V,Bzf!fl^LF 
 
 ^ ^ iiS t4 
 
/ 
 
 The Political Theories 
 
 of 
 
 P. J. Proudhon 
 
 
 * , ' , •> . o • ' • ., ,^ * ) ' ' ' > 
 
 1..,., I. ■>)'■,'> 3,1 
 
 > 1 1 ' > > ' 3 
 
 BY 
 
 S. Y. LU, B.S., M.A. 
 
 'I 
 
 Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for 
 
 THE Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty 
 
 OF Political Science, Columbia University 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 M. R. Gray^ Inc., 461 Eighth Ave. 
 1922 
 

 * • « « • 
 
 exchamgS 
 
 To 
 
 My Friend 
 
 S. Ma 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 Proudhon's published works fill thirty-six volumes and his 
 correspondence brings the total up to fifty volumes. In view of 
 the dearth of studies of Proudhon in the English language, the 
 author has tried to analyze chronologically and to explain rather 
 extensively the development of his philosophical thought in 
 general and his political thought in particular, indicating modi- 
 fications and contradictions. 
 
 The author wishes to acknowledge his profound indebtedness 
 to his friends, Mr. King Chu and Mr. H. C. Wang, for their 
 constant advice, to Professor William A. Dunning, Professor 
 Howard Lee McBain, Professor Carlton J. H. Hayes and Pro- 
 fessor Franklin Henry Giddings, from whose works and lectures 
 he obtained much valuable assistance ; but especially to Professor 
 William A. Dunning and Professor Carlton J. H. Hayes, under 
 whose inspiring direction this work was conducted. 
 
 S. Y. Lu. 
 
 /:73361 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 Historical Background. 
 
 Page 
 
 ( 1 ) The Economic Background 8 
 
 (a) Agriculture 9 
 
 (b) Industry 12 
 
 (c) Commerce 16 
 
 (2) The Social Background 17 
 
 (a) The decline of the old privileged orders : 
 
 (x) The nobility 
 (y) The clergy 
 
 (b) The growth of the middle and lower classes: 
 
 (x) The peasantry 19 
 
 (y) The bourgeoisie 19 
 
 (z) The proletariat 21 
 
 (3) The Political Background 24 
 
 (a) The Revolution 
 
 (b) The First Empire 
 
 (c) The Restoration 
 
 (d) The July Monarchy 
 
 (e) The Second Republic 
 
 (f) The Second Empire 
 
 (4) The Philosophical Background 27 
 
 (a) The revolutionary school — Rosseau 28 
 
 (b) The traditionalist school — Chateaubriand, De Maistre, De 
 
 Bonald and Lamennais 29 
 
 (c) The socialists — St. Simon, Fourier, Cabet and Loviis 
 
 Blanc 31 
 
 CHAPTER n 
 Proudhon's Life. 
 
 (1) The period of boyhood and youth (1809-1836) 39 
 
 (2) The period of mature intellectual activity (1837-1865) 40 
 
 (a) Proudhon as an anarchist (1840-1865) 41 
 
 (b) Proudhon as a federalist (1862-1865) 49 
 
vi The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 Protidhon's General Philosophical Ideas 
 
 Page 
 
 (1) The supremacy of economics over politics 50 
 
 (2) Progress 51 
 
 (3) Liberty 52 
 
 (4) Equality 55 
 
 (5) Justice 61 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 Proudhon's theory of the state from the standpoint of an anarchist 
 
 descriptive. 
 
 ( 1 ) Origin of the State 65 
 
 (a) The family 65 
 
 (b) The tribe 65 
 
 (c) The city 66 
 
 (d) The state 66 
 
 (2) Definition of state and of government 66 
 
 (3) Development of the state 68 
 
 (a) The development of its ideas 68 
 
 (x) The idea of necessity 68 
 
 (y) The idea of providence 71 
 
 (z) The idea of justice 73 
 
 (2) The development of its forms 75 
 
 (x) The old regime — monarchy, aristocracy and 
 
 democracy 75 
 
 (y) The new regime — anarchy 77 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 Proudhon's Theory of the State from the Standpoint of an Anarchist — 
 
 Critical. 
 
 ( 1 ) As to state and government in general 78 
 
 (2) As to the different forms of government 81 
 
 (a) His criticism of absolute monarchy 85 
 
 (b) His criticism of repreesntative government 85 
 
 (x) His criticism of constitutional monarchy 87 
 
 (y) His criticism of democracy or direct government 
 
 in its moderate form 88 
 
 (z) His criticism of direct government in its radical 
 
 form 90 
 
 (3) As to the institutions of the state 90 
 
 (a) His criticism of law 90 
 
 (b) His criticism of the judiciary 91 
 
 (c) His criticism of taxation 93 
 
 (d) His criticism of public functionaries 93 
 
Contents vii 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 
 Proudhon's Theory of the state from the standpoint 
 
 of an anarchist — creative. 
 
 Page 
 
 (1) Why anarchy is preferred by Proudhon to the other forms of 
 
 government 95 
 
 (a) Anarchy is the regime of justice; all the other forms 
 
 of government are the regime of power. 
 
 (b) In anarchy, public power is exercised by all the citizens 
 
 indepently of each other; in all the other forms of 
 government it is the attribute of the public functionaries. 
 
 (2) How can anarchy be realized ? 96 
 
 (a) Through the revolution of ideas 97 
 
 (b) Through the revolution of ideas 97 
 
 (b) Through education 97 
 
 (c) Through economic revolution 98 
 
 (d) Through social revolution 102 
 
 (e) Through political revolution 105 
 
 (3) What are the general characteristics of anarchy? 112 
 
 (a) Anarchy, the absence of master, of sovereign (1840) ... 113 
 
 (b) Anarchy, the real formula of the republic (1848-1849).. 113 
 
 (c) Anarchy in its purest form (1851) 116 
 
 (d) Anarchy and the state (1858) 118 
 
 CHAPTER VII 
 
 Proudhon' s theory of the state from the standpoint of a federalist 
 
 (1862-1865) 
 
 ( 1 ) The change of his basic ideas 122 
 
 (a) Anarchy, the negation of authority and the affirmation 
 of liberty 
 
 (2) Classification of the forms of government 124 
 
 (a) The government of theory or a priori government 
 
 (x) The regime of authority 
 
 ( i) Monarchy 124 
 
 (ii) Communism 124 
 
 (y) The regime of liberty 125 
 
 ( i) Democracy 125 
 
 (ii) Anarchy 125 
 
 (b) The government of fact or mixed government 126 
 
viii The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 CHAPTER VII— (Continued) 
 (3) Federalism 
 
 (a) Geographical 127 
 
 (b) Political 128 
 
 (c) Economic 135 
 
 (d) Social 136 
 
 (e) Educational 138 
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 Conclusion 
 
 (1) Proudhon's theory of nationalism and patriotism 140 
 
 (2) His influence upon anarchism, social radicalism and syndicalism 141 
 
 (3) General criticism of his work 141 
 
 (a) Change of ideas and confusion of terms 
 
 (b) Destructive rather than constructive 
 
 (c) Ideal rather than practical 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 (1) Proudhon's Life 144 
 
 (2) Proudhon's theory of logic 146 
 
 (3) Statistics 
 
 Table a: — The development of agriculture in France from 1789 
 
 to 1865 
 Table b: — The growth of industry in France from 1789 to 1865 
 Table c: — The growth of commerce in France from 1789 to 1869 
 Table d: — The increase of the number of workingmen in France 
 
 from 1789 to 1865 
 Bibliography 149 
 

 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Pierre Joseph Proudhon was the father of anarchism.^ Living 
 between 1809 and 1865, his genius was given ample opportunity 
 to function. France, Hke the rest of Europe, was then in the 
 throes of one revolution after another. He was bom in a revo- 
 lution, the great revolution, which had its spectacular close with 
 Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo when Proudhon was barely seven 
 years of age. At twenty-one, the revolution of 1830 found him 
 poverty-stricken, travelling many weary miles on foot from city 
 to city, in quest of work.^ Then came the revolution of 1848, 
 with the beginning of which Proudhon, already a well-known 
 literary figure because of his "What is Property?" which had 
 appeared in 1840, began his first newspaper venture.^ And before 
 he passed away, he witnessed the radical agitation of I860,* as 
 an exile in Belgium; an exile from which he did not return to 
 France until 1862, until after the special imperial act of 1860, 
 supplementing the Amnesty of 1859, had been promulgated, par- 
 doning those who had committed moral as well as political 
 crimes.^ 
 
 Proudhon wielded a vitriolic pen against everything and 
 everybody. He agreed with nothing and nobody. He attacked 
 Rousseau. He criticized De Bonald. He denounced and even 
 ridiculed the theories of St. Simon, Fourier and Louis Blanc. 
 There was no escaping his pen. 
 
 Of course, this did not go on with impunity. During the 
 short period of the three years between 1847 and 1850, the four 
 
 1 Maurice Lair, "Annales des sciences politiques," 15 September, 1909, 
 p. 588. 
 
 2 Lagarde, p. 11. Desjardin, p. 14. 
 3Diehl, pp. 37-39. 
 
 4 Hayes: Vol. II, pp. 175-180. 
 
 5 Miilberger— P. J. Proudhon. pp. 200 and 211. 
 
S The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 papers with which he was successively connected were success- 
 ively suppressed by the government as being anarchistic and 
 obnoxious.'* Of the many books he wrote, most were seized 
 by the government the moment they came from the presses 
 and suppressed. And not a little of his life was spent in prison, 
 as well as in exile, because of the views he so vigorously enter- 
 tained and so strenuously championed,'^ 
 
 But whether at liberty, in prison or in exile, it made little 
 difference to him. He waged an incessant war against the state, 
 the government, and the various institutions of society. Nothing 
 and nobody could stop him. His criticism was keen. His writings 
 were forceful. His style was entertaining, with its ridicule and 
 sarcasm. Yet his ideas were frequently contradictory and in- 
 consistent, and just as frequently profoundly vague. But always 
 he was ingenious and original. 
 
 The contradictions and inconsistencies in his theories need 
 to be carefully watched, or else one can become entirely misled. 
 Not infrequently he championed a view he had formerly de- 
 nounced, and denounced one he had before that time bravely 
 championed. Indeed, at the very end, he abandoned anarchy, 
 which he had championed nearly all of his eventful life, and 
 championed federalism, which he had formerly ignored. But so 
 powerful was his prolific pen, that he stands out today as one of 
 the greatest writers that France had in the Nineteenth Centur}\ 
 
 1. The Economic Background 
 
 By the time Proudhon began his work, numerous changes had 
 already been brought about in France, by the great revolution 
 and the revolution of 1830, economic, social, political, and philo- 
 sophical. It was with these new conditions that Proudhon labored. 
 Rightly to understand his attitude and theories it will, of course, 
 first be necessary to take a rapid survey of what these conditions 
 actually were, and what led up to them. 
 
 8 Diehl : pp. 37-39. 
 ^ See infra, Ch. II. 
 
The Economic Background 9 
 
 In a general way, France shows marked economic develop- 
 ments, between 1789 and Proudhon's time. Its agriculture had 
 increased. So had its commerce. As had also its industry. 
 Proudhon must have noticed that with the possible exception of 
 agriculture, all this increase benefitted only the bourgeoisie who 
 controlled industry and commerce, rather than the proletariat 
 who worked for the bourgeoisie. Certain it is, he did not fail 
 to grasp the significance of this situation, for he spent his 
 energies and exercised his pen for the express purpose of bringing 
 about an economic revolution — a revolution so complete and far- 
 reaching that thereafter there would be no distinction between 
 the rich and the poor, for there would be no rich and no poor, 
 and no distinction between capitalist and workman, for there 
 would be no such two classes ; all would be producers— everybody 
 would have to work and produce.^ Let us now see just what 
 it was 'that led him to this view, by considering (a) the develop- 
 ment of agriculture, (b) the development of industry, and (c) 
 the development of commerce, 
 (a) Agriculture 
 
 The development of agriculture presents three principal 
 phases: (1) The emancipation of the rural laborer through the 
 abolition of all survivals of feudalism and serfdom; (2) the 
 liberation of agriculture from the ancient, legal and traditional 
 fetters, and (3) the opening of land to the possession of large 
 numbers of people. 
 
 The first distinct service which the National Assembly of 
 1789 rendered to mankind in general, and to agriculture in 
 particular, was the abolition of serfdom.® Through the general 
 decree of August 4, 1789, and the articles of August 11, 1789, 
 the Assembly abolished feudal rights and personal servitude.^" 
 In "The Declaration of the Rights of Man," the Assembly 
 
 * For details of the proposed economic revolution, see Chaps. VI and 
 VII, infra. 
 
 ® For the emancipation of serfs in the 12th and 13th centuries, see 
 Levasseur, "Histoire . . . avant 1789," pp. 888-889. 
 
 ^° Levasseur, "Histoire ... a 1870," I, p. 10 ; Lavergne, p. 5. 
 
10 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 declared that all men were bom, and would remain, free and 
 equal, and that social distinction could be founded only upon 
 common usefulness.^^ 
 
 No less important than the abolition of serfdom was the 
 liberation of agriculture. By the law of 1791, the legislative 
 assembly liberated the land of France. The proprietors were, 
 henceforth, free to cultivate their land in whatever way they 
 chose, and to dispose of their products in whatever place they 
 preferred.^^ 
 
 But the most significant of all, was the wide distribution of 
 landownership. ' There was, to be sure, a large number of 
 small land proprietors before the revolution, as was observed by 
 Arthur Young and Necker.^^ This number, however, was per- 
 ceptibly increased after 1789. Moved by the idea of equality 
 and liberty, the National Assembly confiscated the estates of the 
 
 11 Levasseur, "Histoire ... a 1870" I, p. 15. This was voted by the 
 Assembly on August 20, 22 and 23, 1789 and sanctioned by the king in 
 October, 1789. 
 
 12 Lavergne, p. 10. 
 The Law of 1791. 
 
 Art. 1. "Le territoire de la France dans toute son etendue, est libre 
 comme les personnes qui I'habitent. 
 
 Art. 2. "Les proprietaires sont libres de varier a leur gre la culture 
 et I'exploitation de leur terres, de conserver a leur gre leur recoltes et 
 de disposer de toutes les productions de leur propriete dans I'interieur du 
 royaume et au dehors, sans prejudicicr aux droits d'autrui et en se con- 
 formant aux lois." 
 
 See also Lavergne, pp. 12-13. 
 
 13 "Le nombre des petits proprietaires est si prodigieux," disait Arthur 
 Young en 1789, "que je crois bien qu'il comprend un tiers du royaume." 
 "II y a en France" ecrivait en meme temps Necker, "une immensite de 
 petites proprietes rurales." Lavergne, pp. 24-25. According to Sugenheim, 
 one-third of the land of France before the outbreak of the revolution was 
 in the possession of small land-owners. Sugenheim, pp. 182-183. 
 
The Economic Background ii 
 
 clergy^* and nobility^^ and divided them among a broader con- 
 stituency. As a safeguard one of the articles of August 11, 1789, 
 prohibited the accumulation of incomes beyond the amount of 
 3,000 livres.^® According to Mr, Rubichon, the land was so well 
 distributed in 1815, that there were no less than 3,805,000 families 
 which possessed on an average about twelve hectares each, or 
 approximately twenty-five acres.^'^ 
 
 After 1815, the land was still more greatly distributed. If 
 we analyze the quota of land tax of 1860, we find that one-third 
 of the total amount of taxation was paid by the great land 
 owners, one-third by the average land owners and one-third by 
 the small land owners. We may deduce from this fact the actual 
 distribution of land in 1860 to have been as follows: 
 50,000 great land owners possessing in average 300 
 
 hectares 15 million h. 
 
 500,000 average land owners possessing in average 
 
 30 hectares 15 million h. 
 
 5,000,000 small land owners possessing in average 3 
 
 hectares 15 million h. 
 
 Total 45 million hectares^^ 
 
 1* Through the Act of November 2, 1789, the property of the church 
 was at the disposition of the state. And again through the decree of 
 April 14, 1790, the administration of the property of the church was trans- 
 ferred to the separate assemblies of the departments. Lavergne, p. 19. 
 Lavergne was strongly opposed to this measure. "By this act," says he, 
 "we substitute for the clergy an equal number of the bourgeoisie possess- 
 ing land under another form." Lavergne, p. 25. 
 
 1^ "La somme des domaines confisques sur les emigres, les deportes et 
 les condamnes revolutionnairement etait enorme a I'origine; elle egalait 
 presque la valeur des proprietes ecclesiastiques au deux ou trois milliards. 
 En y ajoutant les domaines de la couronne, la totalite des terres de diverse 
 origine mises en vente a la fois comprenait un tiers du territoire. II n'en 
 a ete vendu en realite que pour un milliard, exactment 987, 819, 968 f r. 96 
 c. et la plus grande partie de ce milliard a ete restituee aux ayants droits 
 par la loi d'indemnite du 17 Avril 1825 ... La depossession reelle n'a pas 
 depasse 300 ou 400 millions." Lavergne, p. 27. 
 
 16 Lavergne, p. 11. 
 
 17 Ibid, pp. 51-53. 
 
 18 Lavergne, p. 53, with the exception of the property of the state and 
 the commune and those lands which are not subject to tax. 
 
12 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 (b) Industry 
 
 Broadly speaking, the development of industry in France from 
 1789 to 1865 may be divided into two periods: (1) domestic 
 industry (1789-1833) and (2) factory industry (1833-1865). 
 Although many important manufactures were established before 
 1833, the industry of France still remained as before 1789, con- 
 stituted for the great part in little workshops where the work 
 was entirely done by hand.^® It was only after 1833, that factory 
 industry began to develop on a large scale, with a corresponding 
 decline in domestic industry, which soon disappeared almost en- 
 tirely.2° 
 
 At the end of the ancien regime, the industry of France was 
 in a state of progress. Manufacturers had increased in number 
 in the Eighteenth Century. Some of them began to employ 
 machines, moved either by horses or by hydraulic wheels. During 
 the revolution social organization underwent a great change. 
 Many of the nobles were obliged to emigrate to the interior. 
 The population of the cities diminished. Industry languished.^^ 
 In woolen industry, for instance, the total number of pieces 
 produced annually at the end of the old regime was 2,606,977, 
 and in the year III (1795) 802,408. Instead of 68,416 work- 
 shops employing 594,911 workers, there were only 35,820 work- 
 shops employing 320,874 workers. ^^ 
 
 Under the Consulate and the First Empire, the development 
 of industry was greatly encouraged by the government.^^ 
 Napoleon once said to Oberkampf, a well-known manufacturer 
 of printed calico, "You and I make war with England, but your 
 war is the best."''* Lyons employed 12,700 weavers before the 
 crisis of 1812; Tours, Nimes, Avignon employed altogether 
 20,000 weavers in the silk industry. Rheims, too, entered into 
 
 " Levasseur "Histoire ... a 1870," II, p. 841. 
 20/fetd: II, p. 842. 
 
 21 Ihid: II. p. 839. See also I, pp. 280-283. 
 
 22 Ibid I, pp. 260-267. See also I, pp. 405-406. 
 " Ihid: I, pp. 399-401 ; II, pp 839-840. 
 2*/6."3; I, p. 421. 
 
The Economic Background 13 
 
 a period of progress. In 1810, it not only manufactured as many 
 articles of cloth as in 1789, but also furnished to commerce 
 400,000 ells of fancy cloth and 32,800 shawls, the total value of 
 which was no less than three and a half million francs.^^ The 
 Continental blockade (1806-1814), the Russian expedition, and 
 the campaign of 1813 had, however, disastrous effects upon 
 industry. After 1810, manufacturing in France fell into a state 
 of decline which grew worse in the beginning of the Restoration. 
 On one hand it suffered from the keen competition of England. 
 On the other, it suffered from the occupation of territory by the 
 armies of the enemy. But at the end of 1818, when the liberation 
 of territory was accomplished, industry resumed its normal 
 development. More than 600 manufacturers were equipped with 
 steam engines.^® 
 
 After the revolution of July, 1830, industry again declined. 
 This time the government found it necessary to come to its help 
 by lending to it thirty millions of francs. It was only in 1833 
 that the ascending movement of industry began to manifest itself 
 anew. Workshops were restored, new manufactures founded, 
 while production and speculation again came into full activity. 
 The consumption of pit coal was tripled, that of cast iron was 
 raised to 60,000 tons, machines became widely used, and the 
 number of horse-power was doubled. 
 
 After the revolution of 1848, France again suffered an in- 
 dustrial crisis. Almost all the workshops were emptied ; in Paris, 
 half of the workers became idle; it was the same in most of 
 the cities of the departments. But the dictatorship of Louis 
 Napoleon 'after the coup d'Etat of 1851, assured confidence in 
 industry. Railways were developed and industry again showed 
 a progressive tendency. The production of pit coal was increased 
 from five millions of tons in 1852 to twelve and a half millions 
 in 1869; that of cast iron increased in an almost equal pro- 
 portion.^^ 
 
 25 Levasseur, "Histoire ... a 1870," I, p. 406. 
 
 26 7fczJ; II, pp. 840-841. 
 
 27 Ibid: II, p. 841-844. 
 
14 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 The principal causes of the development of industry in France 
 from 1789 to 1865 were threefold: (1) The liberation of in- 
 dustry; (2) the development of science, and, in consequence, the 
 increase of invention, and (3) the introduction of machines. 
 
 In 1789, the National Assembly declared that no vocation 
 should be prohibited to anyone. Every individual could manu- 
 facture, sell and transport whatever kinds of products he chose.^^ 
 In the constitution of September 14 of the same year, the 
 Assembly also stated that all the citizens would be admitted to 
 all the phases of employment without any distinction except that 
 of virtue and talent.^^ On March 17, 1791, the National Assembly 
 enacted a measure, stipulating that on and after April 1st follow- 
 ing, every individual should be free to exercise any craft or pro- 
 fession whatever, provided only that he should equip himself 
 wtih a license from the public authorities and should comply with 
 the police regulations, one of which in effect prohibited all com- 
 binations of workingmen. The guilds were not expressly abol- 
 ished, but their monopolistic powers and their other privileges 
 were terminated and the guilds were left without reason for 
 existence. They now rapidly disappeared.^" In the constitution 
 of tlie year III (1795), the National Convention declared 
 emphatically that there should be no privilege, no mastership, 
 no wardship, no limitation to the liberty of the press, of com- 
 merce, of industry and of the arts.^^ 
 
 With the liberation of industry, the French industrial revolu- 
 tion was further accelerated by the development of science. "We 
 
 28 Ibid: I. p. 85. Article 18 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man. 
 
 2^ Ibid: I. p. 15. (See also I. pp. 10-11.) 
 
