Customer Reviews


30 Reviews
5 star:
 (14)
4 star:
 (6)
3 star:
 (5)
2 star:
 (2)
1 star:
 (3)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favourable review
The most helpful critical review


4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Fascinating and provocative
The most readable, well-informed and thought-provoking text on politics I have read for many years. Guaranteed to stimulate your brain, whether you start of as a sympathiser or not. Demonstrates Eagleton's lucid and engaging style to its best advantage. Highly recommended.
Published 21 months ago by Larry Butler

versus
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Disappointingly turgid
As the blurb on the back of the book says with "capitalism shaken to its roots by major crisis" now is the right time for a clear minded reappraisal of Marx. Unfortunately this isn't it, in fact reading the glowing reviews on the back of the book and here I am left wondering if they are about a different book.

Firstly the book doesn't directly address...
Published 5 months ago by Lendrick


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Fascinating and provocative, 22 Feb 2013
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Why Marx Was Right (Paperback)
The most readable, well-informed and thought-provoking text on politics I have read for many years. Guaranteed to stimulate your brain, whether you start of as a sympathiser or not. Demonstrates Eagleton's lucid and engaging style to its best advantage. Highly recommended.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


101 of 114 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Yes - he's still right..., 15 May 2011
By 
Diziet "I Like Toast" (Netherlands) - See all my reviews
(TOP 1000 REVIEWER)   
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Why Marx Was Right (Hardcover)
In his latest book, Eric Hobsbawm suggested that perhaps '[o]nce again, the time has come to take Marx seriously'. In this book, Eagleton does precisely that and, in doing so, demonstrates the continuing relevance and importance of Marx.

Each chapter of the book starts with a common criticism of Marxist thought. So, for example, Chapter 1 begins with:

"Marxism is finished. It might conceivably have had some relevance to a world of factories and food riots... But it certainly has no bearing on the increasingly classless, socially mobile, postindustrial Western societies of the present." (P1)

From here, Eagleton goes on to demonstrate that the 'underlying logic' of capitalism remains the same and thus a Marxist critique is still most certainly relevant. As he points out, to simply accept that:

"some people are destitute while others are prosperous is rather like claiming that the world contains both detectives and criminals. So it does, but this obscures the truth that there are detectives because there are criminals..."(P11)

Other criticisms that Eagleton considers include (Chapter 2) the murderous and tyrannical nature of actually existant socialist societies such as Stalin's Russia and Mao Zedong's China; (Chapter 3) the idea that Marxism is a form of historical determinism and that 'Marx's theory of history is just a secular version of Providence or Destiny' (P30); (Chapter 4) Marxism is utopian and thus unrealistic; (Chapter 5) Marxism reduces everything to the economic and is a form of 'economic determinism'. The final chapter considers whether Marxism has been superseded by later radical movements such as feminism and environmentalism - movements more relevant to our 'postclass, postindustrial world'.

He draws upon a variety of sources besides Marx and Engels themselves - including Raymond Williams, Walter Benjamin, Horkheimer, Adorno and Habermas, Etienne Balibar et al - but puts them all together in a readily accessible way.

This is not a book using Marx's ideas to criticise the current travails of global capitalism - there are plenty of those around already, such as Chris Harman's excellent Zombie Capitalism. This book is about returning to Marx's basic ideas and trying to draw out the power, subtlety and immediate relevance of his philosophy - taking on post-modernist relativism, free market neoliberalism and even human nature along the way - and it does this really well, not afraid to recognise shortcomings in Marx's ideas but overall amply demonstrating their continuing power. Take Marx seriously again.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Disappointingly turgid, 20 Jun 2014
By 
Lendrick (London) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Why Marx Was Right (Paperback)
As the blurb on the back of the book says with "capitalism shaken to its roots by major crisis" now is the right time for a clear minded reappraisal of Marx. Unfortunately this isn't it, in fact reading the glowing reviews on the back of the book and here I am left wondering if they are about a different book.

Firstly the book doesn't directly address the current financial crisis , rather it seeks to refute 6 common objections to Marxism. To be fair it starts reasonably well in arguing that Marxism remain relevant as long as capitalism exists. But even then I found Eagletons style tortuous and with a strong an element of preaching to the converted.

