''Encyclopedia of Public Choice", Springer 2003, pp. 594-597).

Interpretations

Surplus-value may be viewed in five ways:

as a component of the new value product, which Marx himself defines as equal to the sum of labor costs in respect of capitalistically productive labor (variable capital) and surplus-value. In production, he argues, the workers produce a value equal to their wages plus an additional value, the surplus-value. They also transfer part of the value of fixed assets and materials to the new product, equal to economic depreciation (consumption of fixed capital) and intermediate goods used up (constant capital inputs). Labor costs and surplus-value are the monetary valuations of what Marx calls the necessary product and the surplus product, or paid labour and unpaid labour.

Surplus-value can also be viewed as a flow of net income appropriated by the owners of capital in virtue of asset ownership, comprising both distributed personal income and undistributed business income. In the whole economy, this will include both income directly from production and property income.

Surplus-value can be viewed as the source of society's ''accumulation fund'' or ''investment fund''; part of it is re-invested, but part is appropriated as personal income, and used for consumptive purposes by the owners of capital assets (see capital accumulation); in exceptional circumstances, part of it may also be hoarded in some way). In this context, surplus value can also be measured as the increase in the value of the stock of capital assets through an accounting period, prior to distribution.

Surplus-value can be viewed as a social relation of production, or as the monetary valuation of surplus-labour - a sort of "index" of the balance of power between social classes or nations in the process of the division of the social product.

Surplus-value can, in a developed capitalist economy, be viewed also as an indicator of the level of social productivity that has been reached by the working population, i.e. the net amount of value it can produce with its labour in excess of its own consumption requirements.

Measures of the rate of surplus value

According to Marx's theory of exploitation, living labour at an adequate level of productivity is able to create and conserve more value than it costs the employer to buy; which is exactly the economic reason why the employer buys it, i.e. to preserve and augment the value of the capital at his command. Thus, the surplus-labour is ''unpaid'' labour appropriated by employers in the form of work-time and outputs, on the basis that employers own and supply the means of production worked with. The commercial function of labour is only to conserve their value, add value to them, and transfer value.

According to Marx's labor theory of value, human labor is the only source of net new economic value, but is also indispensable for the conservation and transfer of economic value (maintenance and redistribution of capital assets). Asset revaluations according to this theory only ''redistribute'' claims to product-value which has already been created previously.

The ''rate of surplus-value'' in production is defined by Marx as the volume of surplus-value ''produced'' by the workforce divided by the variable capital (or labour-costs) expended to produce it (the ratio S/V). This is very roughly equivalent to the profits/wages ratio, though there is debate in Marxian economics about what exact profit and wage measures should be used. After all, total labour costs often involve far more than wage payments, and profits can be "grossed" and ""netted" in different ways.

Alternative measures Marx cites are:

surplus value divided by the value of labour-power,

surplus labour divided by necessary labour

[the value of] ''unpaid'' labour divided by [the value of] ''paid'' labour, expressible in hours worked or money units

the surplus product divided by necessary product. (see Das Kapital, vol. 1, chapter 28).

The five measures of the rate of surplus value mentioned do not all refer to the same thing exactly (see further rate of exploitation and surplus product). However, the basic meaning of the rate of surplus value is always the ''rate of exploitation of living labour-capacity'', i.e. the net capital yield obtained from the employment of living labour. Marx usually assumed in his models that the rate of surplus-value would be the same in all industries, different rates being equalised to a general norm in an open market for capital and labour. In reality, this is probably not the case, i.e. the rates may vary.

Some authors have interpreted this "rate of exploitation" as a purely economic or commercial concept (in the sense of "labor utilisation", the use of a resource) while others see it primarily as a moral or political concept referring to the domination of a social class which commands labour in virtue of ownership of capital assets.

Equalization of rates of surplus value

Marx believed that the long-term historical tendency would be for differences in rates of surplus value between enterprises and economic sectors to level out, as he explains in two places in ''Capital'' Vol. 3:

This is why he felt justified assuming a uniform rate of surplus value in his models of how surplus value would be shared out under competitive conditions.

Complicating factors in assessing surplus-value

Complicating factors in assessing surplus-value are:

state intermediation, where profit and wage income is taxed on the one side, and supplemented on the other with subsidies and grants of various kinds;

Backwardation of certain physical goods in which time and presence are drivers of price.

employee and employer contributions to social security and health schemes (wage costs and total labour costs may not be equal);

price inflation applying to wage goods, profit and capital goods;

creative accounting and tax avoidance or evasion techniques which misrepresent how much value has really been created.

income obtained from what Marx called "fictitious capital" or what now are often called "bubble" phenomena.

unsold inventories of net outputs which contain surplus-value.

These phenomena often make it difficult to calculate what the real net wage income is, and what the real net profit income is; there may be a very significant difference between gross income and disposable income.

In modern society, the complexity of transactions can often seem almost impenetrable or opaque. People may become less concerned with issues of ''exploitation'', rather their concern may just simply be with defending their entitlement to a secure real net income ("take home pay") from the work they do, or from any other source.

How the exchange between capital and labour happens to be viewed, depends greatly on the balance of power between employers and employees, and on the ability for all parties to the exchange to ''make gains'' from the trade in human labor. People would not usually trade unless they made a positive gain by it, but obviously the gains could be very unequally distributed among different parties to the trade. The more real net income capitalists and workers lose, the more concerned they become about fair exchange and exploitation.

Origin in trade

Surplus-value is not a fixed category but a dialectical, developing one, because the forms in which new value is created and appropriated, and the way the burdens of productive work are shifted between strata of the population, change over time. There is obviously a big difference between simple commodity producers exchanging agricultural surpluses in a village market, and "fast money" in today's global money markets.

Historically, Marx argues, surplus-value originated ''outside'' production in the first commercial forms of exchange - usury, merchant, rentier and bank capital and their associated lending operations. In fact, when Marx first introduces the concept of surplus value in Das Kapital, chapter 4, it is in the context of an analysis of "buying commodities in order to sell them at a profit", which he denotes as M-C-M' (see: ''Capital Vol. 1'', Penguin ed., p. 251). Thus, the first forms of surplus-value include (leaving aside extortion and robbery etc.) profits from simple commodity production, merchants' profit from "buying cheap and selling dear" or unequal exchange, certain types of rent imposed on production, and interest on loans extended by financiers, bankers and usurers. In Europe, "share" certificates of the joint-stock type date from the 16th century, although in some or other form share-type financial obligations already existed much earlier.

In ancient and feudal society, the ability to appropriate surplus-value from trade in commodities and capital was usually strongly regulated, and limited by the state and religious authorities; a universal market where almost everything could be bought and sold freely using money did not exist.

Originally, as Marx explicitly notes, commercial trade emerged at the boundaries of economic communities based on a ''non-capitalist'' mode of production, and it is only when commerce begins to dominate and regulate the bulk of production itself, that it becomes clearer that the ultimate source, or substance, of all surplus-value is really surplus-labour.

The processes whereby capitalist commerce conquers direct control of production (instigating the capitalist mode of production) are however very lengthy and complicated ones; all kinds of socio-economic obstacles ("market rigidities") must be cleared away, and new institutions created, before all the necessary factors of production can be freely bought and sold as inputs and outputs. A good example of that is modern China.

Appropriation from production

Both in Das Kapital and in preparatory manuscripts such as the ''Grundrisse'' and ''Results of the immediate process of production'', Marx shows how commerce by stages transforms a non-capitalist production process into a capitalist production process, integrating it fully into markets, so that all inputs and outputs become marketed goods or services. When that process is complete, the whole of production has become simultaneously a labor process creating use-values and a valorisation process creating new value, and more specifically a surplus-value appropriated as net income (see also capital accumulation).

In fact, Marx argues that the whole purpose of production in this situation becomes the growth of capital, i.e. that production of output becomes ''conditional'' on capital accumulation. If production becomes unprofitable, capital will be withdrawn from production sooner or later.

This means, systemically, that the main driving force of capitalism becomes the quest to maximise the appropriation of surplus-value augmenting the stock of capital. The overriding motive behind efforts to economise resources and labor is to obtain the maximum possible increase in income and capital assets ("business growth"), and provide a steady or growing return on investment.

Absolute vs. relative

According to Marx, ''absolute surplus value'' is obtained by increasing the amount of time worked per worker in an accounting period. Marx talks mainly about the length of the working day or week, but in modern times the concern is about the number of hours worked per year.

In many parts of the world, as productivity rose, the working classes forced a reduction in the workweek, from 60 hours to 50, 40 or 35 hours; but casualisation and flexibilisation of working hours also permits higher paid workers to work less (a fact of concern to statesmen who worry about international competitiveness, i.e. if we don't work harder our country will lose business).

''Relative surplus value'' is obtained mainly by:

reducing wages — this can only go to a certain point, because if wages fall below the ability of workers to purchase their means of subsistence, they will be unable to reproduce themselves and the capitalists will not be able to find sufficient labor power.

reducing the cost of wage-goods by various means, so that wage increases can be curbed.

increasing the productivity and intensity of labour generally, through mechanisation and rationalisation, yielding a bigger output per hour worked.

The attempt to extract more and more surplus-value from labor on the one side, and on the other side the resistance to this exploitation, are according to Marx at the core of the conflict between social classes, which is sometimes muted or hidden, but at other times erupts in open class warfare and class struggle.

Production versus realisation

Marx distinguished sharply between value and price, in part because of the sharp distinction he draws between the ''production of surplus-value'' and the ''realisation of profit income'' (see also value-form). Output may be ''produced'' containing surplus-value (valorisation), but ''selling'' that output (realisation) is not at all an automatic process.

Until payment from sales is received, it is uncertain how much of the surplus-value produced will actually be realised as profit from sales. So, the magnitude of ''profit realised'' in the form of money and the magnitude of ''surplus-value produced'' in the form of products may differ greatly, depending on what happens to market prices and the vagaries of supply and demand fluctuations. This insight forms the basis of Marx's theory of market value, prices of production and the tendency of the rate of profit of different enterprises to be levelled out by competition.