 30 Levasseur "Histoire ... a 1870," I. pp. 22-23. La loi du 17 Mars 
 1791, Article 7. "A compter du 1 Avril prochain, il sera libre a toute 
 personne de faire tel negoce ou d'exercer telle profession, art ou metier 
 qu'elle trouvera bon; mais elle sera tenue de pourvoir auparavant d'une 
 patente, d'en acquitter le prix, suivant les taux ci-apres determines et de se 
 conformer aux reglements de police qui sont ou pourront etre faits." 
 For the re-establishment of the guild of bakers in 1801 and that of butchers 
 in 1800-1803, see Levasseur, op. cit., I, pp. 332-337. 
 31 Ibid: I, p. 85. 
 
The Economic Background 15 
 
 ought," said Castaz, in his report of 1819, "to place in the first 
 rank the progress of the exact sciences and the numerous dis- 
 coveries made during the last thirty years in physics, mechanics 
 and chemistry. These discoveries almost determined the creation 
 or the perfection of many branches of industry. ^^ 
 
 The development of science brought with it a new era of 
 experimentation and progress. One of its striking features was 
 the stimulus it gave to the spirit of invention. From the very 
 beginning of the movement there was a steady increase in the 
 annual number of patents that the government granted. 
 
 Under the Consulate and the First Empire, no more than 100 
 patents had been granted any single year. But in the period of 
 the Restoration (1815-1830) the annual average granted reached 
 250 patents, and one year the number was 452 patent grants, 
 whereas during the Constitutional Monarchy of Louis Philippe 
 (1830-1848) the steady pace of increase continued by leaps and 
 bounds. In 1834, already the number of grants was 576 patents. 
 By 1843, the spirit of invention had so spread that during the 
 year 1,838 patents were granted. And in 1844, following the 
 enactment of the Reform Law of that year, there were no less 
 than 2,158 patents granted.^^ 
 
 No less important than the development of science was the 
 introduction of machinery. In 1804, a certain Englishman, 
 Douglas, established a factory on the Island of Cygnes for the 
 manufacture of macGines, selling not less than 340 of them to 
 the French drapers. Besides Douglas, the Perier Bros., John 
 Collier, Albert Colla and Salneuve also manufactured various 
 kinds of machines.^^ In 1810, there were only one high pressure 
 steam engine and fifteen or more low pressure steam engines 
 being used by the manufacturers for the raising of water.^^ In 
 1830, there were 616 steam engines with 10,000 horse-power; in 
 1847, 4,853 steam engines with 61,630 horse-power, and in 
 
 32 Ihid: I, p. 626. 
 ^^Ihid: II, p. 163. 
 34/fcfd: I. pp. 414-415. 
 35 IhTd: I, pp. 413-424. 
 
i6 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 1870, five years after Proudhon's death, 32,827 steam engines 
 with 871 million horse-power.^® 
 (c) Commerce 
 
 Toward the end of the reign of Louis XVI (1765-1793), that 
 is, prior to the outbreak of the great revolution, commerce had 
 increased, and had surpassed, one thousand millions of francs per 
 year. From 1789 'to 1799, it greatly diminished, being tram- 
 melled by civil War, by social transformation, by foreign wars, 
 by the act of navigation and by the continental blockade. In 
 1799 the general commerce of France fell to five hundred mil- 
 lions.^'' 
 
 From 1800 to 1806, the commerce of France returned to a 
 period of normal development. The third coalition had been 
 broken by the crushing victory of Austerlitz. The administration 
 of the government had been organized. Finally, the protective 
 tariff of 1806, directed particularly against England, replaced that 
 of 1791, which had been very liberal. Industry developed. Com- 
 merce increased on an average of fifty-five millions of francs per 
 year. 
 
 But from 1808, the situation underwent a complete change. 
 The evil effect of the continental blockade, the war of Spain, 
 the disaster of Trafalgar, and the closing of the sea to France 
 by England, all impeded the development of commerce. From 
 1808 to 1814, the total amount of commerce diminished in average 
 forty-three millions per year. After 1815 the commerce of 
 France followed an ascending scale. In spite of the protective 
 and prohibitive tariff laws, seven in number, enacted from 1814 to 
 1826, its growth was very rapid. The total increase of general 
 commerce between 1815 and 1847 was 1,719 millions; that of 
 special commerce 731 millions. The average increase of general 
 commerce per year was fifty-six millions ; and that of special 
 commerce twenty-three millions. 
 
 From 1847, the year of dearth, to 1850, the political troubles 
 under the Second Republic again retarded the progress of com- 
 
 s«/6id; II, pp. 163, 546, 461. 
 
 37 Levasseur, "Histoire du Commerce de la France," II. pp. 821-822. 
 
The Economic Background 17 
 
 merce temporarily. But very soon, it again assumed its normal 
 development. According to the statistics, there was an annual 
 average increase of sixty-one millions per year in special com- 
 merce.^^ 
 
 The period between 1852 and 1859 was especially a period of 
 rapid growth for commerce. The protective tariff was still in 
 vogue. But it was greatly modified by a number of decrees. 
 The condition of the commercial market was transformed com- 
 pletely by the construction of a series of railways, of electric 
 telegraphs and by the establishment of sound credit. The first 
 half of the Second Empire was, therefore, very prosperous. The 
 total amount of general commerce was increased to 2,859 milUons 
 being an average of 317 millions per year. The total amount of 
 special commerce was also increased to 3,048 millions, being 
 an average of 228 millions per year. 
 
 The second half of the Empire (1859-1870), which proved to 
 be a liberal regime, was inaugurated by the treaty of commerce 
 of January 1860 with England. Through this treaty, the protec- 
 tive tariff was abandoned and a maximtmi amount of 25% duty 
 on imported articles was agreed upon. But unfortunately, the 
 political condition of France after 1860 became less favorable to 
 trade. The protectionists in the interior were strongly opposed 
 to the liberal system; the revolutionary parties began to agitate; 
 the impolitic expedition to Mexico ended in a humiliating dis- 
 aster ; the war in Italy awakened the ambition of Germany, which 
 crushed Austria a few years later at Sadowa and revolutionized 
 the equilibrium of Europe to the detriment of France. There 
 was progress in foreign trade but this progress was somewhat 
 slower than that of the preceding periods. ^^ 
 
 2. The Social Background. 
 
 With the vast economic changes that took place in France be- 
 tween 1789 and 1865, it is only natural to expect that similarly 
 
 38 For the distinction between general commerce and special commerce, 
 see Annuaire Statistique de la France, Annees 1914-1915 p. 78. 
 
 39 Levasseur, "Histoire du Commerce de la France," II. pp. 823-827. 
 
i8 The Political Theories of P. J, Proudhon 
 
 vast social changes would follow. And they did. The basis of 
 society being generally economic, when the power and prestige 
 of money increased, the power and prestige of mere title corre- 
 spondingly fell. 
 
 In the old economic order there had existed two large antag- 
 onistic groups ; the so-called "privileged orders," consisting of the 
 nobles and the clergy, pitted against the less fortunate, so-called 
 "third estate," consisting of the bourgeoisie, the proletariat, the 
 peasants and the serfs.*" 
 
 After the downfall of the Bourbon Monarchy in 1830, the 
 power of the old privileged orders became insignificant. The 
 bourgeoisie, who were for the most part rich merchants and bank- 
 ers, fell heir to both the social and political power and prestige 
 that had formerly been held by the nobles *^ and the clergy.'*^ 
 
 But the proletariat, who constituted the vast majority of the 
 people, benefitted little from this changed situation. All they 
 seemed to gain was a swelling of their ranks, due partly to the 
 abolition of serfdom,*^ which had been completed in 1789, but 
 mainly to the development of industry and the increasing use of 
 labor-saving machinery. Their position, if anything, became even 
 worse than under the old regime. And though the old class dis- 
 tinction had virtually disappeared, a new class distinction was 
 brought into existence. This new economic order brought about 
 a division of the people into three classes: (1) peasants, a small, 
 yet not inconsiderable group; (2) proletariat, the vast majority; 
 and (3) bourgeoisie, a very limited group, who took the place 
 formerly held by the old privileged orders. 
 
 *« C. D. Hazen, "Modern Europe," New York, 1917, pp. 40-51. 
 
 *^ According to Bouille, there were 80,000 noble families in France 
 before 1789. Only 1,000 of them were old noble families. Of these only 
 200 to 300 escaped poverty and misfortune. To Sieyes and Lavoisier, 
 there were only 25.000 noble families before 1789 instead of 80,000. 
 (Lavergne, p. 449. Sugenheim, pp. 183-187.) 
 
 *2 According to the law of Nov. 2, 1789, the: property of the church 
 was at the disposition of the nation. In Feb. 13, 1790, all the monastical 
 orders were abolished. (Lavergne, p. 19.) 
 
 ** Lavergne p. S. Levasseur "Histoire ... a 1870," I. p. 10. 
 
The Social Background 19 
 
 ' It was when things had just about reached this state, that 
 Proudhon first commenced to enter into public affairs. He felt 
 that the situation called for a social revolution. He determined 
 to bring it about — to bring about a revolution wherein all class 
 distinction would at last be wiped out forever ; ^* a revolution, 
 after which all would be equal members of one great class. There 
 would then be no more peasants, and bourgeoisie and proletariat. 
 All would be workingmen — producers. There would then be 
 nothing else than producers.** And agriculture would then be 
 recognized 'as the foremost of the fine arts.*^ j 
 
 (a) The peasants. 
 
 As has already been seen, the number of small land-owners was 
 considerably increased between 1789 and 1860.*^ France, there- 
 fore, became pre-eminently a land of petty, but prosperous, 
 proprietors. 
 
 The significance of this development is two-fold. First, as a 
 result of this development, there was created in France a distinct 
 class — the peasants, those who gained their livelihood from the 
 soil, as over against the proletariat, those who gained their live- 
 lihood from the industries, which represents the interests of the 
 industrial classes.*^ Second, this new agricultural class formed 
 an element of stability in French politics because it was always 
 conservative and anti-socialistic.*^ 
 
 (b) The bourgeoisie. 
 
 The movement for the emancipation of the bourgeoisie began 
 at the end of the eleventh century and spread into the twelfth and 
 thirteenth centuries. The bourgeoisie had secured concessions 
 from their feudal lords or from their kings, both by outright 
 purchase and by revolt. Aspiring to municipal liberty, they cre- 
 ated self-governing communes, and therefore were no longer at 
 
 ** For detailed discussion of the proposed social revolution, see Chaps, 
 VI, and VII, below. 
 
 *5 Proudhon, "Justice," I. 515. 
 
 ^^ See above, pp. 10-11. 
 
 47 Hayes, II, p. 93. Sugenheim, pp. 181-182. 
 
 *8 Guerard, p. 48. 
 
ao The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 the mercy of the feudal lords.*® By their number and their 
 wealth, the bourgeoisie who had in the thirteenth century barely 
 held a place in society, became under the reign of Louis XIV 
 and later in 1789, the 'most important of the three orders of the 
 state. " 
 
 But during the revolution, their political influence was still 
 greater. Not only the Constituent Assembly, but also the Con- 
 vention, had a majority of bourgeoisie.^^ During the Restoration, 
 the nobility and clergy seemed to have regained an upper hand 
 over them. But after 1830, they came into power again. The 
 government of the July monarchy was a government of the bour- 
 geoisie, by the bourgeoisie and for the bourgeoisie. The bourgeois 
 spokesmen, Laffitte, in 1830 and Casimir Eerier in 1831, not only 
 were influential in industry and commerce, but also in the gov- 
 ernment as well.^^ 
 
 In 1848, there were 124,000 entrepreneurs who belonged to 
 the "haute" and the "moyenne" bourgeoisie. Some of them en- 
 joyed great fortunes; others were deputies, electors, generals, 
 municipal magistrates, or officers of the national guard, and 
 formed the governing class of the state. It is this class which 
 Villeneuve-Bargemont described as the "new feudality" — a new 
 feudality much more despotic, much more oppressive, and much 
 more influential than the feudaUty of the middle age. 
 
 Besides this class, there were 1,548,000 employers and skilled 
 laborers in the small industries who belonged to the group of the 
 "moyenne" and the "petite" bourgeoisie. This group consisted of 
 both men who were comparatively well off, and of men whose 
 material conditions were no less precarious than that of the 
 workingmen. They participated very little in the political affairs 
 of the state.^* 
 
 *9 Levasseur "Histoire . . . avant 1789" p. 889. 
 
 50 Ibid: pp. 977, 978-999. See Hayes II. p. 471. 
 
 " Levasseur "Histoire ... a 1870, I. pp. 78, 250. II, 288-290. 
 
 "/fcid; I, p. 5. II, p. 11. 
 
 ^^Ibid: I, p. 289. 
 
The Social Background 21 
 
 (c) The proletariat.^^ 
 
 Owing to the development of industry, there grew up in 
 France a new social class — the proletariat. The increase of the 
 number of workingmen from 1789 to 1872 was very significant. 
 In the department of Haut Rhin, for instance, there were 44,000 
 workingmen in 1813; 44,800 in 1827 and 91,000 in 1834.^= From 
 1830 to 1866 the number of workingmen was greatly increased. 
 According to the census of 1866, there were 10,959,091 persons 
 who depended on the work of industry for their living. The total 
 population of France in 1866 was 37,372,000.^'^ The number of 
 workingmen therefore formed 28.8% of the total population. In 
 no less thas seven departments, the workingmen exceeded 40% of 
 the population; Nord 52%, Seine 50%, Ardennes 47%, Bas-Rhin 
 44%, Sommes 44%, SeineTnferieure 42% and Aisne 41%." 
 
 From an historical point of view, the development of the 
 workingmen's class in France may be divided into two periods: 
 (1) the period of discontent and disorder (1789-1830), and (2) 
 the period of organized strikes and insurrections (1830-1865). 
 
 During the great revolution, industry languished; workshops 
 were deserted; and most of the workingmen fell into the state 
 of extreme poverty, or even mendicancy. The condition of the 
 workingmen was particularly deplorable in 1792. Misery and 
 poverty reigned in Abbeville, Amiens and still worse, in Rouen. 
 In Lyons, there were 28,000 persons who lived on charity.^® The 
 condition of the workingmen was no better under the First Em- 
 pire. In 1807, 21,950 out of 66,850 workingmen in Paris re- 
 mained without any work.^* On April 4, 1813, the workingmen 
 at the suburb of Saint-Antoine. demanded work or bread. They 
 
 5* For a brief view of the condition of the workingmen before 1789, 
 see Levasseur "Histoire . . . avant 1789" pp. 881-882. 
 55 Villerme, I, pp. 14-16. 
 5« Levasseur "Histoire ... a 1870" II, p. 612. 
 
 57 Ihid: II, p. 575. 
 
 58 Levasseur "Histoire ... a 1870." I, pp- 49-53, 58-62, 280-283. 
 59/6irf: I, p. 506. 
 
22 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 even posted placards on the wall attacking the Emperor. Nat- 
 urally they were soon suppressed by the police.®" During the 
 period of the Restoration, the condition of the workingmen be- 
 came still worse. 
 
 But they had neither the knowledge nor the organization to 
 bring about any amelioration of their economic conditions.®^ 
 Some of them demanded an increase of wages ; ®^ others pro- 
 tested against the introduction of machines into the factory.®^ 
 Quite often they quarrelled among themselves, which brought on 
 intervention by the government.®* There was no well-organized 
 action on their part against the capitalists. It is true that, now 
 and then, they attempted to form unions demanding an increase 
 of wages. But most of these unions were suppressed by the 
 government ®^ because legally they had no right to form unions.®* 
 In the revolution of July, 1830, the workingmen took a very 
 active part in the overthrow of the Bourbon monarchy. There 
 was then awakened in them a political consciousness, and they 
 realized that they would become a very important factor in the 
 affairs of the state. The insurrection of the workers of Lyons 
 in 1831, 1832 and 1834," the strike of the carpenters of Saint 
 Saloi in 1833, and that of the miners of Saint Etienne in 1844,®^ 
 marked the beginning of an economic struggle between the labor- 
 er /^,irf;, p. 506. 
 
 61 Ibid: II, p. 876. 
 
 e2Bourgin, pp. 67, 129-132, 141, 211-213, 233, 273-274, 309-310. 
 
 «3Bourgin, pp. 125-127, 171-185, 211-213, 255-256, 365-375, 377-379. 
 
 o*Ibid: pp. 253-254, 256, 273, 276, 281, 283-286, 291-297, 312-313, 316, 
 323-324. 
 
 65/6id: pp. 245-253, 265-272, 310, 312, 315-316, 322-323, 376. 
 
 «6The law of July, 1791 and of Germinal 22 Year XI, the decree of 
 the year XII, the penal code of 1810, the law of 1834 and of 1849, all 
 prohibited the formation of unions by the workingmen (Levasseur "His- 
 toire ... a 1870" I, pp. 379-381, 497-498. II, pp. 12, 435-436, 875, 879 and 
 Bourgin, pp. 113-114). It was only after the enactment of the law of May 
 25, 1864 that the right of union was not prohibited to them. 
 
 (Levasseur Histoire ... a 1870" II, p. 513.) 
 
 67 Levasseur, "Histoire . . . 1870," II, pp. 6-16. 
 
 «8/6Mi; pp. 240-242, 247-249, 514-520. 
 
The Social Background 23 
 
 ers and the industrial capitalists. After the February revolution 
 of 1848, the burning question of the day was how to satisfy the 
 demand of the workingmen. In fact, it was through the pressure 
 of the workingmen's party that the government appointed the ill- 
 fated Luxemburg commission.^^ 
 
 After the failure of the commission and the suppression of 
 the June insurrection, the political influence of the workingmen 
 as a class seemed to disappear altogether. But this is not the 
 whole truth. Napoleon III, posing as the Emperor of the work- 
 ingmen had to court their favor for his personal advantage.''" 
 
 There is still another side of the picture. From 1830 to 1840, 
 the material condition of the workingmen was rather deplorable. 
 "What strikes the man of justice and of humanity, in examining 
 the conditions of the workingmen," said Villeneuve-Bargemont, 
 "is the condition of dependence and abandonment which the 
 workingmen of the factories suffered from the oppression of the 
 employers." ^^ The physical and moral conditions of the work- 
 ingmen in 1834 and 1835, as described by Mr. Villerme, demands 
 our deepest sympathy.''^ Debauchery, intoxication and libertinage 
 on one hand,^^ and excessive labor hours,'^* heartless exploitation 
 of children of tender age,^^ and immoral and unhealthy sur- 
 roundings ^^ on the other, were not uncommon abuses of the 
 manufactures he visited. Against these abuses, certain mild be- 
 ginnings of social legislation were found in the 'child labor law 
 of 1841 ; in the twelve hour law of 1848 ; '^^ in the permission ex- 
 tended to laborers to form cooperative societies for collective 
 
 69 Ibid: II, pp. 877-878. 
 
 70 Hayes, II, pp. 158-159. 
 
 71 Villerme, II, 253. 
 
 72 For a general view of the condition of the workingmen in the cotton, 
 silk and woolen industry, see Villerme, I. pp. 437-446. 
 
 73 Levasseur "Histoire ... a 1870." II, pp. 223-226. Villerme I, pp. 
 79-86, 105-107. 
 
 74 Villerme, I, p. 22. II, pp. 83-85. 
 
 75 Villerme, II, pp. 86-92, 110-125. 
 
 76 Villerme, II, pp. 203-275. 
 
 77 Ogg, pp. 398-399, 400-401. 
 
24 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 buying and selling (1863); in legislation for trade unions, and 
 the recognition for the first time of the right of strikes and lock- 
 outs (1864) ; and in the extension of state guarantees to work- 
 ingmen's voluntary insurance against death and industrial acci- 
 dents (1868).^« 
 
 Thus we see in France, between 1830 and 1865, three distinct 
 classes. The bourgeoisie, the ruling class of the day, powerful 
 in the government and dominating industry and commerce. The 
 proletariat, poor but restless, antagonistic to the capitahsts and 
 listening eagerly to democratic and socialistic agitators. Between 
 these two classes, there was the peasant class which, forming a 
 not inconsiderable, though small, section of the French population, 
 was anti-socialistic and would always act as a counter-balance to 
 the radical tendency of the proletariat. 
 
 3. The Political Background. 
 
 Needless to say, the economic and social changes found their 
 reflection in corresponding changes in the government. At first, 
 monarchy by divine right is seen giving place to the republic of 
 the bourgeoisie. Then, to the military government of Napoleon. 
 Then, to the reactionary Bourbon monarchy. Then, to the bour- 
 gois monarchy of Louis Philippe. Then, to the Second Republic. 
 Then, to the plebiscitary government of Louis Napoleon. 
 
 Proudhon helped in the overthrow of the bourgeoisie mon- 
 archy of Louis Philippe in 1848. He believed that thereby he 
 could help establish a true republic. But the republic that was 
 established was not the one he had had in mind.'^^ On becoming 
 a member of the Assembly, in 1848, he took occasion to let the 
 general public know this, by giving his views fiery utterance on 
 the Assembly floor. His speeches became surcharged with abuse, 
 which he hurled indiscriminately, not taking any particular pains 
 to avoid Louis Napoleon. For his efforts, Louis Napoleon had 
 him thrown into prison in 1849, where he remained for the next 
 
 78 Hayes, II, p. 159. 
 
 78 Proudhon, "Justice," II, p. 132. 
 
The Political Background 25 
 
 three years. When he came out, in 1852, he found that by a 
 coup d'Etat in 1851, Louis Napoleon 'had adroitly changed the 
 republic into an empire.^" 
 
 Proudhon approved of Louis Napoleon's Empire no more 
 than he had approved of his Republic. Neither monarchy, be its 
 form what it may, nor the traditional republic, suited Proudhon.®^ 
 For him, at first, the ideal form of government was as paradoxi- 
 cally expressed by him that of anarchy ; which view gave way in 
 the last years of his life to a belief in federalism.^^ 
 
 As has already been seen, the history of France between 1789 
 and 1830 was politically a history of struggle between the bour- 
 geoisie and the old privileged orders — the nobility and the clergy. 
 From 1830 to 1872, it was a history of struggle between the 
 bourgeoisie and the proletariat. 
 
 To be more exact, we may divide the history of France into 
 six periods: (1) the revolution (1789-1799); (2) the consulate 
 and the first empire (1799-1815); (3) the Restoration (1815- 
 1830) ; (4) the July monarchy (1830-1848) ; (5) the second re- 
 public (1848-1851) ; and (6) the second empire (1852-1872). 
 
 From 1789 to 1799, the bourgeoisie seemed to be triumphant 
 over the old privileged orders — the nobility and the clergy. They 
 abolished all the survivals of serfdom. They confiscated the great 
 estates of the nobility and the clergy. In a word, they overthrew 
 the old regime and inaugurated a new one — the regime of the 
 bourgeoisie.^^ 
 
 After the coup d'Etat of 1799, the condition was quite differ- 
 ent. Napoleon, acting as an arbiter between conflicting parties 
 and classes, played them against each other, with admirable skill. 
 Leaning sometimes toward the people, sometimes toward the 
 conservative elements, always towards the army, he suppressed 
 every opposition and every remaining check.^* 
 
 80 See Chapter II. 
 
 81 See Chapter V. 
 
 82 See Chapter VI and VII. 
 
 83 Guerard, p. 51. Levasseur "Histoire ... a 1870," I, pp. 78, 288-290, 
 536-540. 
 
 84 Guerard, pp. 74-76. 
 
26 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 Then came the Restoration. The royaUsts, composed of the 
 nobiUty and the clergy, obtained control of the government, 
 and many reactionary measures were adopted by them against 
 the bourgeoisie.®^ The position of the Bourbon monarchy was 
 gradually weakened. 
 
