What is Property?

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

Description

pubOne.info thank you for your continued support and wish to present you this new edition. The correspondence 1 of P. J. Proudhon, the first volumes of which we publish to-day, has been collected since his death by the faithful and intelligent labors of his daughter, aided by a few friends. It was incomplete when submitted to Sainte Beuve, but the portion with which the illustrious academician became acquainted was sufficient to allow him to estimate it as a whole with that soundness of judgment which characterized him as a literary critic.

Informations

• Publié par: Pub One Info
• Date de parution: 27 septembre 2010
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9782819926313
• Langue: English

Extrait

WHAT IS PROPERTY?
AN INQUIRY INTO THE PRINCIPLE
OF RIGHT AND OF GOVERNMENT
By P. J. Proudhon
DETAILED CONTENTS
P. J. PROUDHON: HIS LIFE AND HIS WORKS
PREFACE
FIRST MEMOIR
CHAPTER I.
METHOD PURSUED IN THIS WORK. — THE IDEA OF AREVOLUTION
CHAPTER II.
PROPERTY CONSIDERED AS A NATURAL RIGHT. — OCCUPATIONAND CIVIL LAW
AS EFFICIENT BASES OF PROPERTY. — DEFINITIONS
% 1. Property as a Natural Right.
% 2. Occupation as the Title to Property.
% 3. Civil Law as the Foundation and Sanction ofProperty.
CHAPTER III.
LABOR AS THE EFFICIENT CAUSE OF THE DOMAIN OFPROPERTY
% 1. The Land cannot be appropriated.
% 2. Universal Consent no Justification ofProperty.
% 3. Prescription gives no Title to Property.
% 4. Labor. — That Labor has no Inherent Power toappropriate
Natural Wealth.
% 5. That Labor leads to Equality of Property.
% 6. That in Society all Wages are Equal.
% 7. That Inequality of Powers is the NecessaryCondition of
Equality of Fortunes.
% 8. That, from the stand-point of Justice, Labordestroys
Property.
CHAPTER IV.
THAT PROPERTY IS IMPOSSIBLE
DEMONSTRATION. AXIOM.
Property is the Right of Increase claimed by theProprietor over
any thing which he has stamped as his own.
FIRST PROPOSITION.
Property is Impossible, because it demands Somethingfor Nothing.
SECOND PROPOSITION.
Property is Impossible, because, wherever it exists,Production
costs more than it is worth.
THIRD PROPOSITION.
Property is Impossible, because, with a givenCapital, Production
is proportional to Labor, not to Property.
FOURTH PROPOSITION.
Property is Impossible, because it is Homicide.
FIFTH PROPOSITION.
Property is Impossible, because, if it exists,Society devours itself.
Appendix to the Fifth Proposition.
SIXTH PROPOSITION.
Property is Impossible, because it is the Mother ofTyranny.
SEVENTH PROPOSITION.
Property is Impossible, because, in consuming itsReceipts, it
loses them; in hoarding them, it nullifies them;and, in
using them as Capital, it turns them againstProduction.
EIGHTH PROPOSITION.
Property is Impossible, because its Power ofAccumulation is
infinite, and is exercised only over FiniteQuantities.
NINTH PROPOSITION
Property is Impossible, because it is powerlessagainst Property.
TENTH PROPOSITION.
Property is Impossible, because it is the Negationof Equality.
CHAPTER V.
PSYCHOLOGICAL EXPOSITION OF THE IDEA OF JUSTICE ANDIN JUSTICE,
AND A DETERMINATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF GOVERNMENTAND OF RIGHT.
PART 1.
% 1. Of the Moral Sense in Man and the Animals.
% 2. Of the First and Second Degrees ofSociability.
% 3. Of the Third Degree of Sociability.
PART I 1.
% 1. Of the Causes of our Mistakes. The Origin ofProperty.
% 2. Characteristics of Communism and ofProperty.
% 3. Determination of the Third Form of Society.Conclusion.
SECOND MEMOIR
LETTER TO M. BLANQUI ON PROPERTY
P. J. PROUDHON: HIS LIFE AND HIS WORKS.
The correspondence 1 of P. J. Proudhon, the firstvolumes of which we publish to-day, has been collected since hisdeath by the faithful and intelligent labors of his daughter, aidedby a few friends. It was incomplete when submitted to Sainte Beuve,but the portion with which the illustrious academician becameacquainted was sufficient to allow him to estimate it as a wholewith that soundness of judgment which characterized him as aliterary critic.
He would, however, caution readers against acceptingthe biographer's interpretation of the author's views as in anysense authoritative; advising them, rather, to await thepublication of the remainder of Proudhon's writings, that they mayform an opinion for themselves. — Translator.
In an important work, which his habitual readerscertainly have not forgotten, although death did not allow him tofinish it, Sainte Beuve thus judges the correspondence of the greatpublicist:—
"The letters of Proudhon, even outside the circle ofhis particular friends, will always be of value; we can alwayslearn something from them, and here is the proper place todetermine the general character of his correspondence.
"It has always been large, especially since hebecame so celebrated; and, to tell the truth, I am persuaded that,in the future, the correspondence of Proudhon will be hisprincipal, vital work, and that most of his books will be onlyaccessory to and corroborative of this. At any rate, his books canbe well understood only by the aid of his letters and the continualexplanations which he makes to those who consult him in theirdoubt, and request him to define more clearly his position.