In his published and unpublished manuscripts, Marx went into great detail to examine many different factors which could affect the production and realisation of surplus-value. He regarded this as crucial for the purpose of understanding the dynamics and dimensions of capitalist competition, not just business competition but also competition between capitalists and workers and among workers themselves. But his analysis did not go much beyond specifying some of the overall outcomes of the process.

His main conclusion though is that employers will aim to maximise the productivity of labour and economise on the use of labour, to reduce their unit-costs and maximise their net returns from sales at current market prices; at a given ruling market price for an output, every reduction of costs and every increase in productivity and sales turnover will increase profit income for that output. The main method is ''mechanisation'', which raises the fixed capital outlay in investment.

In turn, this causes the unit-values of commodities to decline over time, and a ''decline of the average rate of profit'' in the sphere of production occurs, culminating in a crisis of capital accumulation, in which a sharp reduction in productive investments combines with mass unemployment, followed by an intensive rationalisation process of take-overs, mergers, fusions, and restructuring aiming to restore profitability.

Significance of the mass of surplus value

Most Marxist discussions focus on the ''rate'' of surplus value, but for businessmen, the growth of the ''mass'' of surplus-value, or the gross profit ''volume'' produced (denoted here as ''P'') is just as important, or even more important. After all, according to US Internal Revenue Service statistics, the money paid out to corporate officers is equal to about one-third of that paid out to ordinary employees. The growth of ''P'' depends on the growth of the volume of output in an accounting period, and the volume of sales turnover.

We can illustrate the point with a simplified example. If:

''K'' = total capital invested

''P'' = total net profit volume realised

''r'' = the rate of profit (i.e. ''P/K''),

and assuming (perhaps unrealistically) that a sum equal to ''P'' is ''reinvested'' (with or without the aid of credit) with zero price inflation, we can construct a series of annual business results, starting off with ''K''= 1 million and ''r'' = 10% where the ''profit rate declines'' by a constant 0.1% per annum:

year 1: ''K'' = 1,000,000; ''P'' = 100,000; ''r'' = 10%

year 2: ''K'' = 1,100,000; ''P'' = 108,900; ''r'' = 9.9%

year 3: ''K'' = 1,208,900; ''P'' = 118,472; ''r'' = 9.8%

We see here that within two years at least, an 18.5% increase in annual profit ''volume'' has occurred, even though the rate of profit ''decreased'' by 0.2%. In other words, there's nearly ''one-fifth more income'' to disperse among the owners of the capital, although the rate of profit return slightly fell .

What this simplistic example really implies is that, provided market sales keep growing and business expands, a slight fall in the profit rate on capital may not be a point of concern. After all, capital assets have grown, but more importantly, the total volume of ''revenue'' that can be distributed has grown.

However, if the total profit volume created in a capitalist economy stops growing, this becomes a real problem (as highlighted by Henryk Grossman). Because in that case, profitability must fall across the board, and business income is reduced everywhere.

In some Marxist crisis theories (e.g. by Henryk Grossmann, Louis C. Fraina and Paul Mattick), the root ''cause'' of economic crisis is precisely that the growth of profit ''volume'' is eclipsed by the decline of the profit ''rate'' in production, the result being that the total profit volume that can be distributed stagnates or falls.

The overall implication is that ''market expansion'' is critical for the total ''volume'' of surplus-value that can be distributed as profit. Total business income can increase, even although the profit rate on capital invested falls, if markets keep growing. The logical outcome of that is globalisation, i.e. the systematic removal of all barriers to trade worldwide to facilitate market expansion.

Relation to taxation

In general, business leaders and investors are hostile to any attempts to encroach on total profit volume, especially those of government taxation. The lower taxes are, other things being equal, the bigger the mass of profit that can be distributed as income to private investors. It was ''tax revolts'' that originally were a powerful stimulus motivating the bourgeoisie to wrest state power from the feudal aristocracy at the beginning of the capitalist era.

In reality, of course, a substantial portion of tax money is also ''redistributed'' to private enterprise in the form of government contracts and subsidies. Capitalists may therefore be in conflict among themselves about taxes, since what is a cost to some, is a source of profit to others. Marx never analysed all this in detail; but the concept of surplus value will apply mainly to taxes on gross income (personal and business income from production) and on the trade in products & services. Estate duty for example rarely contains a surplus value component, although profit could be earned in the transfer of the estate.

Generally, Marx seems to have regarded taxation imposts as a "form" which disguised real product ''values''. Apparently following this view, Ernest Mandel in his 1960 treatise ''Marxist Economic Theory'' refers to (indirect) taxes as "arbitrary additions to commodity prices". But this is something of a misnomer, and disregards that taxes become part of the normal cost-structure of production. In his later treatise on late capitalism, Mandel astonishingly hardly mentions the significance of taxation at all, a very serious omission from the point of view of the real world of modern capitalism since taxes can reach a magnitude of a third, or even half of GDP (see E. Mandel, ''Late Capitalism''. London: Verso, 1975)

Relation to the circuits of capital

Generally, Marx focused in Das Kapital on the new surplus-value generated by production, and the distribution of this surplus value. In this way, he aimed to reveal the "origin of the wealth of nations" given a capitalist mode of production. However, in any real economy, a distinction must be drawn between the primary circuit of capital, and the secondary circuits. To some extent, national accounts also do this.

The primary circuit refers to the incomes and products generated and distributed from productive activity (reflected by GDP). The secondary circuits refer to trade, transfers and transactions occurring ''outside'' that sphere, which can also generate incomes, and these incomes may also involve the realisation of a surplus-value or profit.

It is true that Marx argues no net additions to value can be created through acts of exchange, economic value being an attribute of labour-products (previous or newly created) only. Nevertheless trading activity outside the sphere of production can obviously also yield a surplus-value which represents a ''transfer'' of value from one person, country or institution to another.

A very simple example would be if somebody sold a second-hand asset at a profit. This transaction is not recorded in gross product measures (after all, it isn't new production), nevertheless a surplus-value is obtained from it. Another example would be capital gains from property sales. Marx occasionally refers to this kind of profit as ''profit upon alienation'', alienation being used here in the juridical, not sociological sense. By implication, if we just focused on surplus-value newly created in production, we would ''underestimate'' total surplus-values ''realised as income'' in a country. This becomes obvious if we compare census estimates of income & expenditure with GDP data.

This is another reason why surplus-value ''produced'' and surplus-value ''realised'' are two different things, although this point is largely ignored in the economics literature. But it becomes highly important when the real growth of production stagnates, and a growing portion of capital shifts out of the sphere of production in search of surplus-value from other deals.

Nowadays the volume of world trade grows significantly faster than GDP, suggesting to Marxian economists such as Samir Amin that surplus-value realised from commercial trade (representing to a large extent a transfer of value by intermediaries between producers and consumers) grows faster than surplus-value realised directly from production.

Thus, if we took the final price of a good (the cost to the final consumer) and analysed the cost structure of that good, we might find that, over a period of time, the direct producers get less income and intermediaries between producers and consumers (traders) get more income from it. That is, control over the ''access'' to a good, asset or resource as such may increasingly become a very important factor in realising a surplus-value. In the worst case, this amounts to parasitism or extortion. This analysis illustrates a key feature of surplus value which is that it accumulated by the owners of capital only within ''inefficient'' markets because only inefficient markets - i.e. those in which transparency and competition are low - have profit margins large enough to facilitate capital accumulation. Ironically, profitable - meaning inefficient - markets have difficulty meeting the definition a free market because a free market is to some extent defined as an efficient one: one in which goods or services are exchanged without coercion or fraud, or in other words with competition (to prevent monopolistic coercion) and transparency (to prevent fraud).

Measurement

The first attempt to measure the rate of surplus-value in money-units was by Marx himself in chapter 9 of Das Kapital, using factory data of a spinning mill supplied by Friedrich Engels (though Marx credits "a Manchester spinner"). Both in published and unpublished manuscripts, Marx examines variables affecting the rate and mass of surplus-value in detail.

Some Marxian economists argue that Marx thought the possibility of measuring surplus value depends on the publicly available data. We can develop statistical ''indicators'' of trends, without mistakenly conflating data with the real thing they represent, or postulating "perfect measurements or perfect data" in the empiricist manner. If theory is not disciplined by valid data, it becomes metaphysical, rather than being scientific.

Since the pioneering studies by Marxian economists like Eugen Varga, Charles Bettelheim, Joseph Gillmann, Edward Wolff and Shane Mage, there have been numerous attempts by Marxian economists to measure the trend in surplus-value statistically using national accounts data. The most convincing modern attempt is probably that of Professors Anwar Shaikh & Ahmet Tonak .

Usually this type of research involves reworking the components of the official measures of gross output and capital outlays to approximate Marxian categories, in order to estimate empirically the trends in the ratios thought important in the Marxian explanation of capital accumulation and economic growth: the rate of surplus-value, the organic composition of capital, the rate of profit, the rate of increase in the capital stock, and the rate of reinvestment of realised surplus-value in production.

The Marxian mathematicians Emmanuel Farjoun and Moshé Machover argue that "even if the rate of surplus value has changed by 10-20% over a hundred years, the real problem [to explain] is why it has changed so little" (quoted from ''The Laws of Chaos; A Probabilistic Approach to Political Economy'' (1983), p. 192). The answer to that question must, in part, be sought in artifacts (statistical distortion effects) of data collection procedures. Mathematical extrapolations are ultimately based on the data available, but that data itself may be fragmentary and not the "complete picture".

Experienced financial analysts are, however, liable to shake their heads at these kinds of Marxian empirical estimates from official data. As regards total ''profit'' volume, statisticians use survey data, administrative records, and tax data to estimate it, consistent with a standard definition of gross product and capital transactions. But this may include or exclude items at variance with real business practice. Some types of transactions are disregarded, while imputations are made for other transactions. Almost always tax data is the main source of generic profit estimates, but tax data typically understate true profitability.

Or, if the rate of profit is measured as a ratio between the total profit component in value added and fixed capital, what is ignored is that capital assets include more than fixed assets, and that profit income includes more than the value added component. So to assess profit volume or profitability, really the problem has to be looked at using a variety of different ''measures'' and a variety of difference ''sources'' (national accounts data, tax data, direct surveys, company reports and circumstantial evidence).