 Then the liberal bourgeoisie again came into power and over- 
 threw the government in 1830.®® Perhaps we may notice in pass- 
 ing that the year 1830 is very significant, politically, in the his- 
 tory of France. It was then that the old privileged orders — the 
 nobility and the clergy — declined, and the bourgeoisie triumphed. 
 It was then that the new class struggle between the bourgeoisie 
 and the proletariat just began to develop. 
 
 From 1830 to 1848, France was a middle-class monarchy. 
 What reforms were made during this period were essentially 
 middle-class reforms. The municipal reforms of 1831 and the 
 educational reforms of 1833, were the best examples. For a time, 
 the government was popular with the bourgeoisie, and held its 
 ground. But the determined resistance of the king to the grow- 
 ing demand for electoral reform from part of the constitutional 
 monarchists and the dynastic Left, i.e., the Liberal and the 
 Royalist middle class, led at last to open insurrection in Paris. 
 Thus, through the comtined effort of the bourgeoisie and the 
 workingmen, the compromise government of Louis Philippe was 
 overthrown in 1848.®'' 
 
 The revolution of 1848 presents two distinct phases: (1) 
 from February to April, 1848, the joint government of the work- 
 ingmen and the bourgeoisie and (2) after April 23, 1848, the 
 suppression of the workingmen's insurrection, known as the "June 
 days" and the complete triumph of the bourgeoisie.®® 
 
 In December, 1848, Louis Napoleon was elected as the presi- 
 dent of the second republic, by an overwhelming majority of the 
 Assembly. From the outset of his administration, he deliberately 
 
 85 Hayes, II, pp. 14-20, 93-94. 
 
 86 Ibid: p. 95. Lcvasseur, "Histoire ... a 1870," II, pp. 3-4. 
 
 87 Hayes, II, pp. 116-120. 
 ^^Ibid: pp. 120-122. 
 
The Political Backgr«un» 27 
 
 set about enlisting the support of all political and social groups 
 in the state . Having found his position well established, he wil- 
 fully brought about the coup d'Etat of 1851. 
 
 From 1851 to 1870, the government of Louis Napoleon tried 
 to win the favor of the conservatives, the liberals, the working- 
 men and the capitalists all alike, but it found it could not side 
 whole-heartedly with any of them.*^ 
 
 4. The Philosophical Background 
 
 The economic, social and political changes that have been 
 noted could hardly have taken place without being somehow 
 accounted for by changes in French thought. There was ample 
 change. This gave rise to various philosophical schools. In 
 Proudhon's time French thought was divided into three such 
 schools; that of the "democrates," which had been influenced in a 
 great measure by the ideas of Rousseau, that of the traditionalists, 
 and that of the socialists, with none of which Proudhon agreed. 
 
 Rousseau's principles embodied the revolutionary spirit of the 
 eighteenth century. He was democratic. But to Proudhon, who 
 himself had ample room to improve his acquaintance with eco- 
 nomic principles, Rousseau's philosophy was not trustworthy 
 because he knew nothing about economic problems of the state, 
 or at least made no endeavor to solve them.^° So, away with 
 Rousseau and his teachings. 
 
 The Traditionalists, on the other hand, were monarchical. 
 This was reactionary. Besides, Proudhon hated monarchy any- 
 how. So, away with the Traditionalists and their teachings. 
 
 As for the Socialists, they aimed at ameliorating the social 
 conditions of the lower classes. But to Utopian and impractical 
 Proudhon, the' Socialists were Utopian and impractical. So, 
 away with the Socialists and their teachings. 
 
 ^^Ibid: pp. 155-159. In fact it was Napoleon III who dissolved the 
 middle class assembly, proclaimed the establishment of the universal man- 
 hood suffrage in favor of the proletariat and brought about the coup d'Etat 
 of 1851. See also Levasseur "Histoire ... a 1870." II, pp. 467-475. 
 
 90 Proudhon, Idee Generale, pp. 116-120. 
 
28 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 He consigned them all to the governmental ash-pile. The 
 ideal government, he insisted, was to have no government, which 
 meant, of course, anarchy. But finding that' since people are 
 only human some government is necessary, he insisted that in that 
 event, it should be as little government as possible; which, of 
 course, meant federalism.^^ 
 
 From the point of view of its social and political philosophy, 
 the history of France may be divided into three periods: (1) 
 1760-1800, (2) 1802-1825 and (3) 1825-1865. The first is a 
 period of revolt against the abuses of the old economic, social 
 and political order. Rousseau was the incarnation of this revo- 
 lutionary spirit. The second is a period of reaction. 
 Weary of rationalism and pseudo-classical mythology, it sought 
 to return to Catholicism and feudal monarchy. The masters of 
 this period are Chateaubriand, De Maistre, De Bonald, Lamen- 
 nais.^^ The third period is one of social unrest— a period wherein 
 the industrial revolution first had its full sway in France, and 
 wherein the poverty and the misery of the workingmen began to 
 be keenly felt by the public. Failing to cope with this new situa- 
 tion, the CathoHc reactionaries fell into a state of spiritual an- 
 archism, of negation and despair ;^2 whereas the individualistic 
 liberals fell into the more embarrassing state of smug optimism 
 or stony fatalism.^* In consequence, socialistic ideas were eag- 
 erly listened to by the proletariat. 
 
 Thus the revolutionary school, the traditional school and the 
 socialistic school formed the three main currents of thought in 
 France etween the year 1760 and 1865. 
 (a) The revolutionary school. 
 
 Voltaire, Diderot and Rousseau were the three distinguished 
 intellectual leaders of the French revolutionary school in the 
 eighteenth century. But Rousseau was the most directly revo- 
 lutionary of them all. His political theory in general and his 
 
 »i See Chapters VI and VII, below. 
 92Guerard, pp. 116-117. 
 93 /bid; p. 117. 
 ^*lhid: p. 194. 
 
The Philosophical Background 29 
 
 theory of sovereignty and of the social contract in particular, 
 are so generally understood that it will be unnecessary for us 
 to consider them here.''^ 
 
 (b) The traditionalist school. 
 
 The political doctrine of the traditionalist school is 'directly op- 
 posed to that of the revolutionary school. First, it attacks the 
 theory of the social contract. "The tower of Babel" says De 
 Maistre, "is the naive image of a mass of men who assemble to 
 create a constitution.^'' Not only does the power to create not 
 belong to men, but it appears that our power, unassociated, does 
 not extend to changing for the better established institutions." ®^ 
 Bonald repudiates the doctrine of the social contract in a more 
 vigorous way. Society, according to him, is the creation of God, 
 instead of man. Social contract involves the idea of equality 
 between contracting parties. How can man be subject to equals? 
 Only where some are in the position of inferiors is there willing- 
 ness to accept so hard but so necessary a fact. Besides, social 
 contract again implies the idea of organization; and, to organi- 
 zation, power is already essential. Once power is present, there 
 is no longer that equality of status which puts its institution on 
 valid grounds.^* 
 
 Second, the traditionalist school attacks the theory of popular 
 sovereignty. DeBonald identified popular sovereignty with athe- 
 ism and materiahsm.^^ "If the people is, as declared, legiti- 
 mately sovereign, then," said he, "all laws made by them must 
 be just. But justice rests upon a broader and deeper basis than 
 this." ^^^ Lamennais denounced the sovereignty of the people 
 
 ^5 For a general view of his work see Dunning, "Political theories 
 from Rousseau to Spencer," New York, 1920, pp. 1-44. Janet, "Histoire de 
 la science politique dans ses rapports avec la morale, second edition, Paris, 
 1887, Vol. II, pp. 415-477. Lowell "Rousseau and the Sentimentalists," 
 in Among my Books (1870), Vol. I. 
 
 ^6 fitude sur la souverainete, p. 238. 
 
 ^^ Essai sur la principe generateur des constitutions politiques, p. 53. 
 
 98 Principe Constitutif, pp. 449-450. 
 
 ^9 Essai Analytique, p. 55. 
 
 100 Legislation primitive, Oeuvres III, p. 21. 
 
30 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 even more bitterly. The sovereignty of the people tends to sub- 
 vert social order and, in making of power the plaything of am- 
 bitious pride, renders tolerance impossible.^*'^ 
 
 Thirdly, the traditionalist school attacks the theory of the gen- 
 eral will. De Maistre said rather ingeniously, "The law is so little 
 the will of all, that the more it is the will of all the less it is 
 law, so that it would cease to be law if it were v/ithout exception 
 the work of all who owe it obedience." ^°' 
 
 So much for the negative criticism of the traditionalist school. 
 Positively speaking, the basic idea of the traditionalists is three- 
 fold. First, it is religious. "Government," says De Maistre, "is 
 really a religion ; it has its dogmas, its mysteries, its ministers." ^"^ 
 "Everything shows us the cradle of sovereignty surrounded by 
 miracles, and the divinity intervening in the foundation of em- 
 pires." "* To De Bonald, God is essentially the directing force 
 of the world. "^ While desiring men's happiness, he has laid 
 down laws for them with that end in view.^°® Princes are the 
 ministers of God and it is because they are the ministers of God 
 that their interest is at one with that of the people.^°^ Second, 
 it is monarchical. Chateaubriand, De Maistre,^*" Lamennais ^"^ 
 and De Bonald are all advocates of absolute monarchy. De Bon- 
 ald's argument for monarchy is especially significant. According 
 to him, the king is the absolute sovereign. He wills, and his 
 
 i«i Oeuvres Completes II, pp. 188 and 193. 
 
 io2£tude, p. 247. 
 
 103 Ibid: p. 247. 
 
 ^o^Ibid: p. 199. 
 
 105 Laski's "Authority in the Modern State," p. 132. 
 
 ^°^Ibid: p. 134. 
 
 107 Ibid: p. 149. 
 
 108 DeMaistre advocates absolute monarchy in his "Essai sur le 
 principe gencrateur des constitutions politiqucs," (1810). 
 
 100 Lamennais defended absolute monarchy in the Conscrvateur of 
 1818-20. But in 1834, he wrote "Paroles d'un Croyant" declaring war 
 agauist monarchy and papacy, preaching revolution as a sacred duty and 
 looking to the emergence of a new society and a new Christianity. 
 
The Philosophical Background 31 
 
 absolute command is binding upon every element in the body- 
 politic, and exercised for the benefit of the people.^^** 
 
 In contrasting the idea of the traditionalist school with that 
 of Rousseau, we shall not fail to see that while the theory of the 
 former is a theory of tradition, of divine right and of faith, the 
 theory of the latter is a theory of reason against tradition, of man 
 against God, and of democracy against monarchy. 
 
 (c) The socialists. 
 
 The industrial revolution in France as has already been seen 
 created two new classes — the bourgeoisie, wealthy and prosper- 
 ous, and the proletariat, poor and oppressed. In coping with this 
 new situation, the socialists devised various schemes, some prac- 
 tical, others illusive. 
 
 One of the earliest leaders in the socialistic movement is Henri 
 de Saint-Simon. Having witnessed the confusion and horrors of 
 the French revolution, St. Simon was liberal, but not democra- 
 tic. He attacked the theory of popular sovereignty. The sov- 
 ereignty of the people, according to him, is simply the antithesis 
 of the sovereignty of divine right, or the sovereignty by the 
 grace of God. It is the metaphysic of the legalists against that 
 of the clergy.^^^ Again, the sovereignty of the people is incom- 
 petent. When its power touches the domain of production and 
 exchange, some crisis will inevitably foUow.^^^ 
 
 While denouncing the sovereignty of the people, St. Simon 
 considered the representative monarchy as a necessary transitory 
 regime, between an arbitrary regime which existed, and a liberal 
 one which would come into being later.^^^ He even went so far 
 as to propose an alliance between the Bourbon and the industrial 
 classes. He asked the king to declare himself the industrial 
 chief of the kingdom and to accomplish the revolution by royal 
 ordinance. ^^^ 
 
 1" Laski's "Authority in the Modern State," p. 152. 
 
 1" E. Fourniere, p. 104. St. Simon's Oeuvres, Vol. XVI, p. 211. 
 
 112 E. Fourniere, p. 114. 
 
 ^^^Ibid: p. 112. 
 
 "4 St. Simon's Oeuvres, Vol. XXII. p. 254. 
 
32 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 So much for the destructive criticism of St. Simon. What he 
 expected to reahze in a more constructive way in the future, 
 was the substitution of the industrial regime for the feudal and 
 military regime. In the industrial regime there are five main 
 characteristics which we may notice. First, in this new regime, 
 industry is naturally dominant. The government will gradually 
 become the tributary of industry.^^^ Second, the government of 
 things will be substituted for the government of man, the 'admin- 
 istrative system for the political system, capacity for power.^^^ 
 Thirdly, the sovereignty of the social body will be substituted for 
 the sovereignty of the people. St. Simon is rather against the 
 interpretation of the dogma of popular sovereignty than 
 against the dogma itself. Instead of entrusting to men who are 
 invested with social functions (St. Simon means here the public 
 officers) the most important political function of fixing the direc- 
 tion according to which the society ought to advance, it will be 
 necessary for us to entrust this function to the social body {corps 
 social.) ^^"^ This social body was to consist only of the industrial, 
 the socially useful, the learned and the artists. All others, who 
 are considered by St. Simon as parasites, axe excluded. Taken 
 collectively, this social body would exercise the power of the 
 sovereign in the state.^^^ Sovereignty, to him, consisted not of 
 opinions arbitrarily enacted into law, but of principles derived 
 from the nature of things, the necessity and justice of which are 
 recognized by the people.^^^ Fourthly, the government should 
 be directed by the competent men of science, of the fine arts 
 and of trade. There should be no place for arbitrariness.^^** 
 But most noteworthy of all is the fact that in the new regime 
 he neither encouraged nor suspected the antagonism between the 
 
 "5 Oeuvres, Vol. XIX. pp. 148-149. 
 118 E. Fourniere, p. 113. 
 
 11' "L'organizateur Onzieme lettre, etc." Oeuvres, Vol. XX, pp. 197- 
 198. 
 
 118 E. Fourniere, p. 114. 
 
 118 "L'Organizateur Onzieme lettre, etc." Oeuvres, Vol. XX, p. 115. 
 
 120 Paul Janet, "Saint Simon et la Saint Simonisme," pp. 54-55. 
 
The Philosophical Background 33 
 
 moneyed class and the workingmen.^^^ On the contrary, it is 
 Lafitte and Perier, the well-known industrial capitalists, he has 
 in view as future leaders of his reform enterprise.^^^ To St. 
 Simon, the property owners, however inferior in number, pos- 
 sess more knowledge than the lower classes.^^^ 
 
 Frangois Charles Marie Fourier was neither a partisan of ab- 
 solutism, nor of representative government. Representative gov- 
 ernment, according to him, while subordinating the laboring class 
 to the possessing class, expresses only the interests of the latter.^^* 
 More emphatically, he repudiated the theory of popular sover- 
 eignty. The person whom we clothe with the title of sovereignty, 
 has neither work nor bread. He sells his life at five sous per 
 day. It is simply absurd to speak of political transformation 
 without corresponding changes in the organization of economic 
 institutions. ^^^ 
 
 In the place not only of absolutism but also of representative 
 government he expected to establish, in the future, the regime 
 of socialism, or mutual guarantees, in which complete harmony 
 would prevail. The main characteristics of the regime of mutual 
 guarantees are fourfold. 'First, industry, organized on the basis 
 of a comprehensive study of human nature, would be more at- 
 tractive. The chief task of the reformer is, therefore, to analyze 
 human passions, and to study their combinations. Fourier dis- 
 covers twelve major passions which can be combined into eight 
 hundred and ten characteristic types. His psychology is to a 
 degree fanciful. ^^^ Second, all the members will be, at once, pro- 
 ducers and consumers, fairly remunerated in proportion to their 
 contribution of capital, labor and talent. In other words, all of 
 them must be productive laborers.^^^ Thirdly, the regime of 
 mutual guarantees is industrial. To Fourier, the individual may 
 
 i2i/&icf: p. 98. 
 122 /^i J; pp. 36, 46. 
 
 123 E. Fourniere, pp. 110-111. 
 
 124 Ibid: p. 186. 
 125/fctW; p. 104. 
 
 126 Guerard, p. 196. 
 
 127 Sargent, p. 145. 
 
34 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 develop his personality without any restraints except the law of 
 his own nature. At the same time, he should not impede or re- 
 strain the development of any other individual's personality. 
 So with Fourier, the individual is everything; the state is noth- 
 ing.^-^ Fourthly, local autonomy, or decentralization, is also one 
 of the distinct features in the regime of mutual guarantees. 
 Every commune, managing its own affairs, would have no rela- 
 tion with the general administration either of the kingdom or of 
 the globe, except to pay its taxes or shares of the public expenses 
 with regularity and in gross ; and to send delegates to the assem- 
 blies of the provinces, of the kingdoms and of the earth's capital, 
 which should be in Constantinople. So in this new social organi- 
 zation it is not the commune which is a fiction, it is the provinces, 
 kingdoms, states which are fictitious, since they represent a cer- 
 tain number of communes, without any power over them or in 
 respect of them ; tlie communes, or phalansteres, having the sole 
 power over their respective local governments. -^^^ 
 
 Both St. Simon and Fourier, we may notice in passing, are 
 indifferent to the idea of class struggle. St. Simon urges the co- 
 operation of the employer and the employee; Fourier, that of 
 capital, talent and work.^^^ They do not represent the interests 
 of the proletariat. What they propose to emancipate is humanity 
 at large.^^^ 
 
 Etienne Cabet's political idea was essentially influenced by 
 Rousseau. This may be shown in the theory of equality. Na- 
 ture, according to him, has made men equal not only in force, but 
 also in intelligence. For him, as for Rousseau, inequality origi- 
 nates in societ)^ Reason is a secondary providence which can 
 create equality. Thus he entrusts to the popular sovereignty the 
 duty of creating social and political equality.^^^ His theory of 
 sovereignty is similar to that of Rousseau. In subjecting 
 
 128 E. Fourniere, p. 183. 
 
 129 Sargent, p. 154. 
 
 130 Bcbel, p. 39. E. Fourniere, p. 400. 
 
 131 E. Fourniere, Preface, pp. ii-iii. 
 ^^2 Ibid: p. 10. 
 
The Philosophical Background 35 
 
 the people to the sovereignty of the people, he gives to 
 the sovereign an unlimited power.^^^ Society should concentrate, 
 dispose of and direct all. It should submit all the wishes and the 
 actions of the people to its regulations, to its order and to its 
 discipline.^^^ 
 
 Louis Blanc's idea is more practical. While rather tren- 
 chantly criticising the prevailing bourgeoisie government as being 
 a government by a class and for a class, he urged the establish- 
 ment of a democratic state, which should direct its energies to 
 the emancipation of the proletariat by setting up national work- 
 shops for the workingmen. He believed that gradually these 
 national workshops would displace privately owned industrial 
 establishments, and private competition would be made to give 
 way to co-operative production.^^^ Some time, when, through 
 the complete emancipation of the workmen, the distinction be- 
 tween inferior and superior classes would disappear, there would 
 be no longer need of a strong and active government. But as 
 long as this state of inferiority lasts for the workingmen, the 
 establishment of an authority is indispensable.^^® 
 
 And now, having briefly described the three main currents of 
 thought in France in the nineteenth century, it is very desirable 
 for us to find out Proudhon's precise attitude toward them. 
 
 Proudhon's criticism of Rousseau's theory of social contract, 
 of law and of popular sovereignty, is very ingenious. We shall 
 explain the details of it later. With regard to the traditionalists, 
 he speaks of them with a mixed feeling of admiration and con- 
 tempt — admiration for their genius and contempt for their abso- 
 lute doctrine.^^'^ But most significant of all, is his criticism of 
 the socialists. 
 
 Speaking generally of socialism or communism, Proudhon 
 did not seem to have any favorable opinion of it. Communism, 
 
 ^^3 Ibid: p. 614. 
 
 134 Voyage en Icarie, p. 403. 
 
 135 Ogg., pp. 495-496. 
 
 136 Organization du Travail, pp. xxv. 
 
 137 Melange, III, p. 42. 
 
36 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 according to him, is Utopian and impractical^^^ It denies expe- 
 rience/^'^ annihilates the individual, and compels him to sur- 
 render his personality in the name of society."" It is the last 
 heritage of religious illusion, and the mother of the authorita- 
 tive spirit/'*^ It means, further, the exploitation of the strong 
 by the weak."^ It violates the sovereignty of conscience and 
 equality; the first by restraining spontaneity of mind and heart, 
 and freedom of thought and action ; the second, by placing labor 
 and laziness, skill and stupidity, and even vice and virtue on an 
 equality in point of comfort.^*^ 
 
 While recognizing the merits of the various socialistic pro- 
 grammes respectively,"* Proudhon criticized them still more tren- 
 chantly. The idea of St. Simon is not scientific. It is retrogres- 
 sive. By its religious inclination, it even hampers the develop- 
 ment of economic institutions, and the spirit of liberalism in 
 society."^ In the establishment of industrial feudality, it is anti- 
 democratic and anti-liberal."^ His criticism of Fourier is even 
 more violent and sarcastic. Fourier is simply a whimsical 
 writer."^ He admits equality, the idea of monarchical govern- 
 ment, and democratic government, the representative system, and 
 the dictatorial system of labor and capital, equality and inequality, 
 
 138 ii>id: p. 177. Socialism and communism identical, Melange II, p. 132. 
 
 139 Corresp., II, p. 226. 
 1*0 Justice, I, pp. 126-127. 
 141 Bougie, pp. 220-221. 
 
 1*2 What is Property, p. 250. 
 
 1*3 Ibid: p. 251. 
 
 1** "L'ecole de Saint-Simon, en protestant la premiere au nom du pro- 
 letariat, a done pose la necessite d'une nouvcUe revolution. 
 
 L'ecole de Fourier, en faisant appcl a la science, a determine par la 
 mcme la caractere objectif de cette revolution. 
 
 Louis Blanc, en proposant d'organiser le travail, a determine son 
 caractere cconomique." Melange, II, p. 36. 
 
 (See also Idee Gencrale, pp. 126, 136.) 
 
 i« Melange, II, pp. 32-33. 
 
 1*8 Letter to Prince Napoleon, Sept. 7, 1853. (See Saint-Beuve 
 "Proudhon" appendice, p. 322.) 
 
