Talk:Marxism

Marxism rises again?

Why Marxism is on the rise again. I can get a mundane idea about this but it isn't enough to post this on this article. Komitsuki (talk) 07:17, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

That formulation decontextualises the quote, and thus completely distorts its meaning

is the reason given for inserting OR into the article. the source listed is specific using the version an editor recently reverted. unless there is a policy for changing the quote/translation from a source, i ask the edit be restored to the version mentioned by the source. [1] Darkstar1st (talk) 02:03, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

'ce qu'il y a de certain c'est que moi, je ne suis pas Marxiste' ('what is certain is that I myself am not a Marxist') from the source Darkstar1st (talk) 02:06, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

equally puzzling is the quote already appears in it's correct form in the etymology section above, why change one but not the other? Darkstar1st (talk) 02:09, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Translation is not an exact science, and there could be several valid and correct ways to translate the phrase. But, as the source here quoted here makes clear. Marx wrote this in the context of a polemic against Guesde and Lafargue, and that his view was that, if their politics represented Marxism then he was not a Marxist. Omitting this essential qualifier transforms the phrase from a polemic against a particular interpretation to a timeless statement, and thus distorts its meaning. I had not noticed other, incorrect, uses of the quote in the article; but my (and others') failure to address these does not invalidate my attempt to do so here. RolandR (talk) 08:24, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

then you will need a new source for the translation, as the one above most certainly uses the word certain, which you have replaced with OR. i will wait to allow you to present new sources to support your edit. Darkstar1st (talk) 10:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

the translation is actually quite simple in this case, several sources have it the same and none the way you reverted, si leurs politiques représentés marxisme or if their politics represented Marxism, instead the actually letter reads, 'ce qu'il y a de certain c'est que moi. moi means "i", and "de certain" means "certain". Darkstar1st (talk) 13:45, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Once again, you demoonstrate your ignorance of the subject. The phrase is not a direct quote from Marx, but rather from Engels writing after Marx's death, reminiscing about his comrade. The phrase appears twice in Engels' corresponddence, only once in French. In November 1882, in a letter to Edward Bernstein, he noted "Now what is known as ‘Marxism’ in France is, indeed, an altogether peculiar product — so much so that Marx once said to Lafargue: ‘Ce qu'il y a de certain c'est que moi, je ne suis pas Marxiste.’ [If anything is certain, it is that I myself am not a Marxist]"[2] In August 1890, he wrote to C Schmidt "little Moritz is a dangerous friend. The materialist conception of history has a lot of them nowadays, to whom it serves as an excuse for not studying history. Just as Marx used to say, commenting on the French "Marxists" of the late [18]70s: "All I know is that I am not a Marxist"."[3] So Engels himself, recalling Marx'x words in French, translated them differently ion different occasions. But what is quite clear from both occasions when Engels wrote this, is that he was pointing out that Marx distinguished himself, not from Marxism, but from what he termed French "Marxists", ie those who misapplied his writings and insights. He did not say simply "I am not a Marxist", but "If that is Marxism, then I am not a Marxist". Your pedantry about the exact translation (and remember that we are discussing an English translation of a German translation of a French original statement) is entirely beside the point, and cannot be used to remove the vital "If that is Marxism" from the quotation. To satisfy you, I will add a further source, from leading Marxist academic Stuart Hall, in which he explicitly uses the formulation I have reinserted into the article. RolandR (talk) 16:49, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

how would Hall know what Marx said 100 years prior to his birth. Hall is referring to the same letter (we assume as he does not source the qoute in the book). ignorance is rampant in wp, example, i never claimed Marx did or did not write the letter, rather my problem was the source used different text, which i suggest by cited verbatim, then add Hall's interpretation if you wish. Darkstar1st (talk) 17:45, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

'Overview' section

According to MOS:LEAD the lead functions as the introduction and overview for an article. I suggest getting rid of the 'overview' section, moving material as necessary to the lead or to other section of the article. LK (talk) 07:39, 16 May 2013 (UTC)