As against that, it can also be shown statistically that most time series of different profit measures from different sources will show the same historical ''trends'' (see e.g. the research by Dumenil & Levy).

Different conceptions

In neo-Marxist thought, Paul A. Baran for example substitutes the concept of "economic surplus" for Marx's surplus value. In a joint work, Paul Baran and Paul Sweezy define the economic surplus as "the difference between what a society produces and the costs of producing it" (''Monopoly Capitalism'', New York 1966, p. 9). Much depends here on how the costs are valued, and which costs are taken into account. Piero Sraffa also refers to a "physical surplus" with a similar meaning, calculated according to the relationship between prices of physical inputs and outputs.

In these theories, surplus product and surplus value are equated, while value and price are identical, but the ''distribution'' of the surplus tends to be separated theoretically from its ''production''; whereas Marx insists that the distribution of wealth is governed by the social conditions in which it is ''produced'', especially by property relations giving entitlement to products, incomes and assets (see also relations of production).

In Capital Vol. 3, Marx insists strongly that

This is a substantive - if abstract - thesis about the basic social relations involved in giving and getting, taking and receiving in human society, and their consequences for the way work and wealth is shared out. It suggests a ''starting point'' for an inquiry into the problem of social order and social change. But obviously it is ''only'' a starting point, not the whole story, which would include all the "variations and gradations".

Morality and power of surplus value

A typical textbook-type example of an alternative interpretation to Marx's is provided by Lester Thurow. He argues in an ''Concise Encyclopedia of Economics'' article: "In a capitalistic society, profits - and losses - hold center stage." But what, he asks, explains profits?

There are ''five'' reasons for profit, according to Thurow:

capitalists are willing to delay their own personal gratification, and profit is their reward.

some profits are a return to those who take risks.

some profits are a return to organizational ability, enterprise, and entrepreneurial energy

some profits are economic rents - a firm that has a monopoly in producing some product or service can set a price higher than would be set in a competitive market and, thus, earn higher than normal returns.

some profits are due to market imperfections - they arise when goods are traded above their competitive equilibrium price.

The problem here is that Thurow doesn't really provide an objective explanation of profits so much as a moral justification for profits, i.e. as a legitimate entitlement or claim, in return for the supply of capital.

He adds that "Attempts have been made to organize productive societies without the profit motive (...) [but] since the industrial revolution... there have been essentially no successful economies that have not taken advantage of the profit motive." The problem here is again a moral judgement, dependent on what you mean by success. Some societies using the profit motive were ruined; profit is no guarantee of success, although you can say that it has powerfully stimulated economic growth.

Thurow goes on to note that "When it comes to actually measuring profits, some difficult accounting issues arise." Why? Because after deduction of costs from gross income, "It is hard to say exactly how much must be reinvested to maintain the size of the capital stock". Ultimately, Thurow implies, the tax department is the arbiter of the profit volume, because it determines depreciation allowances and other costs which capitalists may annually deduct in calculating taxable gross income.

This is obviously a theory very different from Marx's. In Thurow's theory, the aim of business is to ''maintain'' the capital stock. In Marx's theory, competition, desire and market fluctuations create the striving and pressure to ''increase'' the capital stock; the whole aim of capitalist production is capital accumulation, i.e. business growth maximising net income. Marx argues there is no evidence that the ''profit'' accruing to capitalist owners is ''quantitatively connected'' to the "productive contribution" of the capital they own. In practice, within the capitalist firm, no standard procedure exists for measuring such a "productive contribution" and for distributing the residual income accordingly.

In Thurow's theory, profit is mainly just "something that happens" when costs are deducted from sales, or else a ''justly deserved'' income. For Marx, increasing profits is, at least in the longer term, the "bottom line" of business behaviour: the quest for obtaining extra surplus-value, and the incomes obtained from it, are what guides capitalist development (in modern language, "creating maximum shareholder value").

That quest, Marx notes, always involves a power relationship between different social classes and nations, inasmuch as attempts are made to force ''other'' people to pay for costs as much as possible, while maximising one's own entitlement or claims to ''income'' from economic activity. The clash of economic interests that invariably results, implies that the battle for surplus value will always involve an irreducible moral dimension; the whole process rests on complex system of negotiations, dealing and bargaining in which reasons for claims to wealth are asserted, usually within a legal framework and sometimes through wars. Underneath it all, Marx argues, was an exploitative relationship.

That was the main reason why, Marx argues, the real sources of surplus-value were shrouded or obscured by ideology, and why Marx thought that political economy merited a critique. Quite simply, economics proved unable to theorise capitalism as a ''social system'', at least not without moral biases intruding in the very ''definition'' of its conceptual distinctions. Hence, even the most simple economic concepts were often riddled with contradictions. But market trade could function fine, even if the ''theory'' of markets was false; all that was required was an agreed and legally enforceable accounting system. On this point, Marx probably would have agreed with Austrian school economics -no knowledge of "markets in general" is required to participate in markets.

See also

References

''Theories of Surplus-Value'' (1863)

''Value, Price and Profit'' (1865)

''Capital'', Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3

Anwar Shaikh & Ahmet Tonak, ''Measuring the Wealth of Nations''

Anwar Shaikh papers

G.A. Cohen (1988), ''History, Labour and Freedom: Themes from Marx'', Oxford University Press

Shane Mage, ''The Law of the Falling Tendency of the Rate of Profit; Its Place in the Marxian Theoretical System and Relevance to the US Economy''. Phd Thesis, Columbia University, 1963.

Fred Moseley papers:

Gerard Dumenil & Dominique Levy papers

Steve Keen, ''Debunking Economics; The Naked Emperor of the Social Sciences''. London: Zed Press, 2004.Economics: Debunking Economics Overview

Emmanuel Farjoun and Moshe Machover, ''Laws of Chaos; A Probabilistic Approach to Political Economy'', London: Verso, 1983.

Ian Wright, iwright - Probabilistic Political Economy "Laws of Chaos" in the 21st Century.

Ernest Mandel, Marxist Economic Theory, Vol. 1 and Late Capitalism.

Harry W. Pearson, "The economy has no surplus" in "Trade and market in the early empires. Economies in history and theory", edited by Karl Polanyi, Conrad M. Arensberg and Harry W. Pearson (New York/London: The Free Press: Collier-Macmillan, 1957).

Paul A. Baran, The Political Economy of Growth.

Piero Sraffa, ''Production of Commodities by means of commodities''.

Michal Kalecki, "The Determinants of Profits", in ''Selected Essays on the Dynamics of the Capitalist Economy 1933-1970''.

John B. Davis (ed), The economic surplus in advanced economies. Aldershot, Hants, England/Brookfield, Vt., USA : Elgar, 1992.

Anders Danielson, The economic surplus : theory, measurement, applications. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger, 1994.

Helen Boss, Theories of surplus and transfer : parasites and producers in economic thought. Boston: Hyman, 1990.

External links

'The Concepts of Alienation and Surplus-value, a Brief Look' (Archive.org)

Category:Value theory Category:Marxist theory Category:Value

ar:فائض القيمة ca:Plusvàlua cs:Nadhodnota da:Merværdi de:Mehrwert (Marxismus) es:Plusvalor eo:Plusvaloro fr:Plus-value (marxisme) gl:Plusvalor it:Valore aggiunto he:ערך עודף של יצרן la:Plusvalor nl:Meerwaarde ja:剰余価値 pl:Wartość dodana pt:Mais-valia sk:Nadhodnota sl:Presežna vrednost sr:Вишак вредности fi:Lisäarvo sv:Mervärde tr:Artı değer vi:Giá trị thặng dư zh:剩余价值

Region	Western Philosophy, German philosophy
Era	19th century philosophy
Color	#B0C4DE
Name	Karl Heinrich Marx
Birth date	5 May 1818
Birth place	Trier, Kingdom of Prussia
Death date	March 14, 1883 (bronchitis/pleurisy)
Death place	London, United Kingdom
Religion	Protestantism; later, none (atheist)
School tradition	Marxism, Communism, Socialism, Hegelianism
Signature	Karl Marx Signature.svg
Main interests	Politics, economics, philosophy, sociology, labour, history, class struggle
Influences	Hegel, Feuerbach, Spinoza, Proudhon, Stirner, Smith, Voltaire, Ricardo, Vico, Rousseau, Goethe, Helvetius, d'Holbach, Shakespeare, Dante, Chaucer, Fourier, Robert Owen, Balcescu, Hess, Hupay, Guizot
Influenced	Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, Tito, Hoxha, Castro, Guevara, Ceaușescu, Ho, Christofias, Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, Luxemburg, Lukács, Gramsci, Korsch, Kropotkin, Bakunin, Chomsky, Bookchin, Arendt, Marcuse, Lyotard, Tzara, Foucault, Deleuze, Debord, Frankfurt School, Negri, Taussig, Roy and others
Notable ideas	Co-founder of Marxism (with Engels), surplus value, contributions to the labor theory of value, alienation and exploitation of the worker, ''The Communist Manifesto,'' ''Das Kapital,'' materialist conception of history |}}

Karl Heinrich Marx (5 May 1818 – 14 March 1883) was a German philosopher, sociologist, economic historian, journalist, and revolutionary socialist who developed the socio-political theory of Marxism. His ideas have since played a significant role in the development of social science and the socialist political movement. He published various books during his lifetime, with the most notable being ''The Communist Manifesto'' (1848) and ''Capital'' (1867–1894), many of which were co-written with his friend, the fellow German revolutionary socialist Friedrich Engels.

