I agree with this.
Marx is definitely not pro-free market, but he's an interesting read.
Indeed.
Marxist communism may never have succeded anywhere, but frankly neither has as abject capitalism.
Funnily enough though, their point of contention is not strictly on the idea of a free market, it is on who owns the means of production. Marxism holds they belong collectively to the people who work them, whereas Capitalism holds that they can be owned entirely by one entity.
Marx actually, in his way, understood the necessity of a free market as a competetive basis for better value for the consumer, on whixh Capitalists agree. Marx got practically ecstatic (yes, almost in a fedora sense) at the idea of international competition between worker/employee owned communes. Marx also didnt in anyway ascribe to government control of enterprise. He just wanted everyone involved to have equal ownership, not just a wage output like scraps from the masters table.
The difference is really in how the profits are distributed.
In Marxism, everyone OWNS a proportional share, and is thus motivated to work towards better productivity. Ideally, you earn as much as you, and others, put into it. You are not co peting with your co-employees, you are working togehter for profit.
In Capitalism, the owner OWNS it all, and motivation to increase productivity stems from him creating incentives for advancement and better pay. You are working against your co-employees to increase your own income, as derived from the owner.
Just pointing out that a free market is not actually a point of contention between Marxism and Capitalism, though it is often painted so falsely. A free market is, from a Marxist perspective, emminently good for the public and the consumer, just as it is in from a Capitalist perspective. The issue is on ownership, and how profits are distributed. In Marxism you work hard cos you own a part of the company. In Capitalism (and it sounds bad, no matter how I express it), you work hard because you want a larger scrap from the master/owners table...
Kind of makes you think, doesnt it. And no wonder the establishment of the West was terrified of Marxism at the time. Leftist politics though have atleast helped secure the position of employees in Caplitalist systems through unions etc. Unfortu ately, all national Communist experiments have failed miserably (for reasons that are beyond the scope of this post, and would take hours to describe, some of it good, but most of it bad).
There has been a recent trend towards stock options, in a sense, part ownership, that have been very successful, especially because they dont cost the owner much actual money. Especially because dividends are usually paid out of profit, so there are ways to re-invest money before paying out.
Dunno. Time will tell.But the funny thing is, unless you are an owner of the means of production, such as a mine, factory, or service provider, you should really automatically prefer a Marxist model toa Capitalist one, in your own interest. Yet many seem extremely reluctant to think that way, for whatever reason.
As an old saying goes (albeit somewhat religiously paradigmed), "Better to rule in Hell, than serve in Heaven".