Attempts to explicate Marx by asking if he is still relevant become tiresome, and beside the point. We are led through details that don’t matter. In broad strokes Marx is overwhelmingly relevant, and that should lead us to try to update, rethink, and recast his legacy. The left is also at fault here in the fetishizing of Marx. It is not a question of Marx, but of a new formulation that may well echo the original set of ideas. But we need very little despite the canonization of the canon, a cultic phenomenon that has rendered marxists immobile, especially in the added legacy of Stalinism. Capital was a project that derailed and historical materialism is too constrained now. But so what? If we can absorb the gist and start over we can create something that can respond to the kind of proposal at the second link: The Climate Mobilization
We have suggested a way out of this stalled tradition in the quest for a new Manifesto.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/75650151/XML_DARW_GC_Axial/Toward%20a%20New%20Communist%20Manifesto.pdf. Biographies of Marx are of little moment at this point. The basic achievement of Marx/Engels doesn’t need endless commentary and biographical chitchat. Marx/Engels laid down the foundations for a communist challenge to emergent capitalism. Period, over and out. What we need now is a new formulation, a new economic analysis, a new party, a new revolution, and an ecological version poised to resolve the climate crisis.