Marx is more poetic, more aggressive. Marx's writing is dense, theoretical, and often philosophical. He employs complex, abstract concepts, and his tone can be polemical, especially when critiquing political economy or capitalism. Marx’s style is rigorous, dissecting systems with precision and often incorporating historical materialism to support his arguments. His texts, are marked by long sentences, layered analysis, and a critical, sometimes inaccessible, tone.
Engels, in contrast, tends to write in a more accessible and straightforward style. While he is equally intellectual, Engels’ works often have a more practical, pamphleteering quality. His language is clearer and less convoluted, with an emphasis on clarity and popularization of Marxist ideas. Engels is also more willing to engage in rhetorical persuasion, making his writing more digestible for a broader audience, as seen in works like The Condition of the Working Class in England.
When Engels wrote Principles of Communism, he took the style of a straightforward Q&A. After Engels wrote Principles of Communism, it was suggested that the style of a "catechism" be abandoned and a "manifesto" drawn up instead. This is why Marx and Engels ended up co-authoring the Communist Manifesto. But reading through the Manifesto and Principles back to back, the Manifesto seems less accessible, and Principles more straightforward. Manifesto has more of a call to action, but it is also more historically bound by the time it was written, while Principles seems more timeless.
Principles of Communism was written by Engels as a more systematic outline of Communist ideas in response to a question posed by the German Workers' Educational Society. It is a concise, theoretical treatise that lays out the basic principles of Communism, offering a clear framework of ideas, focusing on topics like historical materialism, class struggle, and the abolition of private property. It's more of a primer on Communism.
The Communist Manifesto, co-authored by Marx and Engels, is more dynamic, political, and revolutionary. It’s a direct call to arms, aimed at a broader audience, including workers and intellectuals. While it builds on the ideas in Principles, it is less abstract, emphasizing immediate political action, the inevitability of class struggle, and the need for revolution. The tone is urgent and rhetorical, designed to rally workers and challenge the existing order.
25 posts and 3 image replies omitted.>>2488952Me on the left.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGlN6z9dTBcThis kind of memelord proto-Trump energy could be good for PR right now, Xi is cool if you are already PRCpilled, but to the normies he comes of as kind of scary.