 14T Demonstration du socialismc (O. C. XVIII, p. 33). 
 
The Philosophical Background 37 
 
 faith and reason.^*^ In spite of the enormous rubbish of his 
 hallucinations still remaining to us, there is no science, no theory, 
 no system in his work.^*^ No less bitter is Proudhon's criticism 
 of Louis Blanc, whose idea to Proudhon is reactionary and doc- 
 trinaire.^^" It consists in replacing free action by the initiative 
 force of power, the real being by a being of reason, life and 
 liberty by a chimera.^^^ 
 
 "8 Melange, II, p. 34. 
 
 "9 Oeuvres, Vol. XVII, p. 273. 
 
 150 Melange, II. pp. 25, 35. 
 
 151 Contradictions Economiques, II, p. 261. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 Proudhon's Life.^ 
 
 In the evolution of abstract doctrines, the immediate environ- 
 ment, be it political, social or economic, w^ill necessarily leave its 
 intellectual impression. So w^ill circumstances — the circum- 
 stances of the particular age — circumstances that later generations 
 can analyse and explain. And as if acting in opposition to these 
 two big forces, apparently resisting them and yet being moulded 
 by them, there vi^ill always be found that comparatively inexpli- 
 cable force of a powerful personality. If in reading Proudhon, 
 for instance, the philosophical student attempts to reconstruct the 
 general characteristics of the age in which he lived, the student 
 finds he must at the same time reproduce the portrait of the 
 person with whose life that age was Hnked. True, the student 
 must give his attention to the Republicans, the Traditionalists, 
 the Socialists, he must analyse the agricultural, industrial and 
 commercial revolutions, he must familiarize himself with the me- 
 chanical influence exercised on the age by its contemporary events 
 and by the events of its historical past ; but also, and as a key to 
 the whole, one must come face to face with Proudhon, the man 
 himself. 
 
 Proudhon's life may be divided into two periods : ( 1 ) the 
 period of boyhood and youth, and (2) the period of mature intel- 
 lectual activity. 
 
 (1) The period of boyhood and youth (1809-1836). 
 
 Proudhon was born at Besangon in January 1809. His par- 
 entage was proletarian ; his father was a cooper, enterprising and 
 sarcastic; his mother a cook, a superior woman with a heroic 
 
 ^ For a chronological resume of Proudhon's life, see appendix 1. 
 
Boyhood and Youth 39 
 
 character.^ From the age of eight to twelve, he passed his time in 
 the field, occupying himself with little rustic duties and taking 
 care of the cows.^ In 1820, when he was twelve years of age, he 
 became a cellar boy in an inn.* Later in the same year he was 
 sent to the college of Besangon, where |he proved himself an able 
 student.^ But on account of the poverty of his parents, he was 
 compelled to leave school before receiving a degree.*^ 
 
 In 1827, when he was nineteen years old, he entered into the 
 service of Gauthier, who had a printing house in Besangon. At 
 first he was a proof reader, later he became a compositor.'^ After 
 the revolution of July 1830, the business of the company greatly 
 declined and he had to leave. Then he went to Paris in search 
 of work. Finding none there he travelled to other cities, doing 
 all of his travelling on foot because he lacked the means for 
 travelling otherwise. In this manner he journeyed from Paris 
 to Lyon and from Lyon to Marseille.^ He obtained employment 
 in Neufchatel, Lyon, Marseille and Draguignan.^ None of the 
 work, however, w^as permanent or remunerative. At length in 
 1831, he found himself in Toulon without work, with only thirty 
 francs and fifty sous in his pocket.^" So in 1832 he returned to 
 Besangon and entered the company of Gauthier as an overseer 
 of printing {prote)}^ Toward 1836, he established a small print- 
 ing house with one of his friends in Besangon,^- which business 
 he sold in 1843 because in some manner it became "ruined." ^' 
 
 2 Desjardin I. pp. 3-4, Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon," pp. 3-4. 
 
 3 F. Miickle II, pp. 1-2. Desjardin I, p. 6. Lagarde, p. 8. 
 
 * What is Property, pp. 4-5. 
 ^ Desjardin I, . 9. 
 
 ^ What is Property, pp. 4-5. 
 
 '' Justice I, p. 241. Lagarde, p. 10. Desjardin I, p. 12. 
 
 * Lagarde, p. 11. 
 
 9 Desjardin I, p. 14. Mulberger "P. J. Proudhon," pp. 7-8. 
 ^° Lagarde, p. 11. 
 
 11 Desjardin I, p. 16. Putlitz, p. 82. 
 
 12 Lagarde, p. 11. Desjardin I, p. 16. What is Property, p. 9. Miil- 
 berger "P. J. Proudhon," p. 10. 
 
 13 What is Property, p. 13. Putlitz, p. 80. 
 
40 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 Proudhon's life during his boyhood and youth thus becomes 
 especially significant in two respects. First, he was a man of the 
 people. Second, he was a self-taught man. 
 
 (2) The period of mature intellectual activity (1837-1865). 
 
 Proudhon was, essentially, a man of ideas rather than a man 
 of action. His intellectual life began with the year 1837. While 
 working in the printing company of Gauthier Bros, during the 
 years 1827 and 1830 as proof-reader and compositor, amidst the 
 arduous tedium of reading and composing he did not fail to 
 grasp the opportunity of learning Greek, Latin and even He- 
 brew. His first book "Essai de grammaire generate," which he 
 published in 1837, was a result of this study. Fortunately for 
 him, about this time he somehow succeeded in securing a trien- 
 nial pension of 1,500 francs from the academy of Besangon 
 known as the Suard Pension,^* thus giving him the means of 
 studying unharassed by financial worries. About the end of 
 1838, he went to Paris for the purpose of pursuing his studies 
 in political economy.^^ 
 
 The intellectual life of Proudhon from 1840 to 1865 may be 
 sub-divided into two periods: (a) Proudhon as an anarchist 
 (1840-1861), and (b) Proudhon as a federalist (1862-1865). In 
 1840, he declared himself an anarchist.^** From this time on, 
 until the year 1862, he fought passionately for liberty and justice 
 and against what he then considered was the tyranny and in- 
 justice of authority. After 1862, his ideas underwent a complete 
 change. Instead of anarchism he preached the doctrine of 
 federalism in politics and mutualism in economics.^^ Instead of 
 fighting against authority, he now tried to balance liberty and 
 authority in the federal regime. 
 
 (a) Proudhon as an anarchist (1840-1861). 
 
 1* What is Property, pp. 9-10. Desjardin I, pp. 25-27. 
 Injustice, I, p. 292. 
 
 18 "Although a firm friend of order, I am (in the full sense of the 
 term) an anarchist." What is Property, p. 260. 
 
The Period of Anarchism 41 
 
 We may first consider his career as an anarchist. Proudhon's 
 life as an anarchist passed through three stages of change: (x) 
 The period of demolition (1840-1845), (y) the period of tran- 
 sition from the spirit of demolition to the spirit of construction 
 (1846-1852), and (z) the period of construction or of maturity 
 and clearness ( 1852-1861 ).i« 
 
 (x) The period of demolition (1840-1845). 
 
 In June, 1840, Proudhon published "Qu'est-ce que la pro- 
 prietef" (What is Property?) and dedicated it to the Academy 
 of Besangon. This work is full of destructive criticism against 
 property. Consequently a member of the Academy in August 
 of the same year called the Academy's attention to Proudhon's 
 work and demanded, first that the Academy should disavow and 
 condemn the production with all formality possible as having 
 been published without its consent, and as attributing to the 
 Academy opinions directly opposite to those entertained by every 
 one of its members; second, that Proudhon should be directed, 
 in case of a second edition, to cancel the dedication ; and thirdly, 
 that the resolutions of the Academy should be included in its 
 printed reports. These propositions, having been put to the vote, 
 were carried. Proudhon made himself merry with these pro- 
 ceedings. "After this burlesque decree, which its authors 
 thought to render vigorous by the contradictions it contained," 
 said he, "I have only to beg my readers to abstain from measuring 
 the intelligence of my compatriots by that of our Academy."^'' 
 
 ^' ". . . si, en 1840, j'ai debute par I'anarchie conclusion de ma critique 
 de I'idee gouvernementale, c'est que je devois finir par la federation, base 
 necessaire du droit des gens Europeen et, plus tard, de I'organisation de 
 tous les £tats." Letter to his friend, Nov. 2, 1862. 
 
 18 Diehl's classification is somewhat different from mine. He divides 
 Proudhon's life from 1825-1865 into the three following periods: (a) 
 Die vorbereitende Periode (1825-1848) ; (b) Die Periode der praktischen 
 Vorschlage und Versuche (Von der Februar Revolution bis zur Verurtei- 
 lung Proudhons zu 3 Jahriger Gefangnisstrafe Marz 1849) ; (c) Die 
 Periode nach dem scheitern der praktischen Versuche bis zum Tode 
 Proudhons (1849-1865), Diehl, p. 3. 
 
 19 Sargant, pp. 314-315. Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon," p. 25. 
 
42 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 But this is not the end of the whole story. In 1841, the 
 Academy asked him to appear before the learned society {la docte 
 compagnie) to answer questions which might be asked about his 
 book, or, if he could not appear in person, to soon make known 
 his means of defense. He sent them a written reply. While 
 admitting some exaggerations of language in his work, he in- 
 sisted that the book contained nothing which should alter the 
 bond of veneration and love which had attached him to the 
 Academy, and especially to the Franche-Comte. The Academy 
 then asked him to publish no books henceforth, except with its 
 consent.^" 
 
 Not only the Academy, but also the government was hostile 
 towards him. Mr. Vivien, the minister of justice, had thought 
 of prosecuting him for his work inasmuch as the book not only 
 attacked the authority which adhered to property, but also that 
 which was inherent in government itself. The minister, however, 
 saw fit to consult Mr. Blanqui on the subject. Because of the 
 latter's advice, the notion of a legal proceeding was abandoned.^^ 
 
 In January, 1841, Proudhon became a collaborator of M. 
 Turbot in writing a work upon the problem of reformatories. 
 He called them "preventive prisons." M. Turbot was a judge at 
 the tribunal of the Seine. He was a man of action, but not a 
 man of ideas. Proudhon tried to infuse his anti-property idea j 
 into the work that he and M. Turbot were doing. Their relation- 
 ship was soon severed.^^ 
 
 In answering the attacks of Fourier's disciples on his theory 
 of property, Proudhon published in 1842 his "Lettre a M. Victor 
 Considerant."^^ On January 18, 1842, his work was seized by 
 the government. He himself was accused of attacking property 
 and stirring up hatred against the government and against certain 
 
 20 Dcsjardin I, p. 48. Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon," pp. 25-31. 
 
 21 Sargant p. 315. Blanqui was then professor of political economy and 
 member of the institute of Paris (See also Miilberger, "P. J. Proudhon," 
 pp. 31-32). 
 
 22 Dcsjardin I, pp. 64-65. Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon," pp. 34-35. 
 
 23 Lagarde, p. 15. 
 
The Period of Anarchism 43 
 
 classes of the people, and was summoned to appear before the 
 court of assizes of Doubs on the 3rd of February. He contended 
 that the ideas he expressed were those held by everyone, and 
 instead of being hostile to the government he was favorable to it. 
 He was acquitted.^* 
 
 Between 1840 and 1844, Proudhon was in a state of financial 
 depression. He was constantly visited by poverty.^^ His pension 
 withdrawn from him by the Academy of Besangon in 1841,^^ 
 and his printing house completely ruined in 1843, he was com- 
 pelled to join the company of Gauthier Bros., which had estab- 
 lished a steamboat service for the transport of coal through the 
 canal between the Rhone and the Rhine. He then became their 
 transportation agent at Lyons,^^ where he worked for the com- 
 pany from 1843 to 1847.28 
 
 During these years Proudhon's education progressed apace, 
 and particularly his studies in philosophy as well as in national 
 economy. After Blanqui and Joseph Gamier had welcomed him, 
 he was introduced to the members of "La societe d'economie 
 politique," and to its editor, Guillaumin. Being a devourer 
 of books, he quickly made himself acquainted with the economic 
 doctrine of the society.^^ In consequence, we see in his work 
 after 1845, not only the element of destructive, but also that of 
 constructive thinking. 
 
 \ 
 
 (y) The period of transition from the spirit of demolition 
 
 to the spirit of construction (1846-1852). 
 
 In 1846, he published his "Systeme des Contradictions Econo- 
 miques." Viewing this work as a whole, we may notice that it 
 signifies progress in the intellectual development of Proudhon, 
 
 2*Desjardin I, p. 57. Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon," pp. 41-42. 
 ^^Ibid: pp. 63-64. 
 
 26 What is Property? p. 13. 
 
 27 Bougie, p. 116. Desjardin I, 67. Muckle I, pp. 4-5. Lagarde p. 21. 
 Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon," pp. 51-52. 
 
 28 St. Beuve, p. 294. Lagarde, p. 21. 
 
 29 Bougie, p. 115. Diehl, p. 5. 
 
44 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 The theory of mutualism^" especially marks the beginning of a 
 positive and creative spirit in his work. 
 
 As has already been mentioned, Proudhon worked for the 
 company of Gauthier from 1843-1847. At the close of the year 
 1847 he left this company either on account of dislike for com- 
 mercial practices,^^ or on account of some misunderstanding 
 with his patron, and immediately repaired to Paris. ^^ Here 
 he assumed a very active life. Politically he first took some 
 part in the revolution of 1848;^^ then in the same year he was 
 elected, by a vote of 77,900, to the Chamber of Deputies.^* In 
 that body he had comparatively little influence. He attached 
 himself to no political party, but attacked the radical left and 
 the reactionary right with equal bitterness. Consequently, both 
 of them united against him. In July, 1848, he presented a plan 
 of income-tax. It was voted down.^* 
 
 His fierce attacks won him little friendship from anybody, 
 for no one escaped, not even Louis Napoleon. Proudhon's 
 criticism of him was extremely violent. In 1848, he denounced 
 him as the enemy of democracy and socialism,^^ and again in 
 Januarys 1849, as the personification of reaction.^^ On February 
 14, 1849, the National Assembly authorized Proudhon's prose- 
 cution. There were only forty members dissenting. He was 
 summoned to the court of assizes of the Seine. He was accused 
 of exciting hatred and contempt in the citizens against the gov- 
 ernment and against each other, of attacking the constitution, 
 and the right and authority of the president. He was found 
 guilty and sentenced to three years' imprisonment, and fined 
 3,000 francs. He fled to Belgium. !ln June following, however, 
 
 30 Cont. Eco. ch. VII. 
 
 31 Miickle II, pp. 4-5. 
 
 32Lagardc, p. 21. Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon," pp. 68-69. 
 
 3^ He volunteered to set up the proclamations of the insurgents, and 
 aided in building barricades. Melange, II. p. 8. Desjardin, I. 104-8. 
 
 3*Lagarde, pp. 54-55. Ivor his activities in the chamber see Putlitz, 
 pp. 93-94. 
 
 35 Melange I, p. 247. 
 
 36 Melange I, p. 235. 
 
The Period of Anarchism 45 
 
 he returned to Paris, in order to settle some of his personal 
 affairs. He was promptly rearrested and put into prison.^^ 
 
 Proudhon was a man of audacity. He condemned all forms 
 of sentiment, particularly love. According to him, the adoration 
 of a woman, whoever she might be, was a vice.^^ Love could 
 be justified only under one condition — that is, it should be steeped 
 in justice.^^ The way by which we may realize this idea is by 
 marriage. The conjugal couple is, in effect, an organ of justice, 
 bound together by a compact of absolute devotion.^" In 1849, 
 when he was still confined in prison, he married Mile. Euphasie 
 Piegard, a lace maker without any fortune. His family life was 
 devoted and simple.*^ Faithful to his idea, he did not give 
 sentiment any part. "I have married," he said later, "a young 
 and poor working woman, not through love but through sympathy 
 
 for her position, through esteem of her personality 
 
 Instead of love, I had the vision of home and paternity." *^ 
 
 The intellectual achievement of Proudhon between 1848 and 
 1852 is still greater. While heretofore denying the justification 
 of property, he did not tell us what was going to take its place. 
 His problem now was to search for a philosophy that would be 
 both positive and constructive, instead of negative and destruct- 
 ive.^^ With this end in view, Proudhon devoted his whole 
 attention to the solution of social and economic problems. In 
 1848, he published "La solution du probleme social," "Organ- 
 isation du credit et de la circulation," "Banque du peuple" and 
 "Banque d'echange." 
 
 37 Desjardin I, pp. 135-137. Bougie, p. 172. Miilberger "Studien," p. 28. 
 
 38 Corresp. VIII, p. 374. 
 
 39 Justice IV, pp. 11 and 132. 
 
 ^^Ibid: II, p. 5. See also Justice IV, p. 11 and 97. 
 
 41 Desjardin I, pp. 142-143. 
 
 42 Corresp. VI, p. 8. 
 
 *3 ". . . il ne suffit pas que la critique dcmolisse, il faut qu'elle affirme et 
 reconstruise. Sans cela, le socialisme resterait un objet de pure curiosite, 
 alarmant pour la bourgeoisie, et sans utilite pour le peuple . . ." 
 
 ". . . Id precede par lequel I'esprit affirme n'est pas le meme que celui 
 par lequel il nie ; il fallait, avant de batir, sortir de la contradiction, e!t 
 
\ 
 
 46 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhox 
 
 All primary material, according to him, is furnished gratui- 
 tously by nature to man. Labor is productive;** but capital is 
 not. All the products are the result of labor.*^ Interest is, there- 
 fore, unjustifiable. The debtor will pay the creditor something 
 for nothing.*" The loaning of capital .and the discounting of 
 paper cannot, and must not, give place to interest in exchange. 
 For the purpose of putting his idea into practice, on January 31, 
 1849, Proudlion founded the peoples' bank (banqiie dii peuple) on 
 the basis of gratuitous credit. Being condemned to three years' 
 imprisonment later in the same year, he was obliged to give up 
 the enterprise.*'^ 
 
 In July, 1851, he published "L'idee generale de la revolution 
 au XIX siecle," in which the principle of social liquidation was 
 clearly set forth. By reducing, simplifying, decentralizing and 
 suppressing one after another all the wheels of the great machine 
 which we call the government or the state, Proudhon hoped to 
 realize his aim, by which the governmental system would be 
 submerged into the economic system.*^ In 1852 he published 
 another book, "La Revolution sociale demontree par le coup 
 d'Etat du 2 Decembre." In this work he also laid great stress 
 upon the substitution of economics for politics, and public interest 
 for authority.*^ 
 
 Beside his general literary activity, Proudhon resumed a very 
 active journalistic life between 1847 and 1850. He acted first 
 
 creer une methode d'invention revolutionnaire, une philosophic, non plus 
 negative, mais pour emprunter le langage de M. Auguste Comte, positive." 
 "Confession de la Revolution," pp. 125-126. 
 
 ^* Solution du Probleme Social, p. 260 and the following. 
 
 i^Ibid: p. 263. Melange III. 185-336 (see especially pp. 219 and 235). 
 
 46Putlitz, p. 38. 
 
 *7 Beaucherey, p. XI. Desjardin I, pp. 133-134. Mulberger "P. J. 
 Proudhon," pp. 137-138. For further detail of the people's bank, see 
 H. Denis, "Proudhon et les Principes de la Banque d'echange," Annales 
 de I'institut des sciences sociales de Bruxelles, premiere annee, and C. A. 
 Dana, "Proudhon and his Bank of the People," N. Y., 1896. 
 
 *8 Idee Generale, p.l96. (See also Desjardin I, p. 176.) 
 
 « Desjardin I, pp. 200-201. 
 
The Period of Anarchism 47 
 
 as a collaborator on "The Representative of the People," then 
 as editor-in-chief of "The People," and finally as contributor to 
 "The Voice of the People" and "The People of 1850." War on 
 socialism ! ^° War on the anarchy of privilege ! ^^ End of pov- 
 erty, and accession of the reign of justice ! ^^ Thus Proudhon 
 fought passionately against the old order. All four papers were 
 in turn suppressed by the government as anarchistic and obnox- 
 ious.^^ 
 
 (z) The period of construction (1853-1861). 
 
 In 1852, Proudhon was set free from prison.^* Although 
 opposing the coup d'Etat of 1851,^^ and denouncing Louis 
 Napoleon as reactionary and tyrannical,^*^ he entertained in 1852 
 the hope of utilizing him for the realization of his social reform." 
 The election of 1857 not being favorable to the imperial gov- 
 ernment, Proudhon thereupon promptly abandoned his idea of 
 marrying the second empire with the social revolution.^^ 
 
 In the field of learning, Proudhon reached the stage of matur- 
 ity about the year 1853. His writings became more calm and 
 academic. His bitter and passionate style now appeared only 
 occasionally in his polemic writings. His thought also became 
 more systematic and clear. If not abandoning his preliminary 
 ideas, he at least developed some new ideas of which he himself 
 might not have recognized the importance. The idea of progress 
 was very well set forth in his "Philosophie du Progres," pub- 
 lished in 1853.^^ In 1858 he wrote another book, "De la Justice 
 
 5^ Ibid: II, p. 155. 
 
 51 Melange I, p. 136. 
 
 52 Diehl, pp. 37-38. 
 
 53 For further details see Diehl, pp. 37-39, and Desjardin I, pp. 119-121. 
 5* Desjardin I, pp. 150-151. Mulberger, "P. J. Proudhon," p. 165. 
 ^^Ibid: I, p. 182. 
 
 56 Ibid: I, pp. 192-193. 
 
 57 /&,•(/.• I, pp. 188-192. 
 
 58/&jrf; I, p. 244. 
 
 59 Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon," p. 174 
 
48 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 dans la Revolution et dans I'eglise," in which his anarchic idea 
 of the reign of justice was highly developed.^" 
 
 Shortly after the publication of this work he was declared 
 guilty of five misdemeanors: — (1) For outraging public and 
 religious morality, and attacking the rights of the family; (2) 
 for justifying acts condemned by criminal law, (3) for 
 attacking the respect due to law, (4) for exciting the hatred of 
 the people against each other, and (5) for publishing false news, 
 faithlessly invented.^^ Besides these charges he was also declared 
 guilty of two misdemeanors after the pubhcation of his pamphlet, 
 "Petition to the Senate": — ^-(1) For outraging public and relig- 
 ious morality, and (2) for outraging and deriding a religion, the 
 establishment of which was legally recognized in France.^^ In 
 consequence he was condemned to three years of imprisonment 
 and a fine of 4,000 francs.®* 
 
 Proudhon intended to write a memoir to the judges of appeal. 
 But he could not find any printer for its publication. He fled to 
 Brussels, Belgium, on July 28, 1858, under the name of M. 
 Durfart, professor of mathematics.®^ Here he wrote constantly 
 for "L'office de publicite."®® In the conflict over the Italian 
 question, he published an article on July 12, 1862, entitled "A'laz- 
 zini and Italian unity." ®^ In this article he strongly advocated 
 the principle of federation in opposition to that of unity.®® Many 
 of the influential Belgian newspapers thereupon accused him of 
 
 ^ For a general view of this work, see Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon" pp. 
 181-191. 
 