The final straw for me was chapter 4 which addresses the criticism that 'Marxism is Utopian', the short answer to this is that Marx actually says very little about what a 'Marxist society' might look like and certainly doesn't have a Utopian view of human nature. Eagleton though takes 40 pages of turgid prose to tackle this including a diversion on whether on not stoats have politics(!) and the incredibly tortured metaphor that "Emancipatory politics inserts the thin end of wedge of the future into the heart of the present"

At the end of that chapter I gave up. Part of the problem is I think that as Eagleton is a Marxist the criticisms of Marxism he refutes are often straw men and consequently his refutations facile. Thing is I'm broadly sympathetic to much of the substance socialism but the approach and writing style here I found unengaging and unconvincing.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A service to political reflection, 15 Jan 2013
This review is from: Why Marx Was Right (Paperback)
This book was much needed. The well-read Marxist will probably gain little additional knowledge from it. However, it is a fantastic and enjoyable read, funny, ironic and launching a devastating attack against many of Marx's critics. The book answers to ten of the most common critiques of Marxism. Those who unleash these critiques I am sure will be challenged if they read this book with an open mind. Ultimately, this could be a book for the general reader, the one who would be first helped by an introduction to Marxism and anybody who desires to read to further their limited knowledge of Marxism. I would still recommend reading The Communist Manifesto beforehand. Overall, pick it up.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Rattling good yarn, 3 Oct 2011
By 
E. Clarke "Cambusken" (Glasgow, Scotland) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Why Marx Was Right (Hardcover)
You get the impression Eaglton rattled this off without pausing for breath. This kind of makes you want to hang on and keep reading. There is no denying the lifetime of scholarship that lies behind this achievement though, nor the incisiveness with which he shoots down common (usually ignorant) criticisms of Marx's work and ideas. It is all very, very convincing when it relates to Marx's analysis of (and great admiration for) Capitalism, particularly its instability and its ultimate incompatiblity with a true democacy. Its biggest weakness - which it shares with Marx - is that it offers no alternative that is remotely either plausible or appealing. I wish it did, and and no doubt it is out there, but it is not in this otherwise excellent book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


21 of 24 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Why Marx Was Right: By Terry Eagleton., 11 Oct 2011
This review is from: Why Marx Was Right (Hardcover)
This is a fascinating book, clearly written and highly accessible. The author - Terry Eagleton - is the Distinguished Professor of English Literature at Lancaster and Notre Dame Universities, and lives in Dublin, Ireland. He has written previously upon the subjects of 'God' and 'Evil', and his previous books have received good reviews. This book is essentially written as a counter-argument to what may be viewed as rightwing misconceptions, misapprehensions, deliberate disinformation and misrepresentations of the copious written work of the social philosopher Karl Marx (1818-1883).

The hardback (2011) edition contains 258 numbered pages and consists of a Preface, ten chapters and a Notes section. Although the chapters are not named, each chapter deals with a specific misconceptions regarding Marxist theory, and Eagleton uses the chapter itself to deconstruct the misrepresenting 'myth'. Chapter One, for instance, deals with the idea that Marxist thinking is somehow 'out of date', and 'irrelevant' for today's postmodern, internet fuelled modern world. Eagleton shows clearly that Karl Marx not only predicted the contemporary situation, but wrote extensively about it, expressing how things were most likely to economically develop through time. Other chapters deal with determinism, materialism, ethnic rights, gay rights, feminism, oppressive states, political violence, class, economics, and utopia, etc.

