[PatrickHenry]

The specialization of labor wasn't a new idea. It goes back to David Ricardo, who was influenced by Adam Smith, well before Marx and Darwin. Ricardo described the specialization of labor in a pin factory, explaining how each specialized worker resulted in more production. Nothing communistic about it (although Marx would probably view it as an example of labor "exploitation").

Marx developed his "labor theory of value" a key factor of his economics (an idea which Ricardo rejected), and this was before Darwin published Origins. So if Marx later referred to specialization of labor, and made a Darwinian reference, that's certainly interesting (and news to me), but it wasn't a new idea, and -- like Darwin's work -- it has nothing to do with communism.

It's nice that you've found a reference, but ... you haven't shown a conceptual linkage between evolution and communism. As I've said before, "to each according to his needs" is the opposite of natural selection.

Darwinian evolution is compatible with free enterprise and uncontrolled markets. If Darwin had preceded Adam Smith, we probably could show a connection between those two. (In fact, it's been suggested that Darwin was influenced by Adam Smith.) But there is no conceptual connection between Darwin and Marx.

[PatrickHenry]

Ping to 143.

[betty boop]

In fact, it's been suggested that Darwin was influenced by Adam Smith.

And clearly, Marx was also. Marx cites him repeatedly in Das Kapital -- along with Ricardo and J. S. Mill. And Darwin himself. So, what do you make of that?