"There are, among celebrated people, many methods ofcorrespondence. There are those to whom letter-writing is a bore,and who, assailed with questions and compliments, reply in thegreatest haste, solely that the job may be over with, and whoreturn politeness for politeness, mingling it with more or lesswit. This kind of correspondence, though coming from celebratedpeople, is insignificant and unworthy of collection andclassification.
"After those who write letters in performance of adisagreeable duty, and almost side by side with them in point ofinsignificance, I should put those who write in a manner whollyexternal, wholly superficial, devoted only to flattery, lavishingpraise like gold, without counting it; and those also who weighevery word, who reply formally and pompously, with a view to finephrases and effects. They exchange words only, and choose themsolely for their brilliancy and show. You think it is you,individually, to whom they speak; but they are addressingthemselves in your person to the four corners of Europe. Suchletters are empty, and teach as nothing but theatrical executionand the favorite pose of their writers.
"I will not class among the latter the more prudentand sagacious authors who, when writing to individuals, keep oneeye on posterity. We know that many who pursue this method havewritten long, finished, charming, flattering, and tolerably naturalletters. Beranger furnishes us with the best example of thisclass.
"Proudhon, however, is a man of entirely differentnature and habits. In writing, he thinks of nothing but his ideaand the person whom he addresses: ad rem et ad hominem. A man ofconviction and doctrine, to write does not weary him; to bequestioned does not annoy him. When approached, he cares only toknow that your motive is not one of futile curiosity, but the loveof truth; he assumes you to be serious, he replies, he examinesyour objections, sometimes verbally, sometimes in writing; for, ashe remarks, 'if there be some points which correspondence can neversettle, but which can be made clear by conversation in two minutes,at other times just the opposite is the case: an objection clearlystated in writing, a doubt well expressed, which elicits a directand positive reply, helps things along more than ten hours of oralintercourse! ' In writing to you he does not hesitate to treat thesubject anew; he unfolds to you the foundation and superstructureof his thought: rarely does he confess himself defeated— it is nothis way; he holds to his position, but admits the breaks, thevariations, in short, the EVOLUTION of his mind. The history of hismind is in his letters; there it must be sought.
"Proudhon, whoever addresses him, is always ready;he quits the page of the book on which he is at work to answer youwith the same pen, and that without losing patience, withoutgetting confused, without sparing or complaining of his ink; he isa public man, devoted to the propagation of his idea by allmethods, and the best method, with him, is always the present one,the latest one. His very handwriting, bold, uniform, legible, evenin the most tiresome passages, betrays no haste, no hurry tofinish. Each line is accurate: nothing is left to chance; thepunctuation, very correct and a little emphatic and decided,indicates with precision and delicate distinction all the links inthe chain of his argument. He is devoted entirely to you, to hisbusiness and yours, while writing to you, and never to anythingelse. All the letters of his which I have seen are serious: not oneis commonplace.
“But at the same time he is not at all artistic oraffected; he does not CONSTRUCT his letters, he does not revisethem, he spends no time in reading them over; we have a firstdraught, excellent and clear, a jet from the fountain-head, butthat is all. The new arguments, which he discovers in support ofhis ideas and which opposition suggests to him, are an agreeablesurprise, and shed a light which we should vainly search for evenin his works. His correspondence differs essentially from hisbooks, in that it gives you no uneasiness; it places you in thevery heart of the man, explains him to you, and leaves you with animpression of moral esteem and almost of intellectual security. Wefeel his sincerity. I know of no one to whom he can be more fitlycompared in this respect than George Sand, whose correspondence islarge, and at the same time full of sincerity. His role and hisnature correspond. If he is writing to a young man who unbosomshimself to him in sceptical anxiety, to a young woman who asks himto decide delicate questions of conduct for her, his letter takesthe form of a short moral essay, of a father-confessor's advice.Has he perchance attended the theatre (a rare thing for him) towitness one of Ponsart's comedies, or a drama of Charles Edmond's,he feels bound to give an account of his impressions to the friendto whom he is indebted for this pleasure, and his letter becomes aliterary and philosophical criticism, full of sense, and like noother. His familiarity is suited to his correspondent; he affectsno rudeness. The terms of civility or affection which he employstowards his correspondents are sober, measured, appropriate toeach, and honest in their simplicity and cordiality. When he speaksof morals and the family, he seems at times like the patriarchs ofthe Bible. His command of language is complete, and he never failsto avail himself of it. Now and then a c