Template talk:Marxism/Marxist theory

message: Part of the series onMarxism
Sociology
Alienation
Antagonistic contradiction
Bourgeoisie
Class consciousness
Commodity fetishism
Exploitation
Labour power
Proletariat
Relations of production
Underconsumption
Dunno what picture to use. Marx was good, until I put this template on Marxism, which meant there were two Marxes next to each other - ugly. Any ideas? -- infinity0 11:56, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Remove the Marx and Engels pictures from the introduction of the Marxism article and place them further down. :) Keep a Marx picture here... perhaps a different Marx picture. -- Nikodemos 20:07, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Too Leninist, I think... how about that stylized fist-symbol? Like here. -- Nikodemos 20:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it's in the public domain. Do a google image search for "socialism fist" and you'll find numerous different websites and organizations using that symbol. -- Nikodemos 23:36, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I dunno. The picture of older-Marx is instantly recognizable--pretty much anyone would look at it and say, "Hey, that's Karl Marx!" Whereas I doubt anyone but historians or serious Marxists would recognize the picture of the younger Marx. It's not a good icon, precisely because it's too obscure. I mean, sure, people will say "It's in the Marxism box, I bet it's Karl Marx", but that's different. Narsil 22:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: I think the template for this series should reflect the intellectual side Marxism which developed in the Twentieth Century, principally in Western Europe but also in America and elsewhere. This is not the same thing as the ‘religious-like’ Marxist-Leninist and Stalinist political movements which adorned themselves in these symbols.
My suggestion is that these symbols should NOT pepper this series of articles, but should be used to give the flavour to those political figures and movements which relished in them.
--PeterBowing 08:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you :) I saw all these wonderfully detailed articles on Marxist theory, and thought that they deserve to be formally linked together somehow. -- infinity0 15:47, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red Stars, Hammers and Sickles and the rest of it 

message: Hmm... I'd have preferred it if the template was some shade of red, to link it with socialism. Guess it's just a personal preference and a slight touch of nostalgia for me, though. -- infinity0 15:45, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colours 

message: I think the person who removed the section on Marxist politics (on the grounds that all Marxism was politics anyway) made a serious mistake. Academic Marxism, infusing sociology, economics, history etc. is distinct from Marxist politics which is the study of the strategies of political movements. 
The concept ‘surplus value’ for instance is principally an economic or perhaps sociological concept, but the concept ‘the dictatorship of the proletariat’ on the other hand has little to do with explaining the world ‘as it is’ but is concerned with political thinking.
Of course I accept that many of topics on the list that fall into more than one category in the menu, and obviously on many of these issues there is not a consensus among Marxists themselves.
:Well, I dunno. I saw that there were two sections, Maxist philosophy and Marxist politics which both only had two links in each, and thought it was untidy too. Have a play around with the links and the categorisation - I don't really mind too much as long as it doesn't make the template look ugly. -- infinity0 17:05, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing the category 'Marxist politics' 

message: Any objections if I add a link to reification in the box?  I think it's a pretty central concept in modern interpretations of Marx's thought.  The article at this point in time is a little short, but I plan to expand it in a few minutes.  Just thought I'd propose this, though. Deleuze 05:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure if it's *that* important; it seems to be a subcategory of "commodity fetishism". -- infinity0 21:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Reification (Marxism)|Reification]]

message: I just saw this box on Western Marxism. You lot have done well here. Thanks for this. --Duncan 09:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nice template 

message: (strongly recommend an actual page for listing all recognized Marxists. Pivotal contributors to Marxism and immediately surronding currents should alone be displayed in Sidebar)
I add that I kept Gramsci only because he was a intellectual influence in the same vein as the others I kept, but obviously the purist and and simplest way is the Lenin-Trotsky-Marx-Engels + Luxembourg and Kautsky as the major heads of Marxism. Bernstein was a renegade by his own intention, but he was also a commanding head in this respect. Gramsci was not but he was still a more or less original contributor and more a less a standout influence on new currents.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.31.189.211 (talk) 03:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I wrote this as I edited sidebar 

message: I changed the colour of the words in the table so that the words and links would not look like red links. It Is Me Here (talk) 18:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colour scheme change 

message: On my monitor, the title to this section is too long and overlaps with the border of the template.  It makes the template as a whole look poor.  What if the title simply said 'Social Sciences' or something similar?  
Discuss. --Ibarrutidarruti (talk) 21:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Sociology - Anthropology' heading 

message: It is quite common in literature about Western Marxism to count up the Frankfurt School alongside with other individual theorists. For example see a Review (1977) of Perry Andersons Considerations on Western Marxism:
:"In this group he includes such diverse figures as Lukacs, Gramsci, Korsch, Benjamin, the Frankfurt school, Della Volpe, Colletti, Lefebvre, Sartre, Goldmann and Althusser."
So the term is used for a group of people in the first place, not for a philosophical concept. 
--Schwalker (talk) 13:19, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frankfurt School in the "people" section