Born into a wealthy middle class family in Trier, Prussia, Marx went on to study at both the University of Bonn and the University of Berlin, where he became interested in the philosophical ideas of the Young Hegelians. In 1836, he became engaged to Jenny von Westphalen, marrying her in 1843. Following the completion of his studies, he became a journalist in Cologne, writing for a radical newspaper, the ''Rheinische Zeitung'', where he began to use Hegelian concepts of dialectical materialism to influence his ideas on socialism. Moving to Paris in 1843, he began writing for other radical newspapers, the ''Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher'' and ''Vorwärts!'', as well as writing a series of books, several of which were co-written with Engels. Exiled to Brussels in Belgium in 1845, he became a leading figure of the Communist League, before moving back to Cologne, where he founded his own newspaper, the ''Neue Rheinische Zeitung''. Exiled once more, in 1849 he moved to London together with his wife Jenny and their children. In London, where the family was reduced to poverty, Marx continued writing and formulating his theories about the nature of society and how he believed it could be improved, as well as campaigning for socialism and becoming a significant figure in the International Workingmen's Association.

Marx's theories about society, economics and politics, which are collectively known as Marxism, hold that all societies progress through the dialectic of class struggle. He was heavily critical of the current socio-economic form of society, capitalism, which he called the "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie", believing it to be run by the wealthy middle and upper classes purely for their own benefit, and predicted that, like previous socioeconomic systems, it would inevitably produce internal tensions which would lead to its self-destruction and replacement by a new system, socialism. Under socialism, he argued that society would be governed by the working class in what he called the "dictatorship of the proletariat", the "workers state" or "workers' democracy". He believed that socialism would, in its turn, eventually be replaced by a stateless, classless society called pure communism. Along with believing in the inevitability of socialism and communism, Marx actively fought for the former's implementation, arguing that both social theorists and underprivileged people should carry out organised revolutionary action to topple capitalism and bring about socio-economic change.

While Marx remained a relatively unknown figure in his own lifetime, his ideas and the ideology of Marxism began to exert a major influence on socialist movements shortly after his death. Revolutionary socialist governments following Marxist concepts took power in a variety of countries in the 20th century, leading to the formation of such socialist states as the Soviet Union in 1922 and the People's Republic of China in 1949, whilst various theoretical variants, such as Leninism, Stalinism, Trotskyism and Maoism, were developed. Marx is typically cited, with Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, as one of the three principal architects of modern social science. Marx has been described as one of the most influential figures in human history, and in a 1999 BBC poll was voted the "thinker of the millennium" by people from around the world.

Biography

Early life: 1818–1835

Karl Heinrich Marx was born on 5 May 1818 at 664 Brückergasse in Trier, a town located in the Kingdom of Prussia's Province of the Lower Rhine. His ancestry was Jewish, with his paternal line having supplied the rabbis of Trier since 1723, a role that had been taken up by his own grandfather, Merier Halevi Marx; Merier's son and Karl's father would be the first in the line to receive a secular education. His maternal grandfather was a Dutch rabbi. Karl's father, Hirschel Marx, was middle-class and relatively prosperous, owning a number of Moselle vineyards; he converted from Judaism to the Protestant Christian denomination of Lutheranism prior to his son's birth, taking on the German forename of Heinrich over Hirschel. In 1815, he began working as an attorney and in 1819 moved his family from a five-room rented apartment into a ten-room property near the Porta Nigra. A man of the Enlightenment, Heinrich Marx was interested in the ideas of the philosophers Immanuel Kant and Voltaire, and took part in agitations for a constitution and reforms in Prussia, which was then governed by an absolute monarchy. Karl's mother, born Henrietta Pressburg, was a Dutch Jew who, unlike her husband, was only semi-literate. She claimed to suffer from "excessive mother love", devoting much time to her family, and insisting on cleanliness within her home. She was from a prosperous business family. Her family later founded the company Philips Electronics: she was great-aunt to Anton and Gerard Philips, and great-great-aunt to Frits Philips.

Little is known about Karl Marx's childhood. He was privately educated until 1830, when he entered Trier High School, which was then run by the headmaster Hugo Wyttenbach, a friend of his father. Wyttenbach had employed many liberal humanists as teachers, something which angered the government, and so the police raided the school in 1832, discovering what they labelled seditious literature espousing political liberalism being distributed amongst the students. In 1835, Karl, then aged seventeen, began attending the University of Bonn, where he wished to study philosophy and literature, but his father insisted on law as a more practical field of study. He was able to avoid military service when he turned eighteen because he suffered from a weak chest. Being fond of alcoholic beverages, at Bonn he joined the Trier Tavern Club drinking society (''Landsmannschaft der Treveraner'') and at one point served as its co-president. Marx was more interested in drinking and socialising than studying law, and due to his poor grades, his father forced him to transfer to the far more serious and academically oriented University of Berlin, where his legal studies became less significant than excursions into philosophy and history.

Hegelianism and early activism: 1836–1843

In 1836, Marx became engaged to Jenny von Westphalen, a baroness of the Prussian ruling class who broke off her engagement with a young aristocratic second lieutenant in order to be with him. Their eventual marriage was controversial for breaking three social taboos of the period; it was a marriage between a daughter of a noble background and a man of Jewish origin as well as being between individuals who belonged to the middle and upper class (aristocracy), respectively, and between a man and an older woman. Such issues were lessened by Marx's friendship with Jenny's father, Baron Ludwig von Westphalen, a liberal thinking aristocrat. Marx dedicated his doctoral thesis to him. The couple married seven years later, on 19 June 1843, at the ''Pauluskirche'' in Bad Kreuznach.

Marx became interested in, but critical of, the work of the German philosopher G.W.F Hegel (1770–1831), whose ideas were widely debated amongst European philosophical circles at the time. Marx wrote about falling ill "from intense vexation at having to make an idol of a view I detested." He became involved with a group of radical thinkers known as the Young Hegelians, who gathered around Ludwig Feuerbach and Bruno Bauer. Like Marx, the Young Hegelians were critical of Hegel's metaphysical assumptions, but still adopted his dialectical method in order to criticise established society, politics and religion. Marx befriended Bauer, and in July 1841 the two scandalised their class in Bonn by getting drunk, laughing in church, and galloping through the streets on donkeys. During that period, Marx concentrated on his criticism of Hegel and certain other Young Hegelians.

Marx also wrote for his own enjoyment, writing both non-fiction and fiction. In 1837, he completed a short novel, ''Scorpion and Felix''; a drama, ''Oulanem''; and some poems; none of which were published. He soon gave up writing fiction for other pursuits, including learning English and Italian.

He was deeply engaged in writing his doctoral thesis, ''The Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature'', which he finished in 1841. The essay has been described as "a daring and original piece of work in which he set out to show that theology must yield to the superior wisdom of philosophy", and as such was controversial, particularly among the conservative professors at the University of Berlin. Marx decided to submit it instead to the more liberal University of Jena, whose faculty awarded him his PhD based on it.

From considering an academic career, Marx turned to journalism. He moved to the city of Cologne in 1842, where he began writing for the radical newspaper ''Rheinische Zeitung'', where he expressed his increasingly socialist views on politics. He criticised the governments of Europe and their policies, but also liberals and other members of the socialist movement whose ideas he thought were ineffective or outright anti-socialist. The paper eventually attracted the attention of the Prussian government censors, who checked every issue for potentially seditious material before it could be printed. Marx said, "Our newspaper has to be presented to the police to be sniffed at, and if the police nose smells anything un-Christian or un-Prussian, the newspaper is not allowed to appear." After the paper published an article strongly criticising the monarchy in Russia, the Russian Tsar Nicholas I, an ally of the Prussian monarchy, requested that the ''Rheinische Zeitung'' be banned. The Prussian government shut down the paper in 1843. Marx wrote for the Young Hegelian journal, the ''Deutsche Jahrbücher'', in which he criticised the censorship instructions issued by Prussian King Friedrich Wilhelm IV. His article was censored and the newspaper closed down by the authorities shortly after.

In 1843, Marx published ''On the Jewish Question'', in which he distinguished between political and human emancipation. He also examined the role of religious practice in society. That same year he published ''Contribution to Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right'', in which he dealt more substantively with religion, describing it as "the opiate of the people". He completed both works shortly before leaving Cologne.

Paris: 1843–1845

Following the government-imposed shutdown of the ''Rheinische Zeitung'', Marx got involved with a new radical newspaper, the ''Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher'' (''German-French Annals''), which was then being set up by Arnold Ruge, another German socialist revolutionary. The paper was based not in Germany, but in the city of Paris in neighbouring France, and it was here that both Marx and his wife moved in October 1843. They initially lived with Ruge and his wife communally at 23 Rue Vaneau, but finding these living conditions difficult, the Marxes moved out following the birth of their daughter Jenny in 1844. Although it was intended to attract writers from both France and the German states, the ''Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher'' was dominated by the latter, with the only non-German writer being the exiled Russian anarcho-communist Michael Bakunin. Only one issue was ever published, but it was relatively successful, largely due to the inclusion of Heinrich Heine's satirical odes on King Ludwig of Bavaria, which led to those copies sent to Germany being confiscated by the state's police force.

It was in Paris that, on 28 August 1844, Marx met German socialist Friedrich Engels at the Café de la Régence after becoming interested in the ideas that the latter had expressed in articles written for the ''Rheinische Zeitung'' and the ''Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher''. Although they had briefly met each other at the offices of the ''Rheinische Zeitung'' in 1842, it was here in Paris that they began their friendship that would last for the rest of their lives. Engels showed Marx his recently published book, ''The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844'', which convinced Marx that the working class would be the agent and instrument of the final revolution in history. Engels and Marx soon set about writing a criticism of the philosophical ideas of Marx's former friend, the Young Hegelian Bruno Bauer, which would be published in 1845 as ''The Holy Family''. Although critical of Bauer, Marx was increasingly influenced by the ideas of the other Young Hegelians Max Stirner and Ludwig Feuerbach, but eventually also abandoned Feuerbachian materialism as well.

In 1844 Marx wrote ''The Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts'', a work which covered numerous topics, and went into detail to explain Marx's concept of alienated labour. A year later Marx would write ''Theses on Feuerbach'', best known for the statement that "the philosophers have only interpreted the world, the point is to change it". This work contains Marx's criticism of materialism (for being contemplative), idealism (for reducing practice to theory) and overall, criticising philosophy for putting abstract reality above the physical world. It thus introduced the first glimpse at Marx's historical materialism, an argument that the world is changed not by ideas but by actual, physical, material activity and practice.