Eagleton presents a lucid corrective narrative based upon sound research. The works of Karl Marx are extensive, deeply intellectual, valid and often difficult to understand from a single reading. Ineffect, Marxism is an intellectual tradition that requires time and good guidance if its true essence is to be correctly understood. It is an academic subject that requires a structured approach. Its complexity has opened it to extensive misrepresentation and deliberate distortion by those who find the clarity of Marxian assessment to be 'threatening' in someway, and yet Marx writes with a careful consideration that appears based upon a profound compassion for humankind. Everyone should read this book - simply because Eagleton has produced such a fine piece of work. Superb.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


8 of 9 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Timely Rehabilitation, 9 Sep 2012
By 
L. Davidson (Belfast, N.Ireland) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Why Marx Was Right (Paperback)
I was sympathetic to the ideas of Marxism as a student , but following the demise of the Soviet Union ,the subsequent discrediting of the socialist worldview and my own entry into the capitalist workplace,my opinions turned more right wing.However in middle age I have grown to dislike capitalism once again and the way it turns people into money grabbing,acquisitive, selfish clones."Why Marx Was Right" is a courageous attempt to make the writings of Marx fashionable again in a world which treats them mostly with scorn.Each chapter starts off with a little summary of common criticisms of Marx which the writer then goes on to debunk in a stylishly written ,often witty manner, although a lot of it was waffly. I must admit that I would have tended to agree with much of these criticisms prior to reading this book. Eagleton didnt really convince me of his arguments most of which seem to indicate that Marx was misunderstood,but I appreciated the attempt to create an alternative world view to the pro capitalist one that is hegemonic throughout the world today. We desperately need an alternative to capitalism,but all we get are ones that want more of it or ones that want to reform it slightly to make it more acceptable to poorer people (the majority). However I can understand why this is the case as capitalism is so entrenched on a global basis ,so well organised and so willing to use a wide panoply of forms of repression that it seems impossible to fight it regionally,nationally or globally.Defeatism is the order of the day. Eagleton's book gives back Marxism some of its credibility as a critique of capitalism,but doesnt really suggest how it can be applied to the world today. Surely only a global socialist revolution could succeed in todays world-any national revolutions would only lead to isolation of the country involved and more Communist dictatorships surrounded by a sea of hostility. Also I fail to be convinced that the "working class" are going to lead us into the future. This stratum of society are the least educated (most of them dont even know what Marxism is about),the poorest and they are happier following rather than leading, plus capitalism doesnt allow them to fight the system anyway with its repressive labour laws, mind controlling media ,threat of unemployment and blacklisting and culture of conformance. Also capitalism keeps the working class in a standard of living not quite bad enough to make them hostile to it and want to destroy it. So there are a lot of things in this book that I didnt agree with , but I think its important for Marxist ideas to be circulated more widely and its critique of capitalism made more broadly known -for the sake of democracy and pluralism if nothing else- as rapacious capitalist organisations and corporations seem to have no check on their operations any more and just leave ordinary people feeling helpless,powerless and leave them to succumb to their basest desires.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


25 of 29 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars The Eagleton has landed, 13 Aug 2011
By 
Kevin Mansell (East London) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: Why Marx Was Right (Hardcover)
I bought this for an old mate's 65th birthday thinking it would be a bit of a laugh for ex student Fabians such as us. It's a surprisingly entertaining wander through Marx's writings which makes you wonder whether there's ever been such a noble spirit so traduced by his "followers" Maybe because of Eagleton's Catholic roots, he places more emphasis on the spiritual meaning of Marx's critique of society, but the breadth of scholarship is impressive, even if the question of applied Marxism in history are given a fairly light touch ( the author would argue Karl was misunderstood). Eagleton is fond of multiple simile and has a kind of tabloid approach at times that is quite diverting. I was left thinking of the tantalising possibility that Marx's prophetic view of capitalist society might still be right, and that if the world does not find some better way of organising itself, it may not be that long before the contradictions overwhelm us into self-extinction.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


20 of 24 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars A missed opportunity, 15 Aug 2011
This review is from: Why Marx Was Right (Hardcover)
Perhaps Terry Eagleton was not the right person to write a book arguing why Marx was right in the midst of arguably capitalism's biggest crisis since the 1930s. Instead of focusing on Marx's pioneering insights into financial instability, combined and uneven development, the tendency of the rate of profit to fall, the accumulation of debt as the accumulation of capital, and so on, Eagleton takes a series of well-worn accusations about Marx and Marxism and offers his own defence. Nothing much wrong there, really, and much of Eagleton's analysis, as far as it goes, I agree with, though I think he is too soft on the question of "actually existing socialism" in Eastern Europe and the USSR.