 61 Desjardin II, p. 5. 
 
 62 This pamphlet was published on May 11, 1858. Desjardin II, p. 4. 
 In this pamphlet Proudhon demanded the revision of the Treaty of Con- 
 cordat. IMiilberger "P. J. Proudhon," p. 199 
 
 62 Desjardin II, pp. 4-5. 
 ^*Ibid: II, p. 6. 
 65/6t"d; II, pp. 7-8. 
 66 Lagarde, p. 38. 
 
 6^ This article is printed in his "Oeuvres Completes," volume 16, pp. 
 128-147. 
 
 88 PutUtz, p. 120. 
 
The Period of Construction 49 
 
 preaching the annexation of Belgium to France. On September 
 16, 1862, a group of men and women stopped at his residence 
 and cried out in an impressive manner, "Long live the Belgians ! 
 Down with the annexationists \" ®^ Three days later Proudhon 
 left Belgium for France, to which the supplementary imperial act 
 of 1860 to the amnesty of 1859 gave him free access/" 
 
 (b) Proudhon as a federalist (1862-1865). 
 
 Although Proudhon had since 1840 repeatedly declared him- 
 self an anarchist, his theory of anarchy gradually gave way to 
 that of federalism. Both in "De la justice dans la Revolution 
 et dans I'Eglise" and in "La Guerre et la Paix" (published in 
 1861) the idea of federation was vaguely hinted at. It was 
 only in the year 1862, however, that Proudhon made known to 
 his friend that if he began with the idea of anarchism he would 
 end with the principle of federalism.^^ Both in his "Du principe 
 federatif" (1863) and in "De la capacite politique des classes 
 ouvrieres" (1865),^^ federalism as a definite principle was clearly 
 set out. 
 
 In style, as well as in substance, Proudhon's work after 1.862 
 was distinctly marked with scholarly thought and profundity, 
 especially in the last two works mentioned. He died on January 
 19, 1865, in Paris." 
 
 69Desjardin II, p. 42. Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon," pp. 209-211. 
 
 ''^ Lagarde, p. 40. The amnesty law of 1859 pardoned only those whose 
 crime was political. Proudhon was excluded from this law because his 
 crime was not political but moral. He wrote, as charged by the govern- 
 ment, immoral books. Through a special imperial act in 1860 supple- 
 mentary to the amnesty law of 1859, Proudhon was also pardoned by the 
 government. Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon," pp. 200 and 211. 
 
 '1 Letter of Nov. 1862, to his friend. 
 
 72 Desjardin II, pp. 54-60. See also Miilberger "P. J. Proudhon," pp. 
 212-237. 
 
 73 Desjardin, II, p. 66. Putlitz, p. 126. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 Proudhon's General Philosophical Ideas. 
 
 Every thinker normally cherishes certain basic ideas from 
 which he develops his other notions, political or otherwise. The 
 basic ideas of Proudhon relate to five topics : (1) The supremacy 
 of economics over politics ; (2) progress; (3) liberty; (4) equal- 
 ity; and (5) justice. 
 
 (1) The supremacy of economics over politics. 
 
 Proudhon, born in an age of industry and commerce, did not 
 fail to grasp the growing importance of economic developments. 
 Throughout his work he constantly emphasized the supremacy of 
 economics over poHtics. According to him, the basis of society 
 is economic rather than political. "Over and above the political 
 phantoms which captivate our imagination," said he, "there are 
 the phenomena of social economics which, by their harmony or 
 discord, produce the good or the evil in society." ^ In a pro- 
 letarian democracy, the powers of government will gradually 
 disappear; whereas the idea of labor, of free contract, will 
 become the dominant idea of the day. Politics will then be the 
 corollary of economics."^ 
 
 (2) Progress. 
 
 Progress in its purest form, according to Proudhon, is the 
 movement of ideas, movement spontaneous and indestructible.^ 
 In all society there are always two groups of ideas, the one new 
 
 1 Idee Generale, p. 42. 
 
 ^Ibid: p. 123 and 140. Capacite, p. 145. In 1849 Proudhon thought 
 that politics and political economy were one and the same science, the 
 first more personal, arbitrary" or subjective; the second more real and 
 positive. (Melange III, p. 37.) 
 
 3 Philosophic du Progres, p. 19. 
 
Theory of Progress 51 
 
 and the other old. The old ideas dominate. In opposition to 
 them there arises a group of new ideas which constitute the ideas 
 of future society. Thus from fetichism to polytheism, from poly- 
 theism to Christianity, from Christianity to philosophy, from 
 philosophy to democracy, the world is perpetually in motion.* 
 Truth is only transitory and relative.^ There is no absolute 
 or eternal truth except the law of movement.® What for us is 
 a reality today may be only a Utopia tomorrow. All ideas will/ 
 be false if they are considered as fixed, complete, unalterable,! ^^ 
 not susceptible of modification, conversion, augmentation oq 
 diminution. On the other hand, all ideas will be true if they \ 
 are considered susceptible of fuller realization, of becoming more j 
 useful and of undergoing change.'' 
 
 Progress, therefore, is co-eternal with the universe as well^— -^ 
 as with humanity. The universe, infinite in its nature, is per-*- — ^ 
 petually changing. The law of equilibrium which governs the 
 universe does not impose upon it the state of uniformity andV^ 
 unalterableness. On the contrary, it assures to it a state of 
 eternal change by the economy of forces which are infinite. So 
 is the case with humanity. We do not march to an ideal per- 
 fection or to a static state. We are carried along with the 
 universe in an incessant transformation. The more our intel- . 
 ligence and morality are developed the more gloriously will this 
 transformation be accomplished. Progress is the law of our 
 soul, not in the sense that by the perfection of ourselves we 
 may without interruption approach absolute justice and the ideal, 
 but in the sense that humanity, as creation itself, changes and . 
 develops without end the ideas of justice and of beauty, whichv*^ 
 we shall always change and expand.* 
 
 Progress is also continuous. In opposition to the old ideas, -'^ 
 society, if it is progressive, will produce new ideas which, instead 
 
 * Melange II, p. 29. 
 
 5 Philosophic du Progres, p. 98. 
 
 ^Ihid: pp. 90-91. 
 
 "flhid: pp. 22 and 24. 
 
 8 Justice I, p. 51. 
 
52 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 of destroying the old ideas, will embrace them, generalize them, 
 and rebuild them. In this way society incessantly reproduces new 
 ideas which are enriched by the old.^ 
 
 (3) Liberty. 
 
 The social and democratic republic which Proudhon endeav- 
 ored to establish, ha s liberty as its principle, equ ali ty as ijs jueaas 
 and f rat ernity^ asjnrnd ^° 
 
 Let us consider first what Proudhon meant by "liberty." 
 Proudhon is a passionate lover of liberty. "O liberty," he once 
 wrote, "charm of my existence! Without you work is torture 
 and life a long death."" "Man is a being of liberty and indi- 
 viduality above all."^^ 
 
 Liberty is, in the first place, immanent. It is to man what 
 impenetrability is to matter.^^ It is an absolute inherent right and 
 exists before all social order. While laws and regulations con- 
 stitute obstacles to it, other social institutions give impulse to 
 its development. But neither the one nor the other can create 
 what is not already immanent.^* 
 
 In the second place, liberty is inviolable. We can neither 
 sell nor alienate our liberty; every contract, every condition of a 
 contract, which has in view the alienation or suspension of liberty 
 is null : the moment a slave plants his foot upon the soil of 
 liberty, at that very moment he becomes a free man. When 
 society seizes a malefactor and deprives him of his liberty, society 
 makes use of a legitimate defense: whoever violates the social 
 compact by the commission of a crime, declares himself a public 
 enemy; in attacking the liberty of others, he compels them to 
 take away his own. Liberty is the original condition of man; 
 to renounce liberty is to renounce the nature of man; without 
 liberty how could we perform the acts of man.^^ 
 
 9 Melange II, p. 12. 
 
 lo/fetd; I, p. 137. 
 
 " Cont. Eco. II, 287. 
 
 i^Les Majorats Litteraires, p. 46 (in the note). 
 
 ^3 What is Property, p. 72. 
 
 1* Cont. Eco. I, pp. 143-147. 
 
 15 What is Property, p. 67. 
 
Liberty Defined 53 
 
 Furthermore, liberty is progressive in its development, infinite 
 and absolute in its essence and in its ideal. It is soul, life, spon- 
 taneity, and movement itself .^^ There is no positive liberty which 
 will remain static. Liberty is, essentially, practical and active. 
 It tends to decline when it delivers itself to submission and in- 
 difference.^^ 
 
 Then, too, liberty is social. It exists only in society.^^ The 
 more society becomes organized, the greater will become the 
 number of those who participate in administration and in social 
 activities, the more complete will become the liberty of the in- 
 dividual.^^ 
 
 And in the fifth place, liberty is infinite variety. It respects 
 all the wills without the limitation of any law.~° It permits 
 man to vary his activities according to his desire, and to govern 
 his existence according to an ideal which will play a role 
 analogous to that of instinct with the animal.^^ 
 
 So much for the nature of liberty. We now come to the 
 question of what are its functions. The functions of liberty are 
 dual; one negative, the other positive.^^ Negatively liberty is 
 anarchy. 2^ It knows no authority, no reason, and no principle 
 other than itself. To laws of the world, and of thoughts which 
 beset it, it says "no"; to love which seduces, "no"; to the order 
 of the prince, the voice of the priests, the cry of the multitude, 
 "no, no, no." It is the eternal contradictor, in opposition to all 
 thought and all force which tends to dominate it. It is the 
 indomitable insurgent which has no faith in anything except 
 itself.24 
 
 "Melange I, p. 137. 
 " Justice III, p. 270. 
 
 18 What is Property, p. 268. "Liberty is equality, because liberty exists 
 only in society; and in the absence of equality, there is no society." 
 1^ E. Fourniere, p. 126. 
 
 20 What is Property, p. 268. 
 
 21 Justice III, p. 228. 
 
 22 Ibid: III, p. 230 and 528. 
 
 23 What is Property, p. 268. 
 2* Justice III, pp. 229-230. 
 
54 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 Positively, the function of liberty resides in the achievement 
 of rights which will accelerate its development. The rights 
 demanded by it are liberty of religion, liberty of conscience, 
 liberty of thought, liberty of speech, liberty of press, liberty of 
 association, liberty of work, liberty of teaching, and liberty of 
 commerce and industry.^^ 
 
 Yet to Proudlion liberty is not unlimited. He insists that 
 liberty is not synonymous with license. It has its limitations 
 as well as its guarantees. "As the declaration of rights," said he, 
 "I define liberty as the right of doing what does not injure 
 others. "^^ In another place he said, "The unlimited liberty of 
 man has for its limit respect for the liberty of others." ^^ Still 
 more emphatically Proudhon discussed the guarantees of liberty. 
 "Liberty," wrote he, "can have no guarantee except in the pro- 
 gressive abolition of governmental institutions and the parallel 
 creation of economic institutions.^^ In this new economic regime, 
 liberty will be surrounded with all the guarantees of sincerity, 
 mutuality and equality which economic rights demand.^° 
 
 This study of liberty, however, though we have already dis- 
 cussed its nature, function and guarantees, is not yet complete. 
 We have still to add two other significant points : the one, the 
 relationship existing between liberty and justice, and the other, 
 the relationship existing between liberty and unity, or order. 
 Between liberty and justice the relationship is very close. It is 
 through justice that liberty multiplies its power; it is also through 
 liberty that justice, idealizing itself, acquires this penetrating 
 virtue which makes it the most deep-rooted of our inclinations 
 and the most sublime of our ideals.^" The submission of man 
 to justice will result in the formation of a freer personality for 
 him.^^ In other words, man will develop his personality by the 
 
 25 Melange I, p. 46, 190-191. 
 28 Melange I, p. 45. 
 
 27 Idee Revolutionnaire I, p. 302. 
 
 28 A. Bertrand — "Proudhon et les Lj'onnais," pp. 9-10, Lettre a Laloge. 
 
 29 Capacite, p. 208. 
 
 30 Justice III, pp. 9 and 39. 
 "/fetd; I, p. 198. 
 
Doctrine of Equality 55 
 
 realization of social justice.^^ The relationship existing between ^ 
 liberty and unity or order is still closer. These two concepts are 
 indissolubly connected with each other for all eternity. We can 
 neither separate the one from the other, nor absorb the one in 
 the other.^^ What we need to do is to find a state of social 
 equality in which liberty will exist in unity, in order, and in 
 independence.^* 
 
 (4) Equality. 
 
 The theory of equality has been given three interpretations: 
 (1) The communistic, (2) Rousseau's, and (3) Proudhon's. The 
 first considers equality as real and immediate; the second as 
 personal, and the third as commutative and progressive.^^ What 
 concerns us here is the theory of Proudhon. Men, according to 
 him, are born equal in essence, in quality, in type,^® in dignity, 
 and in right.^^ Inequality is due to three chief causes: (1) 
 Psychological or intellectual, (2) economic, and (3) social. 
 
 Psychologically, the intellectual faculties as among individ- 
 uals and among races are unequal.^® At least, the development of 
 these faculties is not the same for all, one showing more precocity, 
 another less.^^ Intellectual inequality, neutralizing political equal- 
 ity, leads in its turn to honorary distinctions and titles of nobility ; 
 in short, to political inequality.*" It also leads to economic in- 
 equality, to inequality in fortunes and in conditions.*^ 
 
 Economic property is the chief cause of political inequality. 
 If you wish to enjoy political equality, abolish property.*^ So 
 
 32Puech— "Le Proudhonism," pp. 242-243. 
 
 33 Capacite, p. 147. 
 
 3* Celebration du Dimanche, p. 151. 
 
 35 Philosophic du Progres, pp. 54-55. 
 
 36 Justice I, p. 303. 
 
 37 What is Property (second memoir) p. 278. Justice III, p. 114. 
 Theorie de la propriete, p. 146. 
 
 38 Capacite, p. 40. 
 
 3* Theorie de la Propriete, p. 147. 
 
 *"La Guerre et la Paix, p. 45. 
 
 *i Theorie de la Propriete, p. 147. 
 
 *2 What is Property, pp. 60-61. See also Theorie de la Propriete, 146. 
 
56 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 long as economic inequality subsists, political equality will be 
 simply a myth.^* 
 
 Socially, the chief cause of inequality is the realization, in 
 society, of the three abstractions — capital, labor, and talent. 
 While society is divided into three categories of citizens, cor- 
 responding to the terms of this formula, that is to say, into 
 capitalists, laborers, and men of capacity, it gives rise to the 
 distinction of castes. In the caste system the laborers are enslaved 
 by tlie capitalists. These laborers are called in turn slaves, serfs, 
 pariahs, plebeians, and proletarians. The capitalists are the ex- 
 ploiters ; they are called in turn patricians, nobles and bourgeoisie. 
 The men of talent are parasites, agents of corruption and of 
 servitude; they have been first the pagan priests, later the 
 Christian clergies and today are the public functionaries." 
 
 Proudhon is a passionate lover of liberty and equality. For 
 the question of intellectual inequality he has tv^o solutions : one 
 theoretical and the other practical. 
 
 Theoretically, Proudhon first insists upon the idea that in- 
 tellectual inequality is only accidental. All men have the same 
 capacities. They are not born unequal. Inequality is created 
 by the circumstances under which they are bom and developed.*^ 
 Intellectual inequality, in the second place, is only transitory. 
 The tendency of society is toward the equalizing of intelligence 
 as well as toward the equalizing of conditions. Moreover, the 
 equality of talents and of capacities is the norm of the collective 
 reason of which we are severally the manifestations.'*^ And in 
 the third place, intellectual inequality is neutralized by the equal- 
 izing effects of their diversified functions. One man, for ex- 
 ample, possesses only physical strength, whereas another possesses 
 greater mental power. The first may be a successful farmer, the 
 second a successful manufacturer or navigator. In both these 
 cases there exists a source of free competition, of natural equi- 
 
 ps Justice II, pp. 4 and 172. 
 
 *4 Melange I, p. 183. 
 
 <5 Justice I, p. 303. 
 
 *8 Creation de I'ordre, p. 282 et suiv. 
 
Doctrine of Equality 57 
 
 librium, in which the difference in the capacity and skill of the 
 worker, and in the capacity or quality of the work done dis- 
 appears, because both of them have tried their best and have 
 done their duty. The impotence in the individual may be balanced 
 by the collective forces of society.*^ 
 
 Practically, Proudhon expected gradually to bring about intel- f) 
 lectual equality through the development of popular education — '■ . 
 the same education for all the people.'** 
 
 In relation to political and economic inequality Proudhon's 
 doctrine changed no less than two times. In 1849 he thought 
 that there was an intimate relationship existing between political 
 and economic equality. Where either one of them is denied, the 
 other will disappear; and conversely, whether either one of them 
 prevails, the other will, sooner or later, triumph.*^ In 1858, 
 however, he changed his idea. He then believed economic equal- 
 ity to be the basis of political equality. We could not have the 
 latter unless we had first achieved the former. Political guar- 
 antees would, in an unorganized society, only add to the in- 
 stability of the state, and keep the way always open for usurpation 
 and despotism.^*' Then in 1865, he reverted to the converse of 
 the notion of 1858, believing that democracy would lead to econ- 
 omic equality. Once political equality was assured through the 
 exercise of universal suffrage, the tendency of the nation would 
 be toward economic equality.^^ 
 
 Proudhon, therefore, entertained two contradictory ideas as 
 to the manner in which equality might be achieved: (1) Econ- 
 omic equality, as a result of economic transformation, will lead 
 to political equality, and (2) political equality, as a result of 
 political reform, will lead to economic equality. With these views 
 in mind we may consider what were Proudhon's economic re- 
 forms. 
 
 *7 Celebration du Dimanche, p. 148. Lettre a Blanqui, p. 6. See also 
 Les Majorats Litteraires, p. 14 and Bougie, p. 104. 
 
 48 Theorie de la Propriete, p. 146. See also Idee Generale, pp. 96-97. 
 
 49 Melange I, p. 11 5. 
 
 50 Justice II, pp. 4 and 172. 
 
 51 Capacite, p. 214. 
 
58 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 Economic right, according to him, is the necessary counter- 
 part of political right.^^ In order to have political equality, as 
 already mentioned, it is necessary for us to create economic 
 equality. The basis of economic equality is justice. By justice, 
 Proudhon here means the maintenance of an economic equi- 
 librium — a balance between interests and services in society.^^ 
 Instead of being subordinated one to the other, the services of 
 society must be reciprocal — reciprocal in property, in labor, 
 in education, in credit, in exchange, in taxation, in power, in 
 judgment.^^ With justice and reciprocity as his basic ideas, he 
 endeavored to bring about economic equality through the follow- 
 ing reforms: — 
 
 (1) Industrial reforms: 
 
 a. The right to labor guaranteed to everyone."^ 
 
 b. The division of labor.^^ 
 
 c. The suppression of the distinction between labor and 
 
 capital by the equalizing of wage and product." 
 
 57 
 
 (2) Commercial reforms : 
 
 a. The organization of credit and exchange,^® on the 
 
 basis of reciprocity. 
 
 b. The abolition of the system of purchase and sale by 
 
 fixing in advance the exact price of each commodity 
 by the producer-consumers.^^ 
 
 82 Du Principe f ederatif, p. 107. 
 
 63 Justice I, p. 381. 
 
 "Desjardin I, pp. 256-257 ("Nouveau Principe" passim). 
 
 65 What is Property, pp. 228 and 238. 
 
 66 Idee Gencrale, pp. 96-97. "Exchange of commerce leads to equaUty." 
 (What is Property, p. 294.) 
 
 67 Melange I, p. 183. Dcsjardin I, pp. 256-257. "Le salaire, dans le 
 travailleur collectif, est cgal au produit : consequement les produits de 
 tons Ics travailleurs sont egcuix cntre cux, et leur salaires encore egaux : 
 la est le principe de I'egalite des conditions et des fortunes." Cont. Eco. 
 II, p. 290. "What is then, to practice justice? It is to give equal wealth 
 to each, on condition of equal labor. "What is Property?" p. 228. 
 
 68 Idee Generalc, pp. 96-97. 
 68 Desjardin I, pp. 256-257. 
 
Doctrine of Equality 59 
 
 (3) The transformation of property with the following ends 
 in view: 
 
 a. Equalizing of possession. 
 
 b. Equalizing of economic conditions.^" 
 
 The result of these economic reforms, according to Proudhon, 
 would be threefold: (1) Political equality, everyone having the 
 same right; (2) economic equality, everyone living financially 
 under the same conditions; and (3) social equality, everyone 
 being compelled to work, there being no more capitalists, laborers, 
 or artisans, everyone being at one and the same time capitalist 
 and laborer.^^ 
 
 Passing from Proudhon's economic reforms, we may now 
 consider his political reforms. According to his theory, intel- 
 lectual inequality leads to economic and political inequality. But 
 the development of civilization tends to restrict the effect of this 
 inequality. In other words, there is a general effort on the part 
 Df humanity to realize equality. The principle of equality before 
 the law is, first, unanimously consented to by the people. The 
 operation of this principle, in the society of justice and order, 
 tends to reduce the inequality of conditions and of fortunes to 
 the equality of services and products. In short, it tends to make 
 prevalent the idea that the fortune of the citizen will not be 
 the expression of his capacity or virtue, but of his work.^^ 
 
 So far we have discussed Proudhon's theory of equality and 
 [lis plans for its realization. We come, now, to the question of 
 whether absolute equality can be realized. To this question 
 Proudhon's answer is different at different times. In 1840 he 
 would have said, "Yes, it can be realized." "We see," he em- 
 phatically declared, "that equality is constantly being realized 
 without our knowledge, even at the very moment when we are 
 pronouncing it incapable of realization; that the time is drawing 
 near when, without any effort or even wish of ours, we shall 
 
 60 Revol. Social., p. 180. 
 
 61 Melange I, p. 283. 
 
 62Theorie de la Propriete, pp. 146-147. 
 
