Talk:The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon
|WikiProject Books||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject France||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
Is Marxist not a better term than Marxian? 184.108.40.206 15:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Most of the information on this page is a very close paraphrase, and in some places perhaps verbatim copy, of Robert Tucker's introduction to the essay in his Marx-Engels Reader. Without reference notes and quotation marks in the appropriate places, this is just plagiarism (unless Robert Tucker himself wrote the wiki article). Augenblick (talk) 20:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
For example look at: "The pamphlet shows Marx in his form as a social and political historian, treating actual historical events—those leading up to Louis Bonaparte's coup d'état of 2 December 1851—from the viewpoint of his materialist conception of history." This is a direct copy from Tucker's preface on page 594 of the aforementioned book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foadt001 (talk • contribs) 01:25, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
- it really doesnt matter if something is plagiarized here, as no one is taking credit for what they write. all that matters is whether it is a copyright violation. verbatim copying of copyrighted text must be removed. if someone has adequately paraphrased a large portion of a copyrighted text, thats ok.(of course, the boundary between copyright violation and rewriting can be somewhat fluid)220.127.116.11 (talk) 23:19, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
After the quote, "Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past." there is a "Citation needed" tag. It's a quote from The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon, so why does it need a citation? I'm taking it out. Jhobson1 (talk) 12:16, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
- A citation isn't needed for that quotation, but a citation is needed for the clause that introduces that quotation, which claims that this is "the most famous formulation of Marx's view of the role of the individual in history." That's a very strong claim -- I think a citation would be needed even if we claimed that this quotation was famous, but "the most famous"? If that is true, then surely there is a secondary source that supports that claim. If no secondary source supports that claim, then "most famous" is merely the opinion of one Wikipedia editor.
- In my judgment, we don't need a secondary source that says, literally, that this is "the most famous" formulation, but we at least need a secondary source that states that this formulation is extremely renowned, or is widely recognized, or something like that.
- For what it's worth, I don't really see that this quotation says a great deal about "role of the individual in history". How much flexibility does an individual have? Obviously, Caesar and Napoleon and Hitler and Obama inherited the circumstances of the worlds they were born into. But, that being stipulated, did they then have complete freedom to reshape their worlds to the best of their ability? Or were their own personal choices dictated by their psychologies which were in turn shaped by their environments? That is a key question in any discussion of "the role of the individual in history", and it doesn't appear to me that this passage from Marx really addresses these issues. Just my two cents... if a reliable source says that this quotation is about the individual in history, then my doubts are irrelevant. — Lawrence King (talk) 17:42, 20 April 2011 (UTC)