After the collapse of the ''Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher'', Marx, still living on the Rue Vaneau, began writing for what was then the only uncensored German-language radical newspaper in Europe, ''Vorwärts!''. Based in Paris, the paper had been established and was run by many activists connected to the revolutionary socialist League of the Just, which would come to be better known as the Communist League within a few years. In ''Vorwärts!'', Marx continued to refine his views on socialism based upon the Hegelian and Feurbachian ideas of dialectical materialism, whilst at the same time criticising various liberals and other socialists operating in Europe at the time. However in 1845, after receiving a request from the Prussian king, the French government agreed to shut down ''Vorwärts!'', and furthermore, Marx himself was expelled from France by the interior minister François Guizot.

Brussels: 1845–1847

Unable either to stay in France or move to Germany, Marx decided to emigrate to Brussels in Belgium, but had to pledge not to publish anything on the subject of contemporary politics in order to enter. In Brussels, he associated with other exiled socialists from across Europe, including Moses Hess, Karl Heinzen and Joseph Weydemeyer, and soon Engels moved to the city in order to join them. In 1845 Marx and Engels visited the leaders of the Chartists, a socialist movement in Britain, using the trip as an opportunity to study in various libraries in London and Manchester. In collaboration with Engels he also set about writing a book which is often seen as his best treatment of the concept of historical materialism, ''The German Ideology''; the work, like many others, would not see publication in Marx's lifetime, only being published in 1932. He followed this with ''The Poverty of Philosophy'' (1847), a response to the French anarcho-socialist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's ''The Philosophy of Poverty'' and a critique of French socialist thought in general.

These books laid the foundation for Marx and Engels's most famous work, a political pamphlet that has since come to be commonly known as ''The Communist Manifesto''. First published on 21 February 1848, it laid out the beliefs of the Communist League, a group who had come increasingly under the influence of Marx and Engels, who argued that the League must make their aims and intentions clear to the general public rather than hiding them as they had formerly been doing. The opening lines of the pamphlet set forth the principal basis of Marxism, that "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." It goes on to look at the antagonisms that Marx claimed were arising between the clashes of interest between the bourgeoisie (the wealthy middle class) and the proletariat (the industrial working class). Proceeding on from this, the ''Manifesto'' presents the argument for why the Communist League, as opposed to other socialist and liberal political parties and groups at the time, was truly acting in the interests of the proletariat to overthrow capitalist society and replace it with socialism.

Later that year, Europe experienced a series of protests, rebellions, and often violent upheavals, the Revolutions of 1848. In France, a revolution led to the overthrow of the monarchy and the establishment of the French Second Republic. Marx was supportive of such activity, and having recently received a substantial inheritance from his father of either 6000 or 5000 francs, allegedly used a third of it to arm Belgian workers who were planning revolutionary action. Although the veracity of these allegations is disputed, the Belgian Ministry of Justice accused him of it, subsequently arresting him, and he was forced to flee back to France, where, with a new republican government in power, he believed that he would be safe.

Cologne: 1848-1849

Temporarily settling down in Paris, Marx transferred the Communist League executive headquarters to the city and also set up a German Workers' Club with various German socialists living there. Hoping to see the revolution spread to Germany, in 1848 Marx moved back to Cologne where he began issuing a handbill entitled the ''Demands of the Communist Party in Germany'', in which he argued for only four of the ten points of the ''Communist Manifesto'', believing that in Germany at that time, the bourgeoisie must overthrow the feudal monarchy and aristocracy before the proletariat could overthrow the bourgeoisie. On 1 June, Marx started publication of the daily ''Neue Rheinische Zeitung'' ("New Rhenish Newspaper"), which he helped to finance through his recent inheritance from his father. Designed to put forward news from across Europe with his own Marxist interpretation of events, Marx remained one of its primary writers, accompanied by other fellow members of the Communist League who wrote for the paper, although despite their input it remained, according to Friedrich Engels, "a simple dictatorship by Marx", who dominated the choice of content.

Whilst editor of the paper, Marx and the other revolutionary socialists were regularly harassed by the police, and Marx was brought to trial on several occasions, facing various allegations including insulting the Chief Public Prosecutor, an alleged press misdemeanor and inciting armed rebellion through tax boycotting, although each time he was acquitted. Meanwhile, the democratic parliament in Prussia collapsed, and the king, Frederick William IV, introduced a new cabinet of his reactionary supporters, who implemented counter-revolutionary measures to expunge leftist and other revolutionary elements from the country. As a part of this, the ''Neue Rheinische Zeitung'' was soon suppressed and Marx was ordered to leave the country on 16 May. Marx returned to Paris, which was then under the grip of both a reactionary counter-revolution and a cholera epidemic, and was soon expelled by the city authorities who considered him a political threat. With his wife Jenny expecting their fourth child, and not able to move back to Germany or Belgium, in August 1849 he sought refuge in London.

London: 1849–1883

Marx moved to London in May 1849 and would remain in the city for the rest of his life. It was here that he founded the new headquarters of the Communist League, and got heavily involved with the socialist German Workers' Educational Society, who held their meetings in Great Windmill Street, Soho, central London's entertainment district. Marx devoted himself to two activities: revolutionary organising, and an attempt to understand political economy and capitalism. For the first few years he and his family lived in extreme poverty. His main source of income was his colleague, Engels, who derived much of his income from his family's business. Marx also briefly worked as correspondent for the ''New York Tribune'' in 1851.

From December 1851 to March 1852 Marx wrote ''The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon'', a work on the French Revolution of 1848, in which he expanded upon his concepts of historical materialism, class struggle and the dictatorship of the proletariat, advancing the argument that victorious proletariat has to smash the bourgeois state.

The 1850s and 1860s also marks the line between what some scholars see as idealistic, Hegelian young Marx from the more scientifically-minded mature Marx writings of the later period. This distinction is usually associated with the structural Marxism school. Nor do all scholars agree that it indeed exists.

In 1864 Marx became involved in the International Workingmen's Association (also known as ''First International''). He became a leader of its General Council, to whose General Council he was elected at its inception in 1864. In that organisation Marx was involved in the struggle against the anarchist wing centred around Mikhail Bakunin (1814–1876). Although Marx won this contest, the transfer of the seat of the General Council from London to New York in 1872, which Marx supported, led to the decline of the International. The most important political event during the existence of the International was the ''Paris Commune of 1871'' when the citizens of Paris rebelled against their government and held the city for two months. On the bloody suppression of this rebellion, Marx wrote one of his most famous pamphlets, ''The Civil War in France'', a defense of the Commune.

Given the repeated failures and frustrations of workers' revolutions and movements, Marx also sought to understand capitalism, and spent a great deal of time in the reading room of the British Museum studying and reflecting on the works of political economists and on economic data. By 1857 he had accumulated over 800 pages of notes and short essays on capital, landed property, wage labour, the state, foreign trade and the world market; this work did not appear in print until 1941, under the title ''Grundrisse''. In 1859, Marx published ''Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy'', his first serious economic work. In the early 1860s he worked on composing three large volumes, the ''Theories of Surplus Value'', which discussed the theoreticians of political economy, particularly Adam Smith and David Ricardo. This work is often seen as the fourth book of ''Capital'', and constitutes one of the first comprehensive treatises on the history of economic thought. In 1867 the first volume of ''Capital'' was published, a work which analyzed the capitalist process of production. Here, Marx elaborated his labour theory of value and his conception of surplus value and exploitation which he argued would ultimately lead to a falling rate of profit and the collapse of industrial capitalism. Volumes II and III remained mere manuscripts upon which Marx continued to work for the rest of his life and were published posthumously by Engels.

During the last decade of his life, Marx's health declined and he became incapable of the sustained effort that had characterised his previous work. He did manage to comment substantially on contemporary politics, particularly in Germany and Russia. His ''Critique of the Gotha Programme'' opposed the tendency of his followers Wilhelm Liebknecht and August Bebel to compromise with the state socialism of Ferdinand Lassalle in the interests of a united socialist party. This work is also notable for another famous Marx's quote: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

In a letter to Vera Zasulich dated 8 March 1881, Marx even contemplated the possibility of Russia's bypassing the capitalist stage of development and building communism on the basis of the common ownership of land characteristic of the village ''mir''. While admitting that Russia's rural "commune is the fulcrum of social regeneration in Russia", Marx also warned that in order for the mir to operate as a means for moving straight to the socialist stage without a preceding capitalist stage, it "would first be necessary to eliminate the deleterious influences which are assailing it (the rural commune) from all sides." Given the elimination of these pernicious influences, Marx allowed, that "normal conditions of spontaneous development" of the rural commune could exist. However, in the same letter to Vera Zaulich, Marx points out that "at the core of the capitalist system ... lies the complete separation of the producer from the means of production."

Death

Following the death of his wife Jenny in December 1881, Marx developed a catarrh that kept him in ill health for the last 15 months of his life. It eventually brought on the bronchitis and pleurisy that killed him in London on 14 March 1883. He died a stateless person; family and friends in London buried his body in Highgate Cemetery, London, on 17 March 1883. There were between nine to eleven mourners at his funeral.

Several of his closest friends spoke at his funeral, including Wilhelm Liebknecht and Friedrich Engels. Engels's speech included the passage: }} Marx's daughter Eleanor and Charles Longuet and Paul Lafargue, Marx's two French socialist sons-in-law, were also in attendance. Liebknecht, a founder and leader of the German Social-Democratic Party, gave a speech in German, and Longuet, a prominent figure in the French working-class movement, made a short statement in French. Two telegrams from workers' parties in France and Spain were also read out. Together with Engels's speech, this constituted the entire programme of the funeral. Non-relatives attending the funeral included three communist associates of Marx: Friedrich Lessner, imprisoned for three years after the Cologne communist trial of 1852; G. Lochner, whom Engels described as "an old member of the Communist League" and Carl Schorlemmer, a professor of chemistry in Manchester, a member of the Royal Society, and a communist activist involved in the 1848 Baden revolution. Another attendee of the funeral was Ray Lankester, a British zoologist who would later become a prominent academic.

