Gareth Stedman Jones
Autore di Karl Marx: Greatness and Illusion
Sull'Autore
Fonte dell'immagine: from University of London faculty page
Opere di Gareth Stedman Jones
Opere correlate
Marxist History-writing for the Twenty-first Century (British Academy Occasional Papers) (2007) — Collaboratore — 20 copie
Etichette
Informazioni generali
- Nome legale
- Jones, Gareth Stedman
- Data di nascita
- 1942-12-17
- Sesso
- male
- Nazionalità
- UK
- Nazione (per mappa)
- UK
- Luogo di nascita
- London, England, UK
- Luogo di residenza
- London, England, UK
- Istruzione
- St Paul's School, London, England, UK
Oxford University (Lincoln College) - Attività lavorative
- historian
Professor of the History of Ideas, Queen Mary, University of London - Organizzazioni
- Cambridge University
Queen Mary, University of London - Premi e riconoscimenti
- Fellow of King's College, Cambridge
- Breve biografia
- Gareth Stedman Jones is Professor of the History of Ideas at Queen Mary University of London and Director of the Centre for History and Economics at the University of Cambridge.
Utenti
Recensioni
Liste
Labor History (1)
Premi e riconoscimenti
Potrebbero anche piacerti
Autori correlati
Statistiche
- Opere
- 13
- Opere correlate
- 1
- Utenti
- 532
- Popolarità
- #46,804
- Voto
- 3.4
- Recensioni
- 6
- ISBN
- 46
- Lingue
- 6
There's plenty of detail, and much of it is interesting and useful. The frame is ludicrous, though. One paragraph on page 241 is dedicated to telling us what Marx achieved: being the first person to systematically explain capitalism as a system; to explain capitalism as a history; to explain its concrete effects on laborers and others; to emphasize its effects on our subjectivity and desires; to reveal its revolutionary destructiveness (more famously described by Schumpeter). Most of the rest of the book is dedicated to explaining that Marx was somehow full of shit. Now, that seems a bit wrong. Do we really need a hundred pages detailing Marx's empirical failings as a writer for the Neue Rheinische Zeitung? That's useful, yes. But it's funny to read paragraphs like the one on page 241, and then realize that Gazza thinks Marx was a *failure*.
So, this book is great, because it isn't hagiographical. It is good on the shifts in Marx's own political positions, and it would be great if ultra-leftist types could read it and reconsider their revolution-or-nothing positions. But they won't read it, because of the idiotic satanographic framing that is somehow meant to show us the 'real Karl' instead of St. Marx. Probably somewhere in between.
Oh, and on Capital, Gazza is terrible. Naughty Gazza!… (altro)