In his book, he charts the course of human history and tries to predict where it will end up. He comes to the conclusion that a violent revolution will soon come to pass as the workers overthrow their bosses and start sharing resources.

"Soon come to pass" was 150 years ago, the Revolution hasn't happened. Marxist scholars since then have been recreating the letters between early Christians asking why He hadn't returned yet as promised and pushing the date of the Second Coming back.

In my opinion, Marx wrote his conclusion first, then cherry picked the points in history that supported his conclusion.

[–] culprit@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There hasn't been any anti-capitalist revolutions in the last 150 year.

Maybe read a history book?

I seems to recall the US losing a war to communists in the 1970s for instance.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

any

I don't think their point was that no revolution has happened but the revolution to change it all didn't happen like he assumed

[–] culprit@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago

Marx didn't consider capitalists holding the world hostage with nuclear weapons

plenty of successful revolutions did occur though, just not in places under the control of the 'west'

very chauvinistic view to hold IMO