Marx's tombstone bears the carved message: "WORKERS OF ALL LANDS UNITE", the final line of ''The Communist Manifesto,'' and from the 11th ''Thesis on Feuerbach'' (edited by Engels): "The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways—the point however is to change it". The Communist Party of Great Britain had the monumental tombstone built in 1954 with a portrait bust by Laurence Bradshaw; Marx's original tomb had had only humble adornment. In 1970 there was an unsuccessful attempt to destroy the monument using a homemade bomb.

The later Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm remarked that "One cannot say Marx died a failure" because, although he had not achieved a large following of disciples in Britain, his writings had already begun to make an impact on the leftist movements in Germany and Russia. Within 25 years of his death, the continental European socialist parties that acknowledged Marx's influence on their politics were each gaining between 15 and 47% in those countries with representative democratic elections.

Marx's thought

Inspirations

Marx's thought demonstrates influences from many thinkers, including but not limited to: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's philosophy; The classical political economy (economics) of Adam Smith and David Ricardo; French socialist thought, in particular the thought of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Henri de Saint-Simon and Charles Fourier; Earlier German philosophical materialism, particularly that of Ludwig Feuerbach; The working class analysis by Friedrich Engels.

Marx's view of history, which came to be called historical materialism (controversially adapted as the philosophy of dialectical materialism by Engels and Lenin) certainly shows the influence of Hegel's claim that one should view reality (and history) dialectically. However, Hegel had thought in idealist terms, putting ideas in the forefront, whereas Marx sought to rewrite dialectics in materialist terms, arguing for the primacy of matter over idea. Where Hegel saw the "spirit" as driving history, Marx saw this as an unnecessary mystification, obscuring the reality of humanity and its physical actions shaping the world. He wrote that Hegelianism stood the movement of reality on its head, and that one needed to set it upon its feet.

Though inspired by French socialist and sociological thought, Marx criticised utopian socialists, arguing that their favoured small scale socialistic communities would be bound to marginalisation and poverty, and that only a large scale change in the economic system can bring about real change.

The other important contribution to Marx's revision of Hegelianism came from Engels's book, ''The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844'', which led Marx to conceive of the historical dialectic in terms of class conflict and to see the modern working class as the most progressive force for revolution.

Marx believed that he could study history and society scientifically and discern tendencies of history and the resulting outcome of social conflicts. Some followers of Marx concluded, therefore, that a communist revolution would inevitably occur. However, Marx famously asserted in the eleventh of his ''Theses on Feuerbach'' that "philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point however is to change it", and he clearly dedicated himself to trying to alter the world.

Philosophy and social thought

Marx polemic with other thinkers often occurred through critique, and thus he has been called "the first great user of critical method in social sciences." He criticised speculative philosophy, equating metaphysics with ideology. By adopting this approach, Marx attempted to separate key findings from ideological biases. This set him apart from many contemporary philosophers.

Human nature

Fundamentally, Marx assumed that human history involves transforming human nature, which encompasses both human beings and material objects. Humans recognise that they possess both actual and potential selves. For both Marx and Hegel, self-development begins with an experience of internal alienation stemming from this recognition, followed by a realisation that the actual self, as a subjective agent, renders its potential counterpart an object to be apprehended. Marx further argues that, by molding nature in desired ways, the subject takes the object as its own, and thus permits the individual to be actualised as fully human. For Marx, then, human nature—''Gattungswesen'', or species-being—exists as a function of human labour. Fundamental to Marx's idea of meaningful labour is the proposition that, in order for a subject to come to terms with its alienated object, it must first exert influence upon literal, material objects in the subject's world. Marx acknowledges that Hegel "grasps the nature of ''work'' and comprehends objective man, authentic because actual, as the result of his ''own work''", but characterises Hegelian self-development as unduly "spiritual" and abstract. Marx thus departs from Hegel by insisting that "the fact that man is a ''corporeal'', actual, sentient, objective being with natural capacities means that he has ''actual, sensuous objects'' for his nature as objects of his life-expression, or that he can only ''express'' his life in actual sensuous objects." Consequently, Marx revises Hegelian "work" into material "labour", and in the context of human capacity to transform nature the term "labour power".

Labour, class struggle and false consciousness

)}} Marx had a special concern with how people relate to that most fundamental resource of all, their own labour power. He wrote extensively about this in terms of the problem of alienation. As with the dialectic, Marx began with a Hegelian notion of alienation but developed a more materialist conception. Capitalism mediates social relationships of production (such as among workers or between workers and capitalists) through commodities, including labour, that are bought and sold on the market. For Marx, the possibility that one may give up ownership of one's own labour—one's capacity to transform the world—is tantamount to being alienated from one's own nature; it is a spiritual loss. Marx described this loss as commodity fetishism, in which the things that people produce, commodities, appear to have a life and movement of their own to which humans and their behavior merely adapt.

Commodity fetishism provides an example of what Engels called "false consciousness", which relates closely to the understanding of ideology. By "ideology", Marx and Engels meant ideas that reflect the interests of a particular class at a particular time in history, but which contemporaries see as universal and eternal. Marx and Engels's point was not only that such beliefs are at best half-truths; they serve an important political function. Put another way, the control that one class exercises over the means of production includes not only the production of food or manufactured goods; it includes the production of ideas as well (this provides one possible explanation for why members of a subordinate class may hold ideas contrary to their own interests). An example of this sort of analysis is Marx's understanding of religion, summed up in a passage from the preface to his 1843 ''Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right'':

}}

Whereas his Gymnasium senior thesis argued that religion had as its primary social aim the promotion of solidarity, here Marx sees the social function of religion in terms of highlighting/preserving political and economic status quo and inequality.

Economy, history and society

Marx thoughts on labour were related to the primacy he gave to the economic relation in determining the society's past, present and future (see also economic determinism). Accumulation of capital shapes the social system. Social change, for Marx, was about conflict between opposing interests, driven, in the background, by economic forces. This became the inspiration for the body of works known as the conflict theory. In his evolutionary model of history, he argued that human history began with free, productive and creative work that was over time coerced and dehumanised, a trend most apparent under capitalism. Marx noted that this was not an intentional process; rather, no individual or even no state can go against the forces of economy.

The organisation of society depends on means of production. Literally those things, like land, natural resources, and technology, necessary for the production of material goods and the relations of production, in other words, the social relationships people enter into as they acquire and use the means of production. Together these compose the mode of production, and Marx distinguished historical eras in terms of distinct modes of production. Marx differentiated between base and superstructure, with the base (or substructure) referring to the economic system, and superstructure, to the cultural and political system. Marx regarded this mismatch between (economic) base and (social) superstructure as a major source of social disruption and conflict.

Despite Marx's stress on critique of capitalism and discussion of the new communist society that should replace it, his explicit critique of capitalism is guarded, as he saw it as an improved society compared to the past ones (slavery and feudal). Marx also never clearly discusses issues of morality and justice, although scholars agree that his work contained implicit discussion of those concepts.

Marx's view of capitalism was two sided. On one hand, Marx, in the 19th century's deepest critique of the dehumanising aspects of this system, noted that defining features of capitalism include alienation, exploitation and reoccurring, cyclical depressions leading to mass unemployment; on the other hand capitalism is also characterised by "revolutionizing, industrializing and universalizing qualities of development, growth and progressivity" (by which Marx meant industrialisation, urbanisation, technological progress, increased productivity and growth, rationality and scientific revolution), that are responsible for progress. Marx considered the capitalist class to be one of the most revolutionary in history, because it constantly improved the means of production, more so than any other class in history, and was responsible for the overthrow of feudalism and its transition to capitalism. Capitalism can stimulate considerable growth because the capitalist can, and has an incentive to, reinvest profits in new technologies and capital equipment.

According to Marx capitalists take advantage of the difference between the labour market and the market for whatever commodity the capitalist can produce. Marx observed that in practically every successful industry input unit-costs are lower than output unit-prices. Marx called the difference "surplus value" and argued that this surplus value had its source in surplus labour, the difference between what it costs to keep workers alive and what they can produce. Marx's dual view of capitalism can be seen in his description of the capitalists: he refers to them as to vampires sucking worker's blood, but at the same time, he notes that drawing profit is "by no means an injustice" and that capitalists simply cannot go against the system. The true problem lies with the "cancerous cell" of capital, understood not as property or equipment, but the relations between workers and owners – the economic system in general.

At the same time, Marx stressed that capitalism was unstable, and prone to periodic crises. He suggested that over time, capitalists would invest more and more in new technologies, and less and less in labour. Since Marx believed that surplus value appropriated from labour is the source of profits, he concluded that the rate of profit would fall even as the economy grew. Marx believed that increasingly severe crises would punctuate this cycle of growth, collapse, and more growth. Moreover, he believed that in the long-term this process would necessarily enrich and empower the capitalist class and impoverish the proletariat. In section one of ''The Communist Manifesto'' Marx describes feudalism, capitalism, and the role internal social contradictions play in the historical process:

Marx believed that those structural contradictions within capitalism necessitate its end, giving way to socialism, or a post-capitalistic, communist society:

Thanks to various processes overseen by capitalism, such as urbanisation, the working class, the proletariat, should grow in numbers and develop a class consciousness, in time realising that they have to change the system. Marx believed that if the proletariat were to seize the means of production, they would encourage social relations that would benefit everyone equally, abolishing exploiting class, and introduce a system of production less vulnerable to cyclical crises. Marx argued that capitalism will end through the organised actions of an international working class:

}}

In this new society the self-alienation would end, and humans would be free to act without being bound by the labour market. It would be a democratic society, enfranchising the entire population. In such a utopian world there would also be little if any need for a state, which goal was to enforce the alienation. He theorised that between capitalism and the establishment of a socialist/communist system, a dictatorship of the proletariat—a period where the working class holds political power and forcibly socialises the means of production—would exist. As he wrote in his "Critique of the Gotha Program", "between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat." While he allowed for the possibility of peaceful transition in some countries with strong democratic institutional structures (such as Britain, the US and the Netherlands), he suggested that in other countries with strong centralised state-oriented traditions, like France and Germany, the "lever of our revolution must be force."