6o The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 have it universally established; that with it, in it and by it, the 
 natural and true political order must make itself manifest."^^ 
 
 But after 1858, his answer became more cautious. In his 
 "De la Justice dans la Revolution et dans I'Eglise," he said, 
 "From the first equality, the equality of products and of wages, 
 we may deduce the final equality, as approximately as the infinite 
 variety of individuals, their capacities, and increasing human 
 development will permit."®* 
 
 Again in 1861, in his "Theory of Imposts," he said: "In- 
 equality of fortune has its causes not alone in inheritance, which 
 carried with it the acquisition of fortune by sons from fathers, 
 but also in the play of economic forces, in the initiative of the 
 proprietor, in the activity and intelligence of one man and the 
 awkwardness and indolence of another. Absolute equality of 
 fortune cannot be realized because even if all individuals were 
 equal in talent and capacity, that would not be sufficient; it 
 would still be necessary to make the environment the same and 
 equally satisfying. But if equality cannot be achieved, it can 
 at least be approached."®^ 
 
 And finally, in 1865, he came to the definite conclusion that 
 humanity proceeds only by approximations which arise out of 
 (1) the equalizing of faculties by education, by the division of 
 work and by the liberation of all faculties; (2) the equalizing 
 of fortune by freeing industry and commerce; (3) the equalizing 
 of taxation; (4) the equalizing of property; (5) anarchy; (6) 
 non-religion, or non-mysticism, and (7) indefinite progress in 
 science, right, liberty, honor and justice.®® 
 
 It is rather significant to note here that what Proudhon 
 meant by equality is the equality of men only. Woman, according 
 to him, is not only physically, but also morally and intellectually, 
 inferior to man.®^ In the family, husband and wife, the em- 
 bryonic organ of justice, form one body, one soul, one will, one 
 
 63 What is Property, p. 158. 
 
 64 Justice I, p. 283. 
 esThcorie dc I'impot, p. 283. 
 68/fcid; pp. 241-242. 
 67Desjardin I, pp. 19, 270-271. 
 
Women Inferior 6i 
 
 intelligence. They ought to be devoted to each other,^^ but the 
 husband should have the right of life and death over his wife.®^ 
 Woman has no right to participate in politics. The relationship 
 existing between the family and the state is the problem for her 
 husband to solve. She can only interfere in an indirect manner 
 through secret influences. 
 
 The reason for this is threefold. In the first place, political 
 problems which have no other end except that of assuring to the 
 people all the guarantees of liberty, of property, of labor, of 
 commerce, of security and of instruction, are exclusively 
 problems for man to solve. How can woman be consulted? To 
 suppose that the reason of woman could balance that of man is 
 contrary to nature and degrades the virility of man. In the 
 second place, woman is by nature consecrated to functions purely 
 domestic. To give her the privilege of exercising public functions 
 is to degrade the modesty of the family, to make her a pubHc 
 person, to proclaim the confusion of sexes, the communizing of 
 love, the abolition of family, the servility of persons and the 
 infeudation of property. In the third place, devotion is, in the 
 family, the absolute rule. If husband and wife are one body 
 and one soul, how could their opinions and interests be different ? 
 To suppose that woman could express, in the assembly of the 
 people, any opinion contrary to that of her husband, is to suppose 
 discord between them and to prepare for their divorce.'^" 
 
 (5) Justice. 
 
 Religion as understood by Proudhon defines justice as a 
 divine command; philosophy as a simple relation, a necessity of 
 reason. Both of them reduce the idea of justice to an abstraction 
 for the conscience.'^^ Proudhon's interpretation is humanistic. 
 
 68 "La Guerre . . ." I, pp. 58-59. 
 
 69 "La Pornocratie," p. 89. 
 
 ™ "La Guerre . . ." I, pp. 58-59. We may note in passing Proudhon's 
 idea of fraternity. Fraternity, to him, is progressive and absolute 
 (Melange I, p. 139). It can establish itself only through justice, because 
 justice alone is the condition, means and law of liberty and fraternity. 
 (Cont. Eco. I, p. 226). 
 
 71 Justice II, p. 96. 
 
62 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 According to him, justice is, in the first place, immanent in the 
 human soul/^ It is not simply an idea of human relationship, 
 or an abstract notion of metaphysics. It is human, all human, 
 nothing but human." It is a fact of consciousness, power, an 
 impulse of the soul, a faculty organic and positive.^'* In short, 
 it is born of emotion and intellect combined.'^^ It is a reality.''*^ 
 Still more paradoxically, Proudhon wrote in another place, 
 "Justice is for man the principle and form of thought, the 
 guarantee of judgment, the rule of conduct, the aim of knowledge 
 and the end of existence. It is feeling and concept, manifesta- 
 tion and law, idea and fact. It is universal life and reason." 
 
 Justice is, in the second place, reciprocal or social. Man, in 
 virtue of the reason he is endowed with by nature, has the faculty 
 of feeling his dignity in the person of his equals as well as in 
 his own. Justice is the product of this faculty. It is the respect, 
 ^ spontaneously manifested and reciprocally guaranteed, of human 
 dignity in one's own person as well as in that of his neighbors. 
 From this definition of justice, Proudhon deduced the principle 
 of right and duty. Right is for each the faculty of exacting 
 from others respect for the human dignity in his own person; 
 duty, the obligation for each of respecting this dignity in others." 
 Thus justice is social. It is the law of human collectivity.'^^ It 
 is a faculty of the soul, the first of all those faculties which 
 constitute the social being.«° Through the sentiment of justice, 
 each of us feels himself as an individual, and collective, being.^^ 
 To practice justice is to obey the social instinct; to do an act 
 
 " "La Guerre . . ." I. p. 159. 
 
 '■^"La Guerre . . ." II. pp. 305, 307; Justice I, pp. 132, 141 and 227. 
 '* Justice, I, p. 142. 
 ^5 What is Property, p. 228. 
 " Justice II, p. 97. 
 ''Ubid: I, p. 42 (see also p. 97). 
 
 " Justice I, pp. 216, 219, 225, 234, III, p. 227. "La Guerre . . " I 
 pp. 159, 304-305. What is Property, p. 225. 
 78 Desjardin I, p. 265. 
 «° Justice I, p. 227. 
 " Ibid: I, pp. 141 and 216. 
 
Justice Defined 63 
 
 of justice is to do a social act.®^ Justice is also reciprocal. What 
 fastens the bond of right is our conscience, which keeps us from 
 violating the dignity of our neighbors in the fear of violating our 
 own and destroying ourselves morally. In case of injury, the 
 criminal is responsible to himself and to the men he has injured.^^ 
 
 Justice, in the third place, is progressive.** We know how to 
 discern the good from the evil, but we shall never see the end 
 of right, or of justice, because we shall never cease to create new 
 relations between ourselves. We are born perfectible, but we 
 shall never become perfect. Perfection and unalterableness will 
 be death.®^ 
 
 Passing from the chief characteristics of justice, as under- 
 stood by Proudhon, we may now consider its function in society. 
 Justice is, first of all, the basi? of social cohesion. Hobbes is 
 quite wrong in maintaining that enlightened egoism and self- 
 interest will keep the people living together in peace and security. 
 On the contrary, each will desire peace so long as it is beneficial 
 for him. As soon as a man perceives that it is unfavorable to 
 him, he will destroy it. The multitude will then live in a state 
 of perpetual dissolution. A force of cohesion is here indispens- 
 able. This force we find in the principle of justice. 
 
 Justice, as we have mentioned above, is a power of our soul 
 which makes us affirm what is just, independent of all interests; 
 makes us desire, above all other things, the pubHc security; and 
 which attaches us to the city more strongly than to our family 
 or to what relates exclusively to our egoism.*^ By its law of 
 equilibrium and its formula of reciprocity, it could establish order 
 and create unity, in a word, bring all variable and contradictory 
 phenomena to a general and constant law.*^ 
 
 82 What is Property, pp. 221 and 223. 
 
 83 Justice, V, pp. 60-61. 
 s^Ibid: I, p. 142. 
 
 85 Justice I, p. 146. 
 
 86 "La Guerre . . ." I, pp. 146-149, 151, 153, 185-186. 
 
 87 Justice V, p. 158. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 Proudhon's Theory of the State from the Standpoint of 
 AN Anarchist — Descriptive 
 
 There are two Proudhons, (1) Proudhon the anarchist, and 
 (2) Proudhon the federalist; the first youthful and insurgent, and 
 the second mature and cautious. For a superficial reader, it is 
 very easy to confuse the one with the other. For the sake of 
 clearness, we may divide his work into two parts, (1) his theory 
 of the state from the standpoint of an anarchist (1840-1861) 
 and (2) his theory of the state from the standpoint of a federalist 
 (1861-1865). 
 
 Whether anarchist or federalist, Proudhon holds the general 
 nature and scope of political science to be the same. He declares 
 that politics is one branch of social science, a division of anth- 
 ropology, a section of natural history.^ It must be exact, mathe- 
 matical and positive.^ With regard to its scope, it includes ad- 
 ministration, legislation, diplomacy, war, private law, public law 
 and the law of nations.^ 
 
 Proudhon's task as an anarchist is twofold : (1) As a negative 
 critic of the old political institutions, and (2) as a creative 
 thinker of anarchism or republicanism. His doctrines in the first 
 capacity will be considered in this chapter. 
 
 Between 1840 and 1861 Proudhon had two main ideas in his 
 mind: (a) The abolition of authority, and (b) the establishment 
 
 ^ Contradictions Politiques, p. 55. 
 
 2 "Le gouvcrnement et la loi doivent decouler d'une science exacte et 
 mathematique qui n'ait plus rien de personnel, d'occasionncl, de circon- 
 stanciel, mais qui, absolue dans ses principcs et ses conclusions, implique 
 le consentement et I'adhesion de tous les citoyens," Melange I, p. 168. 
 See also Celebration du Dimanche, pp. 133-183. Avertissement, p. 53. 
 Bougie, p. 56. 
 
 3 Philosophic du Progres, p. 69. 
 
Origin of the State 65 
 
 of the regime of justice.* With these two ideas as his basic 
 principle, he proceeded to formulate his theory of the state, both 
 destructive and constructive. He commenced with its very origin. 
 
 (1) Origin of the state. 
 
 The state Is the last of four stages of social development : 
 The patriarchal family, the tribe, the city, and the state. 
 
 (a) In the patriarchal family, the father, or the elder, is the 
 ruler. 
 
 In the beginning of society, all men are equal. Each is obliged 
 to do his own work, hunting, fishing, and pasturing.^ According 
 to the constitution of the family, the father naturally finds himself 
 in control of the family property and responsible for the direction 
 of the actions of the family group.^ In other words, he becomes 
 the chief of the family. All the other members have to follow 
 him. His function is exclusively that of a reflective and intel- 
 lectual nature.'^ Thus Proudhon agrees with Bonald that the 
 family is the embryo of the state. It is in the heart of the family 
 that the spirit of authority has its root.® But the conclusion he 
 draws from this is that if one wishes to regenerate it through 
 the simplification of its attributes and the limitation of its powers, 
 he is confronted with the necessity of cutting away all the bonds 
 between the state and the family. The reason why Proudhon 
 reproaches the governmental socialism of Louis Blanc is just 
 because it misapplies to society the principles of domestic 
 economy.® 
 
 (b) In the tribe, the father is the ruler. 
 
 Two or more families, different in nature and in purposes, 
 each formed for the exercise of a special function and the 
 creation of a particular product, are united through volun- 
 
 * What is Property, p. 254. Philosophic du Progres, p. 48. 
 
 5 Justice VI, p. 87. 
 
 6 Ibid II, p. 108. 
 
 7 What is Property, p. 261. 
 
 8 Idee Generale, p. 109. 
 ^Ibid: pp. 108-109, 253. 
 
66 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 tary or involuntary agreement. ^° Thus the tribe emerges from 
 the family, and therewith, to conserve his dignity, the father 
 increases his power from that over one family to that over 
 several. ^^ 
 
 (c) In the city, the chief of the strong tribe is the ruler. 
 Gradually weak tribes are incorporated with, or eliminated by, 
 
 the strong.^^ As a result of this process, there comes into exist- 
 ence the city. It is a natural law that the greater force will absorb 
 and assimilate the smaller. The chief of the strong tribe, there- 
 fore, holds under his control more children, more associates, more 
 slaves, more dependents, more animals, more land and more 
 capital than the others ; in short, one who controls the greatest 
 collective power, will hold the chief place in the city.^^ 
 
 (d) In the state, the prince is the ruler. 
 In close connection with the development of the state is 
 
 the development of force. In a savage society only brute force 
 prevails. But as civilization advances, force is glorified, hallowed 
 and refined. To the idea of force is added that of right. The 
 strongest man will be the most virtuous man. This is the second 
 period in the development of force; the period of conflicts 
 between the nobles and the plebeians. Against the anarchy of 
 these two conflicting classes, there emerges the prince, who be- 
 comes the representative of the sovereign or collective force. 
 His judgment is the law over the combating parties. ^^ 
 
 (2) Definition of state and government. 
 
 Proudhon's definition of state is fourfold. First, state seems 
 to him to be identical with nation and government. ^^ Second, 
 
 10 Bougie, p. 239. "La Guerre," I, p. 172. 
 " Justice II, p. 108. 
 
 12 La Guerre I, p. 172. 
 
 13 Justice II, p. 108. 
 "La Guerre I, pp. 108-109. 
 Injustice I, p. 96. "Nous sommes induits necessairemcnt a croire que 
 
 ce mot Etat, pouvoir, gouvcrnement indique un veritable etre'." "La 
 Guerre" I, p. 183. "Un nation, un Etat, est un personne collective. . . ." 
 
State and Government Defined 67 
 
 the state represents the collective force of society, produced not 
 by the relation of either domination or subordination, but by 
 the spirit of reciprocity, which exists among the citizens; so that 
 to affirm the state is to affirm the public power, the public thing, 
 rem publicam, and fundamentally to deny public authority.^® 
 Thirdly, the state is a collective person, and is endowed, like an 
 individual, with a life of its own, which has its liberty, its 
 character, its genius, and consequently its rights, the first and 
 the most essential of which is the maintenance of its originality, 
 independence and autonomy.^^ The form of the state, as a col- 
 lective person, constitutes its body or organism, and its ideas 
 constitute its conscience. It is, therefore, a real being because 
 it has the main attributes of existence, form and idea, body and 
 soul.^^ Fourthly, the state, as the organ of the collective force 
 and the incarnation of justice, is in its last analysis an economic 
 expression. ^^ 
 
 As mentioned above, Proudhon seems to have no distinct 
 notion of the difference between state and government. His 
 definition of government is, therefore, more or less identical with 
 that of state. First, government is a phenomenon of the col- 
 lective life, the external representation of our right, the education 
 of some of our faculties. ^° In other words, it is a real being, 
 having the organs of existence, idea and form, the body and the 
 soul of life.^^ Second, government is the manifestation of social 
 spontaneity, the preparation of humanity for a superior state. 
 Thirdly, government is the incarnation of liberty. While there 
 is no liberty there is no government. The best form of govern- 
 ment, in its literal sense, is a contradictory idea. The problem 
 for us is not to know how we should be the better governed, 
 but how we should be the most nearly free. Liberty, adequate 
 and identified with order, is what we wish. How to establish 
 
 " Justice V, pp. 184-185. 
 " La Guerre I, p. 183. 
 
 18 Justice II, p. 96. 
 
 19 "La Guerre" I, p. 140. 
 
 20 Melange II, pp. 260-266. 
 
 21 Justice II, p. 96. 
 
68 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 liberty, which is synonymous with order, is what we aim at in 
 the analysis of the different formulae of authority. For all the 
 rest, we admit the government of man by man no more than we 
 do the exploitation of man by man.^' 
 
 (3) The development of the state. 
 
 The state, as previously stated, has its ideas as well as its 
 forms. In discussing its development, we may divide our work 
 accordingly. 
 
 (a) There were three stages in the development of its ideas: 
 (x) The idea of pagan antiquity or the idea of necessity; (y) the 
 idea of the Christian church, or the idea of Providence (these 
 two ideas, antithetic to each other, being the opposites of an 
 antinomy which runs through all the religious age) ; and (z) the 
 idea of revolution or of justice, which constitutes, in opposition 
 to religious government, human government. 
 
 All governments which have as their basis the idea of fatalism 
 or that of Providence, tend to disruption, and oscillate from one 
 catastrophe to another. The problem for us, then is, after giving 
 the economic background,-^ to apply the idea of justice to gov- 
 ernment, and thus free it from the idea of fatalism and of arbi- 
 trariness. This is the object of revolution.^* 
 
 (x) The idea of necessity. 
 
 The idea of necessity, in other words, the idea of political 
 fatalism, Proudhon points out in his ironical manner, is based 
 upon the idea of natural inequality. In society, as in nature, 
 according to the fatalists, the faculties of individuals and, conse- 
 quently, their conditions, are unequal. ^^ In such a situation 
 justice cannot be the supreme law. It will be subordinated to 
 a higher law, the organ of which is the government. This higher 
 law is the necessity of inequality — inequality of nature, inequality 
 
 22 Melange II, p. 261. 
 
 23 Sec infra. Chapter VI. 
 2* Justice II, pp. 15-16. 
 25/6id: II, p. 32. 
 
Development of the State 69 
 
 of fortune, inequality in society and inequality before the law.^^ 
 Inequality is a necessity, a law of nature and of Providence. It 
 is inevitable.^^ 
 
 The inequality of conditions engenders a divergence of in- 
 terests, which cannot be terminated by the course of justice. 
 Hence the government, for the purpose of overcoming any resist- 
 ance, is armed with a superior prerogative which gives it the 
 right of suppressing justice and liberty. This is the basis of 
 the "reason of state." It is inevitable. 
 
 But this prerogative soon appears to be incompatible with the 
 division of power. It demands, then, that the greatest liberty 
 should be left to the prince ; that what one calls the constitution, 
 the object of which is to limit the political power of the prince, 
 should be destroyed ; and finally that, as the government is, above 
 all, a force of will and of action, it is inseparable from the person 
 of the prince; in other words, the prince and the state are 
 identical, one and the same thing. This is still inevitable. 
 
 Then, because of sovereign action, there should be concentra- 
 tion, incessant absorption of the faculties of the nation into the 
 faculties of the prince. This is also inevitable. 
 
 Hence, three consequences inevitably follow: first, the cor- 
 luption of the social body by the governmental instrument; 
 second, the reaction of the citizen against the prince, the antag- 
 onism between society and the government; and thirdly, revolu- 
 tion, change of policy in the power of the government, if not the 
 death of the nation and of the state. All these are inevitable.^^ 
 
 Then Proudhon points out that the falsity of this theory is 
 threefold. First, it is false metaphysically, because it presupposes 
 a cause, namely, inequality, and consequently a condition of neces- 
 sary antagonism of classes. In the second place, it is false in 
 its notion of inequality, because it considers inequality as a social 
 law, a natural law, and even a righteous law. And finally, it 
 is false in the conclusions which it has tried to deduce from the 
 
 26 Justice, II, p. 24. 
 
 27 76j-d; II, p. 21. 
 
 28 Ibid: II. pp. 32-33. 
 
70 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 facts observed. On one hand the fatalists hold that the subject 
 of the state can have the right of revolting against a natural and 
 social law in such a manner as to weaken the stability of the 
 government, which Proudhon insists is wrong in theory. And on 
 the other hand, they declare the state to be eternally unstable, 
 as eternally as inequality, the cause of its instability, is eternal ; 
 whereas, in truth, the state's instability is only transitory, and 
 so far from being eternal, it is only temporary.^^ 
 
 The inequality of conditions which is recognized by the fatal- 
 ists as the cause of political instability of the state, is not a law, 
 but an accident of nature. Hence, it follows that the instability 
 of the state is not anything of necessity. It is rather an accident. 
 In addition to this fact, it is not primarily the inequality of con- 
 ditions, that provokes directly the revolt against the government ; 
 it is the political iniquity of the government which makes the 
 state an instrument of oppression to labor and to liberty.^" 
 
 With the false idea of inequality as its basis, the principle 
 of political fatalism has entailed many evil effects upon society. 
 First, from the theory of natural inequality, the political fatalists 
 deduce the theory of social inequality; that is, the necessity of 
 slavery, the distinction of castes,^^ and the suhordination of the 
 masses to the privileged class. ^^ Second, because economic in- 
 equality is to be maintained by force, despotism and tyranny, and 
 the economic order is placed outside of the idea of right by the 
 inequality it has consecrated and developed, the political order, 
 instituted for its defense, must also, by the fatalists' reasoning, 
 be dissociated from the idea of right. The more this inequality 
 prevails among the citizens and causes society to crumble to 
 pieces, the more will government be forced to use its power to 
 protect the privileges of the old economic order.^^ Thirdly, 
 political inequality is closely allied with economic inequality. 
 
 29 Justice II, p. 21. 
 ^ojhid: II, pp. 20-21. 
 31/fet'd: I, pp. 64-65. 
 32 76td.- II, p. 23. 
 ^^Ibid: II, p. 22. 
 
Development of the State 71 
 
 With the political fatalists, the state is nothing more than the 
 inheritance of the privileged class. What is useful to society, 
 that is to say, to the hierarchy, to the nobles, to the clergy, to 
 the prince, is the real good; what is injurious to them is the evil. 
 Force may be used by the state to prevent the revolt of the 
 commons against the privileged. But no justice could ever exist 
 under these conditions.^* The power of the state for the 
 privileged class is unlimited. Responsible for maintaining 
 justice on the one hand, and inequality on the other, the state 
 can do no wrong. Its will will predominate over all the other 
 influences ; its prerogative over all the other rights. This is what 
 the political fatalists have called the "reason of state."^^ 
 
 The substitute for the principle of inequality, or the remedy 
 for the evil of political instability, according to Proudhon, will 
 be found in the principle of economic equilibrium, the main- 
 tenance of balance between service and interests. ^^ 
 
 (y) The idea of Providence. 
 
 The pagan principle of necessity is, according to Proudhon, 
 succeeded by its opposite, the Christian principle of Providence.^'' 
 Under the pagan principle, humanity is doomed in advance; 
 slavery, tyranny, the distinction of castes, the antagonism in, and 
 instability of, the state, and finally, the stupid belief in the idea 
 of fate, are the signs of the doom. Under the Christian principle 
 humanity is, on the contrary, in a state of rehabilitation. The 
 world, after having been created by God in perfect harmony, 
 fell, through the revolt of Satan and the lapse of our first father, 
 into disorder, in which the inequality of conditions, although an 
 accidental fact, prevailed. Humanity was then in a state of 
 penitence when Jesus came to their help and prepared them for 
 rehabilitation. In the end, he united his authority with his church 
 
 34 Justice II, 23. 
 
 35 Ibid: pp. 64-65. This has proved to be the chief cause of political 
 instability. 
 
 ^6 Justice II, pp. 20-21. (See also below, Chap. VI.) 
 ^^Ibid: p. 36. 
 