The main problem is that Eagleton takes a broadly "cultural studies" approach to the whole issue and, as other reviewers have commented, he sidelines the "political economy" approach. Thus he offers nothing, for example, to answer the accusation of Eugen von Bohm-Bawerk that Marx's economic theory is internally inconsistent. That is to say, Bohm-Bawerk believed Marx's labour theory of value and his theory of market price formation contradicted each other. Nor is there any discussion of why Marx was right, contra the neo-Ricardians, to assert that the rate of profit falls as the organic composition of capital rises. After all, if a theory were internally inconsistent then one would have to reject it. If Marx was right, as Eagleton asserts, these issues need to be dealt with. Luckily, we have the work of Marxist economists such as Andrew Kliman and Guglielmo Carchedi to provide what seem to me to be plausible answers, based on evidence from Marx's texts, to these more serious accusations.

In any case, it's not a question simply of Marx being correct, but rather a case of how useful the theoretical tools and concepts he developed are to us today. Still, to give Eagleton his due, he does make an amusing aside that those Marxists who would submit everything to "ruthless criticism" struggle to come up with more than a few things to criticize about Marx himself!

Anyone looking for an easy to read and largely jargon-free account of the current crisis of capitalism, but still using Marx's theoretical approach, would do better reading Paul Mattick Jnr's Business as Usual.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


3.0 out of 5 stars Why Marx was most certainly wrong, 11 Jun 2011
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Why Marx Was Right (Paperback)
"Why Marx was right" is a provocatively titled book by Terry Eagleton, a British Christian socialist and distinguished literary critic. The book is erudite, as behoves a professor of literature, and it does score some points. Overall, however, Eagleton's defence of Marx is unconvincing. The author often ends up "saving" Marxism by amputating some of its more distinctive ideas.

To Eagleton, Marxism correctly interpreted (or perhaps correctly applied) is neither determinist, teleological nor metaphysically materialist. This is unconvincing, since one of the central points of Marxism - and one of the main reasons for both its success and its eventual failure as a movement - is exactly the notion that proletarian revolution and communism are inevitable goals of History. Eagleton believes that Marxism is somehow right, simply because crisis-ridden, immoral capitalism is still around. However, Marxism isn't simply a critique of capitalism. It also makes specific predictions about capitalism's eventual fate. These predictions (about a working-class revolution creating a workers' state to build socialism and communism) were rooted in Marx' analysis of the laws of motion of capitalism. The predictions aren't simply tacked on as morally desirable goals. In the Marxist understanding, capitalism's laws of motion *leads to* working-class revolution. The fact that capitalism is still around and still goes into crises, is irrelevant as long as the Marxist predictions haven't come true. Which, of course, they haven't. For all we know, capitalism could be a system similar to ancient slavery or medieval feudalism: a long-lasting form of society which will eventually collapse *without* a workers' revolution. Note also that Marx' analysis of the contradictions of capitalism are rooted in his "Hegelian" philosophy, dialectical materialism. Thus, the failure of Marx' predictions also calls into question his most basic philosophical presuppositions!

Naturally, Eagleton has a huge problem with really existing socialism: the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, etc. He is ambivalent towards it, sometimes spinning "Stalinist" yarns about its brutality being inevitable or even necessary, sometimes sounding "Brezhnevite" (there was full employment and free health care in East Germany, hooray!), and sometimes sounding more critical, "Trotskyist" or even "libertarian socialist". Apparently, Eagleton is a friend of Alex Callinicos, the leader of the British SWP, a Trotskyist group claiming to stand for "socialism from below" (they don't). In the end, Eagleton simply gives up, declaring that Marx may have been a market socialist! Ahem, not true, Terry. What about those labour armies mentioned in the Manifesto? He also takes Parecon seriously, as a supposedly "libertarian" alternative to centralized planning. In reality, the intricate network of "workers' councils" proposed by Parecon would make the planned economy even more bureaucratic and convoluted. When the author is in really bad mood, he simply attacks capitalism on a "tu quoque" basis: since capitalism is brutal, it's hypocritical to attack Soviet or Chinese socialism for *its* brutality. But the brutality of capitalism is irrelevant when discussing whether or not the Marxist alternative to it makes sense. Besides, since when is socialist brutality an alternative to capitalist ditto? Isn't the purported goal of Marxism to abolish brutality altogether?