Personal life

Marx married Jenny von Westphalen in 1843. Together had seven children, but partly due to the poor living conditions they were forced to live in whilst in London, only three survived to adulthood. The children were: Jenny Caroline (m. Longuet; 1844–83); Jenny Laura (m. Lafargue; 1845–1911); Edgar (1847–1855); Henry Edward Guy ("Guido"; 1849–1850); Jenny Eveline Frances ("Franziska"; 1851–52); Jenny Julia Eleanor (1855–98) and one more who died before being named (July 1857). There are allegations that Marx also fathered a son out of wedlock by his housekeeper, Helene Demuth.

Marx frequently used pseudonyms, often when renting a house or flat, apparently to make it harder for the authorities to track him down. Whilst in Paris, he used that of 'Monsieur Ramboz', whilst in London he signed off his letters as 'A. Williams'. His friends referred to him as 'Moor', due to his dark complexion and black curly hair, something which they believed made him resemble the historical Moors of North Africa, whilst he encouraged his children to call him 'Old Nick' and 'Charley'. He also bestowed nicknames and pseudonyms on his friends and family as well, referring to Friedrich Engels as 'General', his housekeeper Helene Demuth as 'Lenchen' or 'Nym', whilst one of his daughters, Jennychen, was referred to as 'Qui Qui, Emperor of China' and another, Laura, was known as 'Kakadou' or 'the Hottentot'.

Legacy

Widespread influence

}}

Marx has widely been thought of as one of the most influential thinkers in history, who has had a significant influence on both world politics and intellectual thought. Marx's biographer Francis Wheen considered the "history of the twentieth century" to be "Marx's legacy", whilst Australian philosopher Peter Singer believed that Marx's impact could be compared with that of the founders of the two major world religions, Jesus Christ and Muhammad. Singer noted that "Marx's ideas brought about modern sociology, transformed the study of history, and profoundly affected philosophy, literature and the arts." Marx's ideas led to him becoming "the darling of both European and American intellectuals up until the 1960s", and have influenced a wide variety of disciplines, including archaeology, anthropology, media studies, political science, theater, history, sociological theory, cultural studies, education, economics, geography, literary criticism, aesthetics, critical psychology, and philosophy.

In July 2005, 27.9% of listeners in a BBC Radio 4 series ''In Our Time'' poll selected Marx as their favorite thinker.

The reasons for Marx's widespread influence revolve around his ethical message; a "morally empowering language of critique" against the dominant capitalist society. No other body of work was so relevant to the modern times, and at the same time, so outspoken about the need for change. In the political realm, Marx's ideas led to the establishment of governments using Marxist thought to replace capitalism with communism or socialism (or augment it with market socialism) across much of the world, whilst his intellectual thought has heavily influenced the academic study of the humanities and the arts.

Marxism

Followers of Marx have drawn on his work to propose grand, cohesive theoretical outlooks dubbed "Marxism". This body of works has had significant influence on the both political and scientific scenes. Nevertheless, Marxists have frequently debated amongst themselves over how to interpret Marx's writings and how to apply his concepts to their contemporary events and conditions. The legacy of Marx's thought has become bitterly contested between numerous tendencies which each see themselves as Marx's most accurate interpreters, including (but not limited to) Leninism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, Maoism, Luxemburgism, and libertarian Marxism. In academic Marxism, various currents have developed as well, often under influence of other views, resulting in structuralist Marxism, historical Marxism, phenomenological Marxism and Hegelian Marxism.

Moreover, one should distinguish between "Marxism" and "what Marx believed"; for example, shortly before he died in 1883, Marx wrote a letter to the French workers' leader Jules Guesde, and to his own son-in-law Paul Lafargue, accusing them of "revolutionary phrase-mongering" and of lack of faith in the working class. After the French party split into a reformist and revolutionary party, some accused Guesde (leader of the latter) of taking orders from Marx; Marx remarked to Lafargue, "if that is Marxism, then I am not a Marxist" (in a letter to Engels, Marx later accused Guesde of being a "Bakuninist").

Founder of social science

Marx is typically cited, along with Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, as one of the three principal architects of modern social science. In contrast to philosophers, Marx offered theories that could often be tested with the scientific method. Both Marx and Auguste Comte set out to develop scientifically justified ideologies in the wake of European secularisation and new developments in the philosophies of history and science. Whilst Marx, working in the Hegelian tradition, rejected Comtean sociological positivism, in attempting to develop a ''science of society'' he nevertheless came to be recognised as a founder of sociology as the word gained wider meaning. In modern sociological theory, Marxist sociology is recognised as one of the main classical perspectives. For Isaiah Berlin, Marx may be regarded as the "true father" of modern sociology, "in so far as anyone can claim the title."

Criticism

Predictions and theories

While many Marxist concepts are still of importance for modern social science, some specific predictions Marx made have been shown to be unlikely. Marx is often criticised for expecting a wave of socialist revolutions, originating in the most highly industrialised countries, to overturn capitalism. However others, pointing to Marx's encounter with late 19th-century Russian populism and Marx and Engels' preface to the second Russian edition of the ''Manifesto of the Communist Party'' (1882), have argued that Marx evinced a growing conviction in his late writings that revolution could in fact emerge first in Russia. Marx predicted the eventual fall of capitalism, to be replaced by socialism, yet since the late 20th century state socialism is in retreat, as the Soviet Union collapsed, and the People's Republic of China shifted towards a market economy. Additionally, his argument that profits are generated only through surplus labour has been challenged by the counterclaim that profits also come from investments in human capital and technology. Marx predicted that over time, inequality would grow (correctly) but also that this would mean growing impoverishment of the growing worker class, increasingly exploited by the capitalists. The latter has not borne true, as in the developed world, through liberal reforms, trade unions won many concessions, improving the situation of the workers (something that Marx considered very unlikely). The working class is also growing smaller, as the industrial sector is replaced by the service sector, and worldwide poverty has decreased since the end of the 19th century. (It should be noted that scholars have debated whether Marx's comments about the proletariat can be analyzed in the context of the working class). In addition to specific predictions, certain of Marx's theories, such as his labour theory of value, have also been criticised. However, in the wake of the economic crisis of 2008 some thinkers like Terry Eagleton, David Harvey, and David McNally have given renewed impetus to the debate on whether Marx was right that capitalism inherently tends towards crisis (which Marx discussed as the "contradictions of capital").

Marxism as the ideology of totalitarian states

While Marxist thought may be used to empower marginalised and dispossessed people, it has also been used to prop up governments who have utilised violence to remove those seen as impeding the revolution. In some instances, his ultimate goals have been used as justification for the end justifies the means logic. Moreover, contrary to his goal, his ideas have been used to promote dogmatism and intolerance. Polish historian Andrzej Walicki noted that Marx's and Engels's theory was the "theory of freedom", but a theory that, at the height of its influence, was used to legitimise the totalitarian socialist state of the Soviet Union. This abuse of Marx's thought is perhaps most clearly exemplified in Stalinist Marxism, described by critics as the "most widespread and successful form of mass indoctrination... a masterly achievement in transforming Marxism into the official ideology of a consistently totalitarian state." The controversy is further fueled as some left-wing theorists have tried to shield Marxism from any connection to the Soviet regime. Lastly, the undue focus on the Marxist thought in the former Eastern Bloc, often forbidding social science arguments from outside the Marxist perspective, led to a backlash against Marxism after the revolutions of 1989. In one example, references to Marx drastically decreased in Polish sociology after the fall of the revolutionary socialist governments, and two major research institutions which advocated the Marxist approach to sociology were closed.

Selected bibliography

''The Philosophical Manifesto of the Historical School of Law'' (1842)

''Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right'', 1843

''On the Jewish Question'', 1843

''Notes on James Mill'', 1844

''Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844'', 1844

''The Holy Family'', 1845

''Theses on Feuerbach'', 1845

''The German Ideology'', 1845

''The Poverty of Philosophy'', 1847

''Wage-Labour and Capital'', 1847

''Manifesto of the Communist Party'', 1848

''The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon'', 1852

''Grundrisse'', 1857

''A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy'', 1859

''Writings on the U.S. Civil War'', 1861

''Theories of Surplus Value'', 3 volumes, 1862

''Value, Price and Profit'', 1865

''Capital'', Volume I (''Das Kapital''), 1867

''The Civil War in France'', 1871

''Critique of the Gotha Program'', 1875

''Notes on Wagner'', 1883

''Capital'', Volume II (posthumously published by Engels), 1885

''Capital'', Volume III (posthumously published by Engels), 1894

See also

Karl Marx House

Marx Memorial Library

Marx’s method

Marx's notebooks on the history of technology

Marxian Class Theory

Marxian economics

Pre-Marx socialists

References

Footnotes

Bibliography

;Academic and Popular Books |year= 2002 |publisher=Wiley-Blackwell |location= Oxford |isbn=978–0631213475 |nopp=|ref=Cal02}} |year= 2010 [1983] |publisher=Bookmarks |location= Bloomsbury, London |isbn=978–1905192687 |nopp=|ref=Cal10}} |year= 2011 |publisher=Little, Brown |location= London |isbn=978–1408702871 |nopp=|ref=Hob11}} |year= 1967 [1913]|publisher=Foreign Languages Press |location= Peking |isbn=|nopp=|ref=Len67|url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/granat/index.htm}} |year= 1980 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location= Oxford |isbn=978–0192875105 |nopp=|ref=Sin80}} |year= 2004 |publisher=Index Books |location= Kettering |isbn=978–0572029357 |nopp=|ref=Sto04}} |year= 1973 |publisher=Verlag Die Wirtschaft |location= |isbn= |nopp=|ref=Vyg73|url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/vygodsky/1965/discovery.htm}} |year= 2001 |publisher=Fourth Estate |location= London |isbn=978–1857026375 |nopp=|ref=Whe00}}

Further reading

Althusser, Louis and Balibar, Étienne. ''Reading Capital''. London: Verso, 2009.

Avineri, Shlomo, ''The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx'' (Cambridge University Press, 1968) ISBN 0–521–09619–7

Axelos, Kostas, ''Alienation, Praxis, and Techne in the Thought of Karl Marx'' (translated by Ronald Bruzina, University of Texas Press, 1976).

