Sir, The current global economic crisis has certainly stimulated a resurgence of interest in Marxism (times2, Oct 21).

Karl Marx was more of a political philosopher than a structural economist. But he might have been correct in his historicity that “every particular social system must destroy itself, simply because it must create forces which produce the next historical period” (Karl Popper, The Open Society and its Enemies, Vol 2, Routledge, 1993).

In the last century we have seen imperialism being destroyed in continental Europe and replaced by fascism and communism, the latter only to be replaced by a democratic political system. If the present economic crisis spells the end of capitalism, it would appear that capitalism, in its laissez-faire form especially, had a short shelf life.

Sam Banik

London N10

Sir, Marx’s theory of the crises of capitalism is little more than a melodramatic description of the business cycle — standard fare in economic analysis. Every original contribution that Marx made to our understanding of capitalism is demonstrably false: the working class does not become increasingly immiserated; the class structure does not become increasingly polarised; no society has evolved from feudalism through capitalism to communism; the iron law of wages is fallacious; the State does not wither away when capitalism is abolished. Marx will continue to be neglected by serious scholars because he was wrong in every important respect.

Dr John Meadowcroft

Lecturer in Public Policy

Department of Management

King’s College London

Sir, Rachel Sylvester seems disappointed that today’s politicians accept Marx’s creed that “religion is the opium of the masses” (Opinion, Oct 21). Yet Marx was writing at a time when it was common that babies were given opium so that they would sleep while their mothers worked in factories. His “opium of the masses” quotation continues: “It is the heart of a heartless world, the soul of soulless conditions.” The implication is clear. Religion does lead to false impressions and confusion, but it also serves a purpose; in the misery of capitalism it makes the unbearable bearable.

Rachel Sylvester argues that we need religion now to give people hope. Karl Marx might well be in complete agreement.

W. D. Carter

Wareham, Dorset

Sir, In the economic climate, the surge in popularity of Karl Marx could be predicted. After the Great Depression, his works thrived also. A fundamental aspect to Marxism is the unequal distribution of wealth and inequalities between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The controversial aid for our banking world provided by all taxpayers will be given and forgotten by those studying Marx, as will his ideas of equality. When the bonuses, holiday houses and designer clothing again become viable for those in the banking world, he will retire to the bookshelves until the next recession.

Alison Macrae

Glasgow

Sir, The renewed interest in Marx reminds me of a documentary on the Tay Bridge disaster. He and Engels were touring Scotland and supposedly their journey included a trip on the fateful train. At the last moment, they changed their plans and cancelled, thus saving their lives. What an effect there would have been on the 20th century had they taken that train.

David Lloyd Hughes

Leeds

Explore Letters

• Feedback