72 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 and created in this church two powers, one spiritual and another 
 temporal, that is, the priesthood and the empire.^^ 
 
 The basic idea of the church is, first, the omnipotence of God. 
 Humanity, because of the effect of original sin, is in a state of 
 perdition. Only those who please God are predestined to sal- 
 vation. The decree of predestination is foreign to all merit and 
 demerit, and is based simply on blind destiny. It is equivalent 
 to a true lottery. It is a pure act of the good pleasure of God. 
 Thus, in a Christian government, the most favored are not neces- 
 sarily those who are the most deserving, but rather those whom 
 the religious authority, assisted by the Holy Spirit, has desig- 
 nated.^^ The Christians depend only upon Providence for favor, 
 subsistence and success.'*" 
 
 The basic idea of the church, in the second place, is the divine 
 origin of government. Society is founded upon the idea of God.*^ 
 All power, democratic or monarchical, is of divine right. "The 
 people is the true sovereign immediately established by God," said 
 the Abbe Lenoir, "and universal suffrage is the means through 
 which the collective mediator makes known the divine will."*^ 
 
 The basic idea of the church, in the third place, is the sub- 
 ordination of the temporal power to the spiritual power. In the 
 state of Providence, the legislative power, having as its principle 
 theology or theodicy, belongs essentially to the church. The 
 princes and the kings are only the executors of its canons ; and 
 the pope, servitor of the servitors of God, is raised above all 
 republics, all monarchies, in fact, all humanity.*^ 
 
 The basic idea of the church, in the fourth place, is the idea 
 of authority. Authority to a Christian is the same thing as right 
 to a revolutionist. It is his code. It is his charter. "Cease 
 speaking to me of political rights, parliamentary forms and all 
 
 38 Justice II, p. 65. 
 ^^'ibid: p. 43. 
 *o Ibid: p. 67. 
 *^Ibid: p. 43. 
 42/&id; p. 34. 
 " Ibid: p. 43. 
 
Development of the State 73 
 
 your constitutional procedure," the Christian will say. "All these 
 are atheistical. I am a Christian. I have my faith. I have my 
 Christ who, except in the inevitable accidents which are chiefly 
 due to the imperfection of my nature, guarantees to me, as much 
 as I could desire, the wisdom and the fealty of my pastor."** 
 Thus in the church*^ as well as in government, the principle of 
 authority predominates. Just as the government of Providence 
 in the universe is a government of reparation, of restoration, of 
 rehabilitation and of predestination, so the government in the 
 Christian state is a government of dictatorship, of privileges, of 
 prerogatives, of expediency, of police and of exceptions.** 
 
 ' In short, under the government of Christianity, authority is 
 everything; political justice as well as economic justice are denied 
 to the people. The principle of government, in the order of 
 liberty as in that of interests, is to deny right, that is to say, to 
 have no principle.*^ 
 
 (z) The idea of justice. 
 
 The idea of Providence, Proudhon declares, is followed his- 
 torically by the idea of justice, the principle of revolution. Theo- 
 retically, justice, in order to be effective, should be more than 
 an idea. It should be a reality. It should be not only a concept 
 of intellect, an economic relation, or a formula of order, but 
 also a power of the soul, form of the will, interior energy and 
 social instinct. It should be, in short, a force, not simply a 
 notion ; a force which, in increasing for the individual his dignity, 
 his security and his happiness, will, at the same time, protect 
 social order for him against the incursion of egoism.*® 
 
 Practically, the idea of justice will be realized through the 
 reciprocal contract. Two men, for instance, meet together, re- 
 cognize the dignity of each other, realize the benefit to both of 
 them from the concert of their industry, and in consequence they 
 
 4* Justice II, pp. 57-58. 
 ^5 Ibid: pp. 46 and 48. 
 ^f^Ibid: p. 66. 
 ^nbid: pp. 57-58. 
 *^Ibid: I, pp. 132-133. 
 
74 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 guarantee each other their equality. Here is all the social system ; 
 an equation and a power of collectivity. Two families, two 
 cities, two provinces, contract with each other upon the same 
 basis. There should be only two things resulting from this 
 process — an equation and a power of collectivity.*^ 
 
 In sliori, justice is a pact of liberty. ''° Its practical realization 
 consists of the estabUshment of a social order upon a system of 
 free adjustment and of reciprocal guarantees, having for their 
 inteipretation the arbitration of the city, and for their sanction 
 the city's power.^^ While the age of religion has been the age 
 of struggle, in which the heroism of combat and the enthusiasm 
 of martyrdom keep the place of happiness, the age of justice 
 we are going to reach will be an age of science, of serenity, in 
 which the perfection of mankind and the equilibrium of society 
 will be achieved through justice.^^ 
 
 So far we have considered Proudhon's general idea about 
 justice. We may ask, then, how the revolutionary utopia^^ of 
 justice can be realized. In answering this question, Proudhon 
 has his faith in human nature. "It is the law of nature," he said, 
 "that the intelligent and free being will make his own moral rules, 
 that he will act according to the law of reason and of liberty, 
 and finally in some situations that he will find himself . . he 
 will achieve fortune through his morality. Here is what reason 
 says and nature demands — what man seeks under the double 
 and irresistible impulse of his sensibility and of his conscience. 
 To remain in this state of half justice is impossible. It is neces- 
 sary to advance. . . ."^* 
 
 If justice is to be realized Proudhon is not blind to the fact 
 that there must be some guarantees for it. First, it must be 
 accompanied by the equalizing of fortunes. Justice without the 
 
 *» Justice III, pp. 114-115 (See also III, p. 272). 
 
 w) Ibid: p. 274. 
 
 51/6/d; I, p. 124. 
 
 52 Ibid: III, pp. 9, 71-72, 229. 
 
 ^^Ibid: III, p. 274. 
 
 " Ibid: I, p. 126. 
 
Development of the State 75 
 
 equality of fortunes is just like a balance with a false weight.^'' 
 It must also be maintained by force. "The obligation of observ- 
 ing justice," said Proudhon, "is subject to caprice, to immediate 
 and selfish interests. It is necessary to arrange the constraints 
 against another constraint, that of evil. It is necesary to provide 
 force in the service of justice. "^^ 
 
 (b) Development in the forms of government. 
 
 There are two kinds of government: (1) The government 
 of the old epoch and (2) the government of the new epoch. The 
 government of the old epoch may be classified into four kinds: 
 (a) Monarchy; (b) aristocracy; (c) democracy; and (d) mixed 
 government. When government belongs to one alone, it is called 
 monarchy ; to a few, aristocracy ; and to all, democracy. Besides 
 these three forms, there is still a fourth, the mixed government, 
 which is composed of the elements of monarchy, aristocracy and 
 democracy.^^ 
 
 The government of monarchy may again be divided into two 
 kinds: (x) Absolute monarchy and (y) constitutional monarchy. 
 In an absolute monarchy, the king is the government; the people 
 its subjects. In a constitutional monarchy, the government is 
 composed of a king and two chambers, the members of which 
 are either hereditary nobles, or chosen by the prince or by one 
 class of the nation. The body of subjects of the government in 
 a constitutional monarchy are those who remain outside of the 
 government, that is, the immense majority of the country.^^ 
 
 Democracy may also be classified into three kinds : ( 1 ) The 
 quasi-democratic republic, (2) direct government in its moderate 
 form, and (3) direct government in its radical form; the first 
 being the form in actual operation, and the other two only 
 forms advocated by political theorists. In a quasi-democratic 
 republic, all the male citizens are admitted, every third or fourth 
 year, to elect (1) the legislators and (2) the executives. The 
 
 55 What is Property, p. 97. 
 
 56 "La Guerre . . ." I, p. 291. 
 "Justice II, p. lis. 
 
 58 Idee Generale, pp. 164-165. 
 
76 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 time of the participation of the whole body of the poeple in the 
 government is short, forty-eight hours or thereabouts for each 
 election. It is because of this fact that the body of the stribjects 
 of the government is almost the same as that in a constitutional 
 monarchy, that is to say, nearly the whole body of the people. 
 \^ The president and the representatives, once elected, are masters 
 in the state; all the rest have to obey.^^ In a direct government 
 of the moderate form, all the people will participate in at least 
 one part of the legislation and will elect one part of the agents 
 or functionaries of the executive power. The tendency of this 
 system is to make at least one half of the people plus one partici- 
 pate in the government.'"' And finally, in a direct government 
 of the extreme form, advocated by the radicals, all the people 
 enter into the government and take up all the powers of it, 
 always deliberating, voting and acting only by unanimous consent, 
 as in an insurrection. Under direct government of the extreme 
 form, there would be no more presidents, no more representatives, 
 no more commissioners, no more majority in the state. All the 
 people in their collectivity are legislators and administrators. 
 
 Proudhon in 1851 denounced forcefully this extreme form of 
 direct government, "If all are the governors, where," he asked, 
 "should be the governed, the judged, the administered?"^^ We 
 may notice here in passing that what Proudhon thus in 1851 
 reproached as the extreme form of the direct government is just 
 what he considered as his ideal form of anarchy in 1843.®^ 
 
 Historically speaking, the three main forms of government, 
 that is, monarchy, aristocracy and democracy, are always in a 
 state of revolution. Just as all despotic government resolves it- 
 self in virtue of force and right into aristocracy, so aristocracy 
 develops finally into a democracy. Here a new modification of 
 the right of force is produced. In the institution of nobility, the 
 
 s" Idee Generale, p. 165. 
 ^Ibid: p. 165. 
 «i Ibid: p. 164. 
 
 «2 Solution du Problcme Social, pp. 49, 87. (See also below Chapter 
 VI.) 
 
Development of the State 77 
 
 right of force is combined with the right of the family, that is, 
 the right of birth. With the advancement of democracy, the 
 right of birth gives place to the right of numbers, or of majority. 
 The force of collectivity is, then, the point of departure and the 
 basis of the social contract.^^ 
 
 The different forms of state, from absolute monarchy to 
 representative democracy, are, according to Proudhon, but middle 
 terms, illogical and unstable positions which may be regarded 
 as steps toward liberty — a political ladder, by the aid of which 
 society will raise itself to the consciousness and possession of 
 itself.«* 
 
 In opposition to the regime of the old epoch, as discussed 
 above, is the regime of the new epoch, the regime af anarchy, 
 or of justice, the details of which we consider in a following 
 chapter. 
 
 63 "La Guerre," I, p. 233. 
 «* Melange I, pp. 12-13. 
 
f 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 Proudhon's Theory of the State from the Standpoint of 
 
 AN Anarchist — Critical. 
 
 Proudhon is, essentially, a destructive rather than a con- 
 structive thinker. His work is full of criticisms of the state in 
 general and of the different forms of government in particular. 
 
 ( 1 ) As to state and government in general. 
 
 Proudhon's attitude toward the state passed through two 
 Stages. From 1840 to 1850 his criticism was always bitter, 
 and sometimes violent. "What is the state?" he asked. "The 
 state is the army, the police, the judiciary, the public treasury, 
 the budget, the custom duty, the public debt, the money, the 
 liquidation, etc."^ It is, in the first place, distinct from, above, 
 and outside of, the people.^ Being originally the servitor of the 
 people, the state, by general and unlimited power to act for the 
 electors, creates for itself an interest contrary to that of the 
 people.^ It is in the second place a parasite,* acting for its own 
 interests. It has to create many public functionaries who will 
 gradually form an official class over against liberty and labor. 
 The development of this bureaucratic class will result in nepotism 
 and corruption. Seeing that the imposts are not sufficient for 
 its corrupt uses, for the payment of its favorites or sinecures, 
 the state will at last resort to loans, or even to embezzlement. 
 After having taken the money from the people, it will invent 
 some means to make them applaud its robbery.^ Being distinct 
 from the people, it has, in the third place, no consciousness, no 
 
 1 Melange II, pp. 18-19. 
 ^Ibid: III, p. 76. 
 3 Ibid: III, p. 76-78. 
 *Ibid: p. 76. 
 Ubid: III, pp. 76-78. 
 
What is the State? 79 
 
 ideas of its own. Anarchy, on the other hand, is the living 
 society, the people not the state, who have the consciousness of 
 their ideas and who will govern themselves through the division 
 of labor, and the special delegation of functions — in a word, 
 through the equal distribution of powers.® And finally, in the 
 fourth place, the state is an instrument of tyranny;^ having as 
 its basis the physical, intellectual and moral indifference of the 
 masses on the one hand, and the permanence of antagonism 
 between the weak and the strong on the other. The state has 
 always endeavored to suppress individual initiative by its 
 authority,® and the revolt of the weak against the strong by its 
 coercive force.^ 
 
 There is, therefore, absolutely nothing to the state except 
 abuses to reform, parasitism to suppress, and instruments of 
 tyranny to destroy.^" Through economic revolution, that is, 
 through the division of labor, the consolidating of industry, the 
 increasing of the public well-being, the distributing and equalizing 
 of capital and of taxation — through this liberty and justice will 
 have more guarantees than religion and the state can ever offer.^^ 
 In a well organized society the state will represent nothing more 
 than itself. It is then bound to disappear.^^ 
 
 In discussing the foregoing criticism of the state, we must 
 not fail to recognize the fact that what Proudhon attacks is not 
 the economic state, the state of the new epoch, but the parasitic 
 state, the state of the old epoch. As early as 1851 he recognized 
 that the state did have some real functions to perform when he 
 said that the state was alone capable of remedying the disorgani- 
 zation of society. It would, for instance, destroy the effects of 
 monopoly, and of stock-jobbing.^^ In 1858 his attitude toward 
 
 6 Melange III, p. 76. 
 
 7 Ibid: II, p. 19. 
 
 8 Organization du credit, pp. 91-92. 
 ^ Melange II, p. 23. 
 
 ^^Ibid: II, p. 19. 
 ^^Ibid: II, p. 23 
 ^2 Idee Generale, p. 91. 
 Injustice V, pp. 184-185. Proudhon defines authority as follows: 
 
8o The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 the state was further modified. Instead of attacking the state 
 as tyrannical, he then considered it as being the embodiment of 
 pubUc force. It was not the state, but rather government, i.e., 
 authority, which he denied. The state, as conceived by him then, 
 is the most energetic agent of civiUzation. It is indispensable to 
 society. As such it cannot achieve its maximum power imless 
 it is separated from all forms of authority, of governmentaUsm, 
 and of divine right.^* 
 
 While admitting the function of government in the develop- 
 ment of mankind^^ Proudhon criticized it still more severely than 
 the state. "All governments," he said, "have fallen one after the 
 other, not only because they are retrograde, but also because they 
 are governments."^^ First, government is the representative of 
 class interests. While claiming to have established order in 
 society, it divides society into two hostile groups, the rich 
 and the poor.^" In a conflict between the two, it is always 
 on the side of the former against the latter. Instead of sustaining 
 liberty and equality among all, it has endeavored to destroy them, 
 by virtue of its natural inclination toward the privileged class. 
 Thus the history of government is the martyrdom of the pro- 
 letariat.^* Second, government has no generosity, no noble senti- 
 ment, no intelligence at all.^^ Whatever the number of persons 
 
 "Cest la faculte que s'arroge un individu, une corporation ou une caste, 
 de disposer a son gre, pour une fin comme de lui seul, et sans garantie 
 ni responsabilite de son part, de la puissance publique, des interets 
 generaux, c'est a dire de I'Etat me me, et jusqu a certain point des fortunes, 
 et proprietes particulieres, le tout en vertu d'un droit pretendu divin ou 
 de conquete, de la superiority de race, ou meme d'une delegation du 
 people. Le principe d'autorite, qui a fait jusqu' ici le veritable apanage, 
 non pas de I'Etat mais du personnel governant, nous le nions et le 
 repoussons comme incompatible avec la dignite de I'homme et du citoyen, 
 incompatible avec la justice, incompatible avec la notion meme de I'Etat." 
 
 " Justice V, p. 183-185. 
 
 i5/6td; II, p. 6. 
 
 18 Letter to his friend, August 10, 1850. 
 
 17 Idee Generale, p. 298. Solution du Probleme Social, p. 42. 
 
 i« Idee Generale, p. Ill, 256. Justice V, \BA; II, pp. 4 and 70. 
 
 10 Letter to his friend, Nov. 15, 1840 (St. Beuvc, p. 246). 
 
The Evils of Government 8i 
 
 constituting the government, be it five, ten, one hundred, or one 
 thousand, it is always the domination of man by man, the 
 reign of the personal will and caprice of those who are the gov- 
 ernment,^" which is the fiction that violates liberty, and the brutal 
 force which annihilates justice.-^ Thirdly, government is by 
 nature contra-revolutionary ; oppressive in its policies and corrupt 
 in its administration. It can never be revolutionary. It is im- 
 possible to expect government to ameliorate the condition of the 
 unfortunate class.^^ 
 
 In addition to these facts government, according to Proudhon, 
 has also contained in itself the following evils: (a) The con- 
 secration of the principle of inequality through the lack of bal- 
 ance in economic adjustment, (b) the appropriation by indi- 
 viduals of the powers pertaining to society, (c) the establishment 
 of a fictitious power in place of the real power of society, (d) 
 the abolition of justice by the reason of state (raison d'Etat), 
 (e) the direction of government by an arbitrary prince, if the 
 government is monarchical, and in all other forms of government 
 by intriguing political parties, and (f) the continual tendency to 
 the absorption of society by the state.^^ Proudhon's chief aim 
 is, then, to annihilate government through economic reform:— 
 that is, through the abolition of interest, the establishment of free 
 credit, and the suppression of the existing system of taxation, 
 etc.2* 
 
 (2) As to the different forms of government. 
 
 Before discussing Proudhon's criticism against the different 
 forms of government, we may first consider briefly two of his 
 basic ideas: (a) his theory of sovereignty and (b) his theory 
 of the division of power. 
 
 The meaning of sovereignty, according to Proudhon, is two- 
 fold: (x) Independence of the state in relation to other states, 
 
 20 Qu'est ce que la propriete ; premier memoire, p. 30. 
 
 21 Idee Generale. p. 130. 
 
 22 Cont. Eco. I, p. 288. Confession, p. 22. See also Idee Generale p. 111. 
 
 23 Justice II, pp. 115-116. See also Idee Generale, pp. 254-255. 
 
 24 Melange III, p. 50. 
 
82 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 and (y) supremacy of the state in relation to its own people. 
 Proudhon admitted the existence of sovereignty in the first sense 
 of the word. "Considered in its political unity, the nation," he 
 said, "is sovereign. Its autonomy knows no authority, no 
 tribunal."25 
 
 With regard to sovereignty in its second sense, Proudhon's 
 opinion varies with different forms of government. It is un- 
 questionably true that, in a monarchy, the king is the sovereign.^^ 
 It is, however, quite wrong to allege that sovereignty, in a 
 democratic government, rests with the people. First, the sove- 
 reignty of the people does not exist in the real sense of the word. 
 In principle, the people are sovereign. But nothing previously 
 has shown that they could have performed any act of sove- 
 reignty.^^ The sovereignty of the people exists in name only. 
 In spite of the principle of sovereignty, the delegates of the 
 sovereign, once elected, become the masters of the sovereign.^'* 
 Sovereignty, then is transferred from the people to a few of the 
 mandatories. It becomes a fiction only.^^ Second, sovereignty 
 of the people is immoral. If the people are subject to error, what 
 would become of their sovereignty? Would their error be still 
 respected in itself as the truth? Would they obey what they 
 willed although they know that they have deceived themselves? 
 In this case ,the people are beings sovereignly immoral because 
 they think of the evil, actually will it, and themselves bring it 
 about.^" Thirdly, the sovereignty of the people is an image of 
 the man-king^^ (homme-roi). It is exercised in the collective 
 name of the people. It is one and indivisible. Its action is 
 essentially unitary. It could leave nothing outside of itself, with- 
 out contradicting its principle, its aim, and exposing itself to ruin. 
 
 25 "La Guerre" I, p. 251 (See also p. 210). 
 
 26 Cont. Pol.— pp. 170-171. 
 
 2'' Solution du Probleme Social, p. 46. 
 
 28 Cont. Pol, p. 90. 
 
 29 Melange III, p. 49. 
 
 30 Solution du Probleme Social, pp. 42-44. 
 
 31 Idee Generale, pp. 257-258. 
 
On Popular Sovereignty 83 
 
 In rendering sovereignty collective, we should have done nothing 
 more than create rivalries, oppositions and antagonisms in the 
 state.'^^ 
 
 In discussing the criticisms of Proudhon against the theory 
 of popular sovereignty, we must not fail to notice that even 
 though he denies its existence in fact, he does not go so far as 
 to deny its existence in prmciple. He admits that the people are, 
 theoretically, sovereign. ^^ What he tries to do, then, is not to 
 do away with the principle of popular sovereignty, but to trans- 
 form it. In order to achieve this aim, Proudhon had three dis- 
 tinct ideas in mind. First, universal suffrage must be reorganized 
 in such a way as to render the sovereignty of the people more 
 effective and real.^* Second, the sovereignty of reason must be 
 substituted for the sovereignty of will.^^ And finally all society, 
 the whole of the people, instead of one class of the people, must 
 constitute the sovereign.^® 
 
 With regard to the division of power, his idea showed three 
 phases: (x) Against the division of power (1848-1849), (y) in 
 favor of it (1850-1863), and (z) once more against it (1864- 
 1865). 
 
 In 1848 Proudhon considered that thought, will, and action 
 in government, as well as in man, ought to be indivisibly imited.^^ 
 Authority ought to be one and impersonal. The functions of 
 government ought to be separated on the one hand and well co- 
 ordinated on the other.^^ The division of power is the eternal 
 deception of liberty. It is the division of what is indivisible — 
 the will of the sovereign. The strongest support of despotism is 
 found in this division of power into legislative, executive, and 
 judicial branches. Through such a division liberty, equality, and 
 
 32Cont. Pol., pp. 133-134. 
 
 22 Solution du Probleme Social, p. 46. 
 
 34Cont. Pol. pp. 170-171. 
 
 35 Premier Memoire sur la Propriete, Ch. V, 2e partie. 
 
 36 Justice II, p. 123. 
 
 37 Melange I, p. 153. 
 
 38 Ibid: I, p. 170. 
 
84 The Political Theories of P. J, Proudhon 
 
 responsibility are bound to perish.^^ What Proudhon now tried 
 to do, therefore, was to remove these divisions and concentrate 
 all power in the hands of the national assembly. The assembly 
 would exercise the executive, as well as the legislative power, not 
 by delegation to some ministers, but by its own self in dividing 
 the work among its committees, each of which would nominate 
 its ministers and agents, with the approval of the assembly.*" 
 
 In 1850, however, he ceased to advocate the idea of con- 
 centrating power in the hands of the assembly, because he realized 
 that a collective being like the assembly would always tend to 
 oppose moderation, always going to extremes. Its despotism 
 might become one hundred times worse than the autocracy of 
 one man. If we are to divide authority it would be advisable to 
 give these separated powers some control over each other.*^ 
 
 In 1858, he developed his idea one step further. He saw 
 in the division of power its unity. "The division of power," he 
 said, "is only the unity of power considered in the diversity of 
 groups which form it. If the observer places himself in the 
 center of the network and from there runs over the series of 
 groups, all power will appear to him divided. But if he looks 
 at the result of these forces in their relationship with each other, 
 he will see the unity.*^ 
 
 But in 1864 Proudhon returned to his former view again. 
 He thought that the separation of powers would destroy, not 
 only the unity of conquest, which was nothing more than the 
 submission of the weak to a strong and independent power, but 
 also the rational unity which exercised itself within a proper 
 limit and which was excluded from any idea of partition. In 
 short, not only imperial centralization, but all kinds of govern- 
 
 39 Desjardin II, p. 221. 
 
 •*" Melange I, p. 168. He made no mention of what would become 
 of the judicial branch of government. 
 *i Desjardin II, p. 221. 
 