Barnett, Vincent, ''Marx'' (Routledge, 2009)

Blackledge, Paul. ''Reflections on the Marxist Theory of History'' (Manchester University Press, 2006)

Bottomore, Tom, ed. ''A Dictionary of Marxist Thought''. Oxford: Blackwell, 1998.

Alex Callinicos, ''The Revolutionary Ideas of Karl Marx'' (Bookmarks, 1983)

Isaiah Berlin, ''Karl Marx: His Life and Environment'' (Oxford University Press, 1963) ISBN 0–19–520052–7

G. A. Cohen, ''Karl Marx's Theory of History: A Defence'' (Princeton University Press, 1978) ISBN 0–691–07068–7

Andrew Collier, ''Marx'' (Oneworld, 2004)

Hal Draper, ''Karl Marx's Theory of Revolution'' (4 volumes) Monthly Review Press

Ronald Duncan and Colin Wilson, (editors) ''Marx Refuted'', (Bath, UK, 1987) ISBN 0–906798–71–X

Fine, Ben. ''Marx's Capital.'' 5th ed. London: Pluto, 2010.

Foster, John Bellamy. ''Marx's Ecology: Materialism and Nature''. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2000.

Stephen Jay Gould, ''A Darwinian Gentleman at Marx's Funeral – E. Ray Lankester'', Page 1, Find Articles.com (1999)

Harvey, David. ''A Companion to Marx's Capital.'' London: Verso, 2010.

Harvey, David. ''The Limits of Capital''. London: Verso, 2006.

Georg G. Iggers, "Historiography: From Scientific Objectivity to the Postmodern Challenge."(Wesleyan University Press, 1997, 2005)

Leszek Kołakowski, ''Main Currents of Marxism'' Oxford: Clarendon Press, OUP, 1978

Daniel Little, ''The Scientific Marx'', (University of Minnesota Press, 1986) ISBN 0–8166–1505–5

Mandel, Ernest. ''Marxist Economic Theory''. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1970.

Mandel, Ernest. ''The Formation of the Economic Thought of Karl Marx''. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1977.

McLellan, David ''Marx before Marxism'' (1980), Macmillan, ISBN 978–0–333–27882–6

McLellan, David. ''Karl Marx: his Life and Thought'' Harper & Row, 1973 ISBN 978–0–06–012829–6

Franz Mehring, ''Karl Marx: The Story of His Life'' (Routledge, 2003)

Miller, Richard W. ''Analyzing Marx: Morality, Power, and History''. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1984.

Boris Nicolaevsky and Otto Maenchen-Helfen (translator), ''Karl Marx: Man and Fighter'' (Penguin Books, 1976) ISBN 0–14–021594–8

Postone, Moishe. ''Time, Labour, and Social Domination: A Reinterpretation of Marx's Critical Theory.'' Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

Murray Rothbard, ''An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought Volume II: Classical Economics'' (Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., 1995) ISBN 0–945466–48–X

Maximilien Rubel, ''Marx Without Myth: A Chronological Study of his Life and Work'' (Blackwell, 1975) ISBN 0–631–15780–8

Saad-Filho, Alfredo. ''The Value of Marx: Political Economy for Contemporary Capitalism''. London: Routledge, 2002.

Schmidt, Alfred. ''The Concept of Nature in Marx''. London: NLB, 1971.

Jerrold Seigel, ''Marx's fate: the shape of a life'' (Princeton University Press, 1978) ISBN 0–271–00935–7

Thomas T. Sekine, ''The Dialectic of Capital. A Study of the Inner Logic of Capitalism'', 2 volumes (preliminary edition), Tokyo 1986; ISBN 4924750449 (vol. 1), ISBN 4–924750–34–4 (vol. 2)

Paul Strathern, "Marx in 90 Minutes", (Ivan R. Dee, 2001)

Thomas, Paul. ''Karl Marx and the Anarchists''. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980.

Walker, Frank Thomas. 'Karl Marx: a Bibliographic and Political Biography''. (bj.publications), 2009.

Amy Wendling, ''Karl Marx on Technology and Alienation'' (Palgrave Macmillan, 2009)

Francis Wheen, ''Karl Marx: A Life'', (Fourth Estate, 1999), ISBN 1–85702–637–3

Francis Wheen, ''Marx's Das Kapital'', (Atlantic Books, 2006) ISBN 1–84354–400–8

External links

Bibliography and online texts

Works by Karl Marx at Zeno.org

Karl Marx at Libcom.org

Marxists.org, homepage of the Marxists Internet Archive

Works by Karl Marx in audio format from LibriVox

Articles and entries

Dead Labour: Marx and Lenin Reconsidered by Paul Craig Roberts

Hegel, Marx, Engels, and the Origins of Marxism, by David North

''In Praise of Marx'' Terry Eagleton synopsising his ''Why Marx was right'' chronicle.com 10 April 2011.

Karl Marx: Did he get it all Right? by Philip Collins, ''The Times'', 21 October 2008

''Karl Marx'' ,Ernest Mandel

''Karl Marx and the Iroquois'' by Franklin Rosemont

Liberalism, Marxism and The State, by Ralph Raico

Marx, Mao and mathematics: the politics of infinitesimals, by Joseph Dauben

Marx Was Right

Marxism and Ethics from ''International Socialism'' Paul Blackledge (2008)

Marxmyths.org Various essays on misinterpretations of Marx

Portraits of Karl Marx (International Institute of Social History)

Paul Dorn, The Paris Commune and Marx' Theory of Revolution

The Top Seven Reasons why Marx was Right by ''Green Left Weekly''

Why Marx is the Man of the Moment

Category:1818 births Category:1883 deaths Category:19th-century philosophers Category:19th-century German people Category:19th-century journalists Category:Ashkenazi Jews Category:Atheism activists Category:Atheist philosophers Category:Burials at Highgate Cemetery Category:German communists Category:Economic historians Category:German economists Category:German atheists Category:German emigrants to the United Kingdom Category:German Jews Category:German revolutionaries Category:German socialists Category:Hegelian philosophers Category:Historians of economic thought Category:Jewish atheists Category:Jewish philosophers Category:Jewish socialists * * * Category:Materialists Category:Members of the First International Category:People from the Rhine Province Category:People from Trier Category:People associated with the Royal Society of Arts Category:Political economy Category:Political philosophers Category:Revolutionaries Category:Socialists Category:Social philosophers Category:German sociologists Category:Stateless persons Category:University of Bonn alumni Category:German philosophers Category:German historians

af:Karl Marx am:ካርል ማርክስ ar:كارل ماركس an:Karl Marx as:কাৰ্ল মাৰ্ক্স ast:Karl Marx ay:Karl Marx az:Karl Marks bn:কার্ল মার্ক্স zh-min-nan:Karl Marx be:Карл Маркс be-x-old:Карл Маркс bcl:Karl Marx bo:ཁཱར​་ལ་མར་ཁེ་སི། bs:Karl Marx br:Karl Marx bg:Карл Маркс ca:Karl Marx cv:Карл Маркс cs:Karl Marx co:Karl Marx cy:Karl Marx da:Karl Marx de:Karl Marx dsb:Karl Marx et:Karl Marx el:Καρλ Μαρξ es:Karl Marx eo:Karl Marx ext:Karl Marx eu:Karl Marx fa:کارل مارکس hif:Karl Marx fr:Karl Marx fy:Karl Marx ga:Karl Marx gd:Karl Marx gl:Karl Marx gan:馬克思 glk:کارل مارکس ko:카를 마르크스 hy:Կարլ Մարքս hi:कार्ल मार्क्स hsb:Karl Marx hr:Karl Marx io:Karl Marx bpy:কার্ল মার্ক্স্ id:Karl Marx ia:Karl Marx is:Karl Marx it:Karl Marx he:קרל מרקס jv:Karl Marx kn:ಕಾರ್ಲ್ ಮಾರ್ಕ್ಸ್ ka:კარლ მარქსი kk:Карл Маркс Генрих sw:Karl Marx ku:Karl Marx lad:Karl Marx la:Carolus Marx lv:Kārlis Markss lb:Karl Marx lt:Karl Marx li:Karl Marx jbo:karl. marks lmo:Karl Marx hu:Karl Marx mk:Карл Маркс ml:കാൾ മാക്സ് mt:Karl Marx mr:कार्ल मार्क्स arz:كارل ماركس mzn:کارل مارکس ms:Karl Marx mwl:Karl Marx mn:Карл Маркс my:ကားလ်မာ့ခ် nl:Karl Marx ne:कार्ल मार्क्स ja:カール・マルクス no:Karl Marx nn:Karl Marx nov:Karl Marx oc:Karl Marx uz:Karl Marx pa:ਕਾਰਲ ਮਾਰਕਸ pnb:کارل مارکس ps:کارل مارکس pms:Karl Marx nds:Karl Marx pl:Karol Marks pnt:Καρλ Μαρξ pt:Karl Marx kaa:Karl Marx ro:Karl Marx rm:Karl Marx qu:Karl Marx rue:Карл Маркс ru:Маркс, Карл sah:Карл Маркс sa:कार्ल मार्क्स sc:Karl Marx sco:Karl Marx st:Karl Marx sq:Karl Marx scn:Karl Marx si:කාල් මාක්ස් simple:Karl Marx sk:Karl Marx sl:Karl Marx so:Karl Marx ckb:کارڵ مارکس sr:Карл Маркс sh:Karl Marx fi:Karl Marx sv:Karl Marx tl:Karl Marx ta:கார்ல் மார்க்சு kab:Karl Marx tt:Карл Маркс te:కార్ల్ మార్క్స్ th:คาร์ล มาร์กซ์ tg:Карл Маркс tr:Karl Marx uk:Карл Маркс ur:کارل مارکس ug:كارل ماركىس za:Karl Marx vi:Karl Marx fiu-vro:Marxi Karl wa:Karl Marx war:Karl Marx yi:קארל מארקס yo:Karl Marx zh-yue:馬克思 diq:Karl Marx bat-smg:Karls Marksos zh:卡尔·马克思