it wouldn't need to be an adversarial thing. we could argue about stuff of course but the overall idea would be trying to figure out what's going on in the text.
if memory serves (and i'm feeling a little dicey about this after i blocked out the revolutionary program outline from ch. 2 of the manifesto and tried to claim it wasn't what it was in fact) vol 1 was completed by marx & 2 and 3 are fragmentary, edited/sequenced largely by engels. so vol. 1 is relatively smooth as a text--but alot of the conceptual moves lean on hegel so they can take a bit of unpacking to sort out.
friedman's more popular stuff is pretty annoying, but it was really influential in the construction of neoliberalism, so wading through is a bit of intellectual history kinda. from what i remember of his more academic stuff the basic schematas are the same but the data's better and the demonstrations more interesting. but i still think he's full of it in a basic way.
keynes might be interesting to read now.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|