 *2 Justice II, p. 121. (See also p. 106.) Proudhon expressed the same 
 idea in his "Petit Catechismc." Desjardin II. p. 222. 
 
On the Forms of Government 85 
 
 ment, including that of the city, would become impossible if the 
 power of government was divided.*^ 
 
 Keeping these two basic ideas in mind, we may proceed to 
 discuss his criticism against the different forms of government. 
 Proudhon denounced monarchy, aristocracy, as well as democ- 
 racy, because they all imply the idea of governmentalism. He felt 
 that there should be no authority — no government.** 
 
 (a) His criticism of royalty, or absolute monarchy. 
 
 For royalty, or absolute monarchy, he had absolutely no sym- 
 pathy. First, royalty is hierarchical, personal, local, stationary, 
 living within itself and for itself. Its social basis is the caste. 
 For mediaeval feudalism of land ownership it substituted the 
 feudalism of commerce and industry. It is the enemy of progress 
 and of mankind. With it, universal suffrage is simply a lottery.*^ 
 Second, it is vicious, corrupt and extravagant. Its court reeks 
 of wastefulness and moral laxity.*^ Thirdly, it is arbitrary. The 
 nation-king who cannot exercise his sovereignty himself, is ob- 
 liged to delegate it to his agents. Be these agents five, ten, one 
 hundred or a thousand, of what consequence is the number and 
 what matters the name? It is always the government of man, 
 the rule of will and caprice.*^ Fourthly, it is illegitimate. Equal- 
 ity of conditions is the aim of society. In order to secure this 
 aim, it is necessary to abolish royalty.*^ 
 
 (b) His criticism of representative government. 
 
 No less forceful is his criticism of representative govern- 
 ment. First, the people can never be legitimately represented. 
 The electoral system is the mechanism of falsehood. An assembly 
 is formed by the caprice of the lot. What relationship exists 
 between the assembly and the individual? What guarantees can 
 the assembly offer the individual? Why should the individual 
 
 43 Cont. Pol. p. 137. 
 
 ** Idee Generale, p. 130. 
 
 *5 Melange I, p. 141. 
 
 *6 Idee Generale, p. 164. 
 
 *7 What is Property, p. 56. 
 
 *8 Desjardin I, p. 33. 
 
86 The Political Theories of P. J, Proudhon 
 
 make the enormous sacrifice of accepting the resolutions of the 
 assembly as being the expression of his will, the just measure of 
 his right? And again, when the assembly, after the debate of 
 which the individual knows nothing, comes to impose upon him 
 its decision as law, and offers to him this law at the point of the 
 bayonet, what becomes of his dignity as sovereign?*^ 
 
 Second, interests ought not to, and cannot be represented. 
 If they need an intermediary to represent them they are interests 
 sacrificed.^" In this connection we may notice that the representa- 
 tion of interests is different from the harmonizing of interests. 
 To harmonize interests is to abolish interests. Canals, after the 
 harmonization of interests, will be free of tolls. Whoever advo- 
 cates representative government advocates the harmony of in- 
 terests. Whoever advocates the harmony of interests, advocates 
 the absence of government.^^ To represent interests is, on the 
 "other hand, to reconstitute authority.^^ The representatives of 
 interests will, for instance, levy tolls upon the canals rather than 
 keep them free, because they have other interests to take care of 
 besides the interests of the people.^^ "Speak no more of liberty 
 represented, of rights and interests represented," said Proudhon, 
 "because liberty and interests, in their collectivity as well as in 
 their inter-relationship cannot be represented. The representa- 
 tive of a nation, as well as the representative of a family, of 
 property, of industry, will be the chief and the master."^* 
 
 Thirdly, under a representative government, the individual 
 has no freedom. He is not free when he receives from others 
 his wages, his work, the measure of his right, and his duty. He 
 is free neither in his sovereignty, nor in his action when he is 
 constrained to have others draw up his law for him. He is not 
 free when he is forced to elect a representative to govern him, 
 even though this representative is the most devoted of servants."'^ 
 
 *^ Idee Generale, p. 143. 
 
 ■""^ Revolution Sociale, p. 187. 
 
 5i/6trf; p. 183. 
 
 52/6id: p. 187. 
 
 53/feid; p. 186. 
 
 54/&tW; p. 187. 
 
 55 Idee Generale, p. 216. 
 
Representative Government 87 
 
 There are three kinds of representative government: The 
 constitutional monarchy, the quasi-democratic repubHc and direct 
 government in its moderate form.^® Having discussed Proud- 
 hon's criticism against representative government in general, we 
 may now consider his particular criticisms against the different 
 forms respectively. 
 
 (x) His criticism of the constitutional monarchy. 
 
 Proudhon is a strong enemy of monarchy. He denounces the 
 constitutional monarchy just as severely as the absolute mon- 
 archy. First, the constitutional monarchy is a class government. 
 It is the government of the bourgeoisie. It is a government based 
 upon the aristocracy of talents and of fortunes. The majority 
 of the people are excluded from the government. They are ex- 
 ploited by the bourgeoisie whose tyranny is followed by the 
 misery of the proletariat.^^ Second, the constitutional monarchy 
 is contradictory in its basic principles. Unity, legality and order 
 are the three essential elements without which no nation can 
 exist. In a constitutional monarchy royal authority produces the 
 unity, preponderant, inviolable and hereditary. What produces 
 legality is no longer the royal prerogative, without which govern- 
 ment would develop into pure despotism, but the national will, 
 manifested by various laws anterior to the monarchy, or at 
 least contemporary with it. And finally what produces order is 
 a 'third principle, objective and materialistic, the hierarchy or 
 subordination of citizens, that is to say, the inequality of faculties 
 and fortunes resulting from blind destiny. The order, thus 
 produced, is called now feudalism, now aristocracy, now govern- 
 ment of the middle class, or equilibrium of powers, etc. 
 
 The monarchical constitution then, necessarily implies three 
 conflicting principles, royal power, national will, and hazard of 
 conditions and fortunes. It is from these principles that con- 
 stitutional monarchy develops the three elements, unity, legality 
 
 56 Broadly speaking, all government except anarchy is representative, 
 Melange III, p. 74. 
 
 57 Solution du Probleme Social, p. 61. See also Idee Generale, p. 165. 
 
88 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 and order. As the principles upon which the constitution rests, 
 royal authority, national authority and the authority of hazard, 
 are essentially antagonistic, they fall into the state of perpetual 
 conflict, so that in the monarchy, unity, legality and order form 
 among themselves an irreconcilable contradiction.^^ The con- 
 stitution so constituted by the three principles, is subject to viola- 
 tion, interminable laceration, and permanent revolution and catas- 
 trophe.^^ 
 
 (y) His criticism of democracy.®" 
 
 Still more forceful is Proudhon's criticism of democracy. 
 First, democracy is class government. It is a government of 
 the proletariat over the bourgeoisie, under which the latter are 
 exploited by the former. The tyranny of the proletariat means 
 the ruin of the bourgeoisie.''^ 
 
 Second, the government of democracy is composed of medi- 
 ocre men, who have practically very little talent and fortune.®^ 
 
 Thirdly, democracy means ostracism. Under the electoral 
 system, a deputy is elected to the legislature presumably to repre- 
 sent all the ideas and interests of the general public. In point 
 of fact, he represents only one idea and one interest. The 
 legislature, being composed of these deputies, reaches its decisions 
 by the half plus one vote. Thus the half minus one vote is not 
 represented unless it be done in spite of itself. The minority 
 is virtually disfranchised, except when chance intervenes on its 
 behalf. Consequently, it is found that of all the varying ideas 
 and interests which concern and agitate the general public, divid- 
 ing the citizens, only one idea and only one interest find ex- 
 pression in the legislature — that idea and interest which is repre- 
 sented by the half plus one vote. All the rest are pitilessly 
 
 58 Melange II, pp. 122-124. 
 
 C9 Ibid: II, p. 127. 
 
 60 Proudhon's classification of the form of the government was still 
 vague in 1848. By democracy, he means probably the direct government 
 in its moderate form as mentioned by him in 1851. 
 
 6^ Solution du Probleme Social, p. 61. 
 
 62 Ibid: pp. 59-60. 
 
Criticisms of Democracy 89 
 
 excluded. To be more exact, one may say that the problem of 
 democratic government consists of eliminating through the 
 mechanism of suffrage, claimed to be universal, all the ideas and 
 interests of the half minus one group, the minority, and declaring 
 sovereign the majority, the half plus one group, and giving all 
 care and all attention only to its idea and its interest.^^ 
 
 Fourthly, democracy means the tyranny of the majority — 
 the most execrable tyranny of all, because it supports itself 
 neither upon the authority of religion, nor upon the nobleness 
 of race, nor upon the distinction of talent and fortunes : it has 
 its basis upon number and its mask in the name of the people." 
 If the majority has by hazard voted for the budget, the minority 
 may believe that it also has voted for it. In consequence, it is 
 obliged to pay what it has in fact voted against paying.''^ 
 
 Fifthly, democracy is expensive. It costs more than monarchy. 
 The reason for this is two-fold. On the one hand, the tendency 
 to allow the totality of citizens to participate continuously in the 
 affairs of the government is contrary to the law of the division 
 of labor ; on the other hand, the tendency to bring into the state 
 liberal functions which the monarchy would have outside of the 
 state, is contrary to the law for the reduction of cost.^^ 
 
 Sixthly, democracy is materialistic. It has as its basis uni- 
 versal suffrage, which is nothing more than a kind of atomism 
 by which the legislator, unable to make the people speak in a 
 substantial unity, invites them to express their opinions by the 
 head, just as the Epicureans express thought, will and intelligence 
 by the combination of atoms. The surest way of making the 
 people lie is to establish universal suffrage.^'^ 
 
 Seventhly, democracy is contradictory in its principles. On 
 one hand it lays down as its fundamental basis the sovereignty 
 of the people; on the other, it accuses the people of being in- 
 
 6^ Solution, pp. 54-55. 
 ^*Ibid: p. 56. 
 65 Ibid: p. 56. 
 66/feid; pp. 76-87. 
 ^■i Ibid: p. 62. 
 
90 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 capable of governing themselves on account of their ignorance. 
 A democracy, therefore, treats the people as sovereign, yet con- 
 siders them so ignorant that they cannot make use of their 
 sovereignty. It is necessary that the authority should belong to 
 some one vi^ho will exercise it in the name, and by the authority, 
 of all.«« 
 
 And finally, democracy is the idea of the state raised to the 
 nth power.®^ It is the idea of aristocracy in disguise.''" It reigns 
 by the distinction of castes and the supremacy of the state.''^ 
 
 (z) His criticism of the radical form of direct government. 
 
 Under direct government, as advocated by the radicals, there 
 will be no more hereditary royalty, no more presidency, no more 
 delegation, no more representation. Proudhon's argument against 
 it is twofold. First, it is illogical. When all are governors, where 
 would be the governed ?^^ Second, it will become tyrannical. 
 It will be the "begetter of cesarism" in spite of our posts, our 
 railways, our telegraphs, etc. It will precipitate us much more 
 quickly into imperial tyranny.''^ 
 
 (3) As to the institutions of the state. 
 
 Proudhon is, as we have seen, a violent opponent of the state 
 and of government. It is quite natural that he raises objection 
 to the various institutions of the state. The police,'^'* the army,'^^ 
 and the political parties^*^ are all denounced by him. But the 
 most significant of all are his arguments against law, the courts, 
 the imposts, and the public functionaries. 
 
 (a) His criticism of law. 
 
 Proudhon's idea about law underwent two stages of change: 
 (x) The transformation of law (1839-1849) and (y) the 
 
 6s Solution, p. 66. 
 
 69/fcj'i: p. 86. 
 
 ^oibid: p. 47-49. 
 
 ''^Ibid: p. 2. 
 
 72/feiW; p. 164-167. 
 
 ^3 Idee Generale, p. 113. 
 
 ^4 Idee Revolutionnairc, p. 91. 
 
 '5 Melange I, p. 72. See also Desjardin II, p. 225. 
 
 78 Confessions, p. 81. 
 
The Law and the Courts 91 
 
 abolition of law (1851-1865). From 1839 to 1848, the chief aim 
 of Proudhon was not to aboHsh law, but to transform it. Law 
 is not the expression of the king's exclusive will, nor of a general 
 will of the people. It is the expression of fact. In other words, 
 it is the natural relation of things, discovered and applied by 
 reason.'^" 
 
 After 1849, Proudhon changed his idea, however. He in- 
 tended not only to transform, but also to abolish, law. Law, 
 according to him, is originally imposed upon the people. It is 
 obeyed through fear rather than through love.'^ It is a cob- 
 web for the strong and the powerful, a chain for the small and 
 the weak, which no steel could sunder.'^^ It is, therefore, neces- 
 sary for us to simplify it. "In place of a million of statutes, one 
 alone is sufficient," said Proudhon, "do not do unto others that 
 which you do not wish them to do to you ; but do unto others as 
 you would be done by." ^° To simplify law is, in fact, to 
 abolish it. 
 
 Here, Proudhon developed his idea of contract. For law 
 he would substitute the contract. How will this contract be 
 drawn up? According to him, the citizens should gather in a 
 solemn convention and there define the rights, obligations and 
 attributes of each, exchanging guarantees and indorsing sanc- 
 tions. Justice, thus springing from liberty, would not be ven- 
 geance but rectification.®^ 
 
 (b) His criticism of the judiciary. 
 
 With regard to the institution of the judiciary he also enter- 
 tained two contradictory views. In 1848 he merely endeavored 
 to simplify the organization of the courts. Instead of twenty 
 tribunals, two would be sufficient — the "tribunal of instance," and 
 
 7^7 What is Property? pp. 56-57. Celebration du Dimanche, pp. 144 
 and 189. 
 
 78 Melange III, 73. Idee Generale, p. 270. 
 
 ''^ Idee Generale, p. 138. 
 
 80 Ibid: p. 150. 
 
 s^Ibid: pp. 139 and 274. 
 
92 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 the "tribunal of cassation." The abohtion of the death penahy 
 was also opposed by him.^^ 
 
 But in 1851 he urged the abolition of the judiciary. Man 
 alone has the right of judging himself. If he is guilty and be- 
 lieves that expiation is good for him, he may demand punishment 
 for himself. Justice is an act, essentially voluntary, of the con- 
 science which cannot be judged or absolved except by itself. 
 Society may have the right of defending itself and revenging any 
 injury done it, but not the right of judging, and after having 
 judged, punishing any individual.^^ The reason for this is that, 
 in an actual social state, authority is not the result of con- 
 tract, but the result of constraint. To judge and to condemn is 
 not to carry out the principle of justice, but to usurp its form.®* 
 When the majority of the people are denied any property, the 
 proprietors, or capitalists, are the masters of society. They are 
 allied with the government, enjoying its protection and its favor. 
 They are the natural judges of the proletariat.^^ What makes 
 the code is not justice, but vengeance, most unique and atrocious 
 vengeance, the last vestige of the ancient hatred of the patrician 
 class against the servile class.^^ 
 
 For this actual society where tyranny of one class over an- 
 other prevailed, Proudhon wished to substitute a new society, 
 based upon the plan of reason, founded upon equality of right 
 among all its members, and especially upon the free and volun- 
 tary adhesion thereto of each of them.®^ All the people would 
 enter into a contract which would express the free will of the 
 social individual.®^ There would be no more courts. The idea 
 of rectification instead of vengeance would be the guiding prin- 
 ciple in any conflict among the people. Suits would be reduced 
 to a mere convocation for the purpose of obtaining the testimony 
 
 82 Melange I, pp. 71-72. 
 
 82 Idee Generale, pp. 75 and 271. 
 
 8*/feid; p. 173. 
 
 85/6irf: 174, 273-274. 
 
 86 Ibid: p. 272. 
 
 87 /fold; p. 175. 
 
 88 /foicf; pp. 174 and 312. 
 
Theory of Taxation 93 
 
 of the accuser and the accused. There would be no need of any 
 other intermediary than the friends to whom the parties come 
 for arbitration.^® 
 
 (c) His criticism of imposts, or taxation. 
 
 Proudhon's idea on this topic underwent two stages of 
 of development. From 1840 to 1848 he opposed taxation. First, 
 taxation is imposed upon the poor for the maintenance of the 
 army, the court, the school, the police and other things which 
 are supposed to be established for the interests of the poor.®" 
 Second, taxation is unproductive. Whenever the government 
 makes war, loses or gains a battle, changes the outfit of its army, 
 erects a monument, digs a canal, opens a road or builds a rail- 
 way, it borrows money, on which the tax-payers pay interest ; that 
 is, the government, without adding to its productive capacity, 
 increases its active capital — in a word, capitalizes after the man- 
 ner of the proprietor whom Proudhon has so bitterly attacked." 
 
 In 1861, he changed his idea. He now did not demand the 
 abolition of taxation, as he had demanded in 1849,®- but instead 
 demanded its reformation. Taxation is an exchange between the 
 individual and the state. It is paid by the people to the state in 
 exchange for what each of them will receive from it in public 
 service. What the state gives to the citizen in terms of service 
 ought to be, therefore, the exact equivalent of what it has de- 
 manded from them.®^ 
 
 (d) His criticism of public functionaries. 
 
 To Proudhon, public functionaries are, first of all, unproduc- 
 tive.®* They are simply parasites.®^ In humanity, there are four 
 divisions of work : mining, industry, commerce, and agriculture. A^ 
 
 s^Ibid: p. 275. 
 
 90 Cont. Eco., I, p. 260. 
 
 91 What is Property? p. 210. 
 
 92 Melanges III, p. 84 (see also p. 48). 
 
 93 Theorie de I'impot, pp. 39 and 47. 
 
 94 Cont. Eco. I, p. 260. 
 
 95 Justice, VI, p. 675. 
 
94 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 Proudlion would put aside anything which does not bring to 
 the market some effective product furnished by one of these four 
 industrial categories. The functionaries of the state are unpro- 
 ductive because their services do not fall within the law of ex- 
 change. It is necessary then, before suppressing the state, to sub- 
 ordinate to industry this power which adds neither to the devel- 
 opment of wealth, nor to the perfection of social order.^^ 
 
 Public functionaries are, in the second place, reactionary. 
 They are the enemies of justice and liberty .^^ They destroy the 
 spirit of enterprise. They crowd the central government and 
 cause the administrative machine to absorb all the individual 
 and local life at the expense of free thought. The producers who 
 might, since the declaration of right and the establishment of 
 universal suffrage, be the masters of society, appear before them 
 no more than a mass of slaves. So long as public functionaries 
 exist, good institutions will be misrepresented, rights paralyzed 
 and liberty become impotent.®^ 
 
 ^^ Cont. Eco. pp. 276 and 333. See also Desjardin II, p. 224. / 
 
 97 Melange III, p. 78. 
 
 98 Cont. Eco., I, p. 61. Alelange I, p. 277. Justice VI. pp. 275-276. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 Proudhon's Theory of the State from the Standpoint of 
 
 AN Anarchist — Creative 
 
 As has already been said, Proudhon was the father of anarch- 
 ism.^ From 1840 to 1863, he repeatedly declared himself an 
 anarchist.^ In discussing his theory of anarchy, we may, for the 
 sake of clearness, divide the work into three parts: (1) why he 
 preferred anarchy to the other forms of government, (2) how it 
 can be realized, and (3) what are its general characteristics. 
 
 I. Why Proudhon preferred anarchy to the other forms of 
 government. 
 
 Society, he declares, is perpetually progressive.^ Anarchy is 
 the condition of existence for adult society. Hierarchy is the 
 condition of existence for primitive society. There is an inces- 
 sant growth in human society from hierarchy to anarchy.* 
 
 There are two chief differences between anarchy and all the 
 other forms of government. First, anarchy is the rule of justice, 
 while all the other governments are that of power. In the fam- 
 ily, where authority is close to the heart of man, government is 
 based upon birth; in the savage and barbaric society, upon patri- 
 archy, or force; in a sacerdotal society, upon faith; in an aristo- 
 cratic society, upon primogeniture or caste; in the system of 
 Rousseau, upon chance or number. Birth, force, faith, primogeni- 
 
 1 Maurice Lair, in "Annales des sciences politiques," 15 Sept. 1909, 
 p. 588. 
 
 2 What is Property, p. 260 (1840). Letter of Dec. 14, 1849. "Con- 
 fessions" ch. IX (1849). Letter of March 7. 1851. Idee Generale, p. 
 109 (1851). 
 
 3 Corresp. V, p. 249. 
 * Melange II, p. 9. 
 
96 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 ture, chance and number are all equally unintelligible, with which 
 we cannot reason but to which we can only submit. They are 
 not principles but different modes through which the investiture 
 of power is effected.^ 
 
 Second, in anarchy, public action will be exercised by all the 
 citizens individually, and independently of each other, while in all 
 the other forms of government it becomes the exclusive practice 
 of a selected few, that is, the few public functionaries elected by 
 the people for this end. All the others are no longer associates 
 of these public functionaries, but their subjects. It is this sys- 
 tem which has been in vogue up to the present and which is called 
 in turn theocracy, monarchy and obligarchy: — all these designa- 
 tions indicating one and the same thing, that is, the state of 
 priests, dynasties, patricians or nobles.® 
 
 II. How can anarchy be realized. 
 
 Anarchy can be realized through (1) revolution of ideas,^ 
 (2) revolution of education,^ (3) economic revolution,^ (4) so- 
 cial revolution,^" and (5) political revolution.^^ 
 
 Before discussing these topics, we may first consider what 
 Proudhon's general idea of revolution was. Revolution, accord- 
 ing to him, is extraordinary acceleration of movement in the 
 continuous progress of humanity.^- It must first be legitimate 
 and must proceed directly from the anterior state. Second, it 
 must be legal. It must support itself upon established right. 
 Thirdly it must be pacific. It must be capable of developing it- 
 self freely on one hand and tolerating the existing ideas on the 
 other.^^ Fourthly, it must be accomplished through progressive 
 
 5 Idee Generale, p. 142. See also Chap. V, his criticism against the 
 government. 
 
 6 Melange III, p. 74. 
 ^Corresp. IV, p. 179. 
 8 Melange I, p. 115. 
 
 » Ibid: III, p. 48. 
 10 Justice VI, pp. 87-89. 
 "Melange III, p. 48. 
 12 Ibid: II, p. 19. 
 13/fetd; I, p. 14. Ibid: II, pp. 19 and 210. 
 
How Can Anarchy be Realized 97 
 
 reform, instead of through violence.^* Violence is useless and 
 contradictory ; useless because social problems can be easily solved 
 by pacific means/^ contradictory because violence is an appeal to 
 force, to arbitrariness/*' Fifthly, it must be universal. It will be 
 ineffective if it is not contagