What did Karl Marx claim was the error of previous historians and economic thinkers?

Answer 1

Karl Marx and his partner not only gave their views on the history of humanity and how it developed, they took the time to boost themselves up at the expense of historians and economists that wrote previous to their own "discoveries" concerning history. By looking back at their writings, it once again as always is the case, that hindsight has twenty-twenty vision. I doubt that Marx or Engels ever believed that their ideas would cause so much misery and death. But critically speaking, based on their own ideas, it was not necessary for them to write about past human events or future ones. That is said in light of the fact, both men believed they only uncovered "natural laws" that were scientific in nature and would take place soon irregardless of the ideas they espoused. That the world would become a socialist one leading to communism is not an idea they invented, only a process they uncovered.

Nevertheless, a critique might begin with the Shakespearian phrase," Me thinks that thou protest too much".

hat must be said in that Marx and Engels wrote volumes and volumes of texts that sought to enlighten the common worker but as in Das Kapital, to enlighten the higher levels of society.

One paragraph that seems to tie all of Marxian thought together is what is next paraphrased from one of their numerous publications.

The consciousness of men is determined by their mere existence, and not the other way around. This is correct thinking and disproves all types of ideals, even the most "concealed ones". ( our ) thinking rejects all conventional and customary views of historical matters. It rejects the traditional manner of political reasoning. It is recognized that there will be opponents to scientific history. It puts to rest the overall truths that only display an exceptional lack of understanding.

As an aside, it would be interesting to have Nietzsche debate Marx on the value of the intellect.

Answer 2

Karl Marx argued that previous historians and economic thinkers focused too much on ideas, culture, and individuals rather than on social classes, economic systems, and material conditions that shape society. He believed that understanding the material conditions of production and the struggle between social classes was essential for grasping the true dynamics of history and society.