Eagleton is right that Marx was a radical democrat of sorts, calling for cheap government and supporting the Paris Commune. The problem, however, is that the centralized planned economy called for by Marx doesn't seem to be compatible with radical democracy. It's difficult to envisage even in principle how a centralized, completely statified economy with "labour armies" can be run in a radically democratic fashion. (Ask those libertarian socialists a.k.a. anarchists about it.) Thus, the lack of democracy and abundance of bureaucracy, not to mention sheer terror, in the really existing socialist states doesn't seem to be a contingent historical aberration, but rather an inevitable outcome of the Marxist program, which is surely contradictory on this point. Eagleton argues that the October revolution in Russia went off the rails because of the civil war and the foreign intervention (circa 1918-21). But war can't fully explain the bureaucratic degeneration. Britain had more democracy during the blitz than the Soviet Union had during détante! More to the point, leftist Nicaragua (with its mixed economy) had more democracy during its war with the contras than equally leftist Cuba (with a planned economy) had in peace time. It's hard to believe that the lack of democracy in *all* nations with centralized planning doesn't mean *something*. Another popular "explanation" for ostensibly Marxist regimes turning authoritarian is that socialist revolutions only succeeded in backward, semi-feudal nations with little or no preconditions for democracy. This begs the question why this would be the case at all, since according to Marx the revolution would inevitably triumph in the advanced Western nations - where it has always failed, or not being attempted at all. The long march (or detour) of the socialist project through the Third World is distinctly un-Marxist.

The most curious chapter in Eagleton's book denies that Marx was a metaphysical materialist. This is presumably connected to Eagleton's Christian beliefs. True, Marx wasn't an Enlightenment materialist, let alone a vulgar materialist. However, his "dialectical materialism" surely is an all-encompassing philosophy about the ultimate nature and meaning of reality. I would argue that it's exactly Marxism's curious combination of "scientific" materialism and Hegelian (quasi-spiritual) teleology that makes it so enchanting to many atheists and agnostics, being in effect a kind of substitute religion. The author wants to turn Marx into some kind of "agnostic materialist", with interesting ideas about our corporeality, but nothing to say about what (if anything) lays outside the material domain. Here, religion can presumably roam free. In reality, Marx argued that human practice shows that only matter in motion is real, making the militant atheism of many Marxist movements and regimes a logical conclusion.

As already pointed out, "Why Marx was right" also makes some points which are largely correct. Eagleton, in contrast to many other literature professors, is a staunch opponent of postmodernism, making him less sensitive to the criticism that Marx was Euro-centric, colonialist, Orientalist, etc. As Eagleton points out, even colonialism had *some* positive traits (the abolition of slavery comes to mind), so Marx was surely right to point this out, even when he eventually came out in favour of anti-colonial liberation struggles (who were often inspired by Western ideas of equality, nationhood and the like). Eagleton further emphasizes that the working class, while becoming smaller in the Western nations, has become *more* important in the Third World and hence globally. Thus, the argument that the "disappareance" of the working class disproves Marxism is bogus. (What really disproves Marxism is that the non-disappearing working class hasn't carried out a succesful socialist revolution á la the Paris Commune, not even in the global south.) The author is correct when pointing out that Marx supported women's emancipation and wrote pieces on environmental destruction. Of course, the cornucopian streak in Marxism is still problematic. Peak oil, anyone? Nor did Marx crave violence for its own sake. Indeed, he seems to have believed that socialism might be established peacefully in some really advanced democracies, including the United States!

Despite scoring on these points, overall I must say that Terry Eagleton hasn't been able to save much of Marx for posterity. His main defence strategies are blatant revisions of what Marxism actually entails, coupled with "tu quoque" arguments against capitalism when discussing really existing socialism. Somehow, the fact that he is forced into apologetics of this sort proves in itself that his case is weak, and that Marx was most certainly wrong...
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

This product

Why Marx Was Right
Why Marx Was Right by Terry Eagleton (Hardcover - 1 April 2011)
Used & New from: £11.37
Add to wishlist See buying options
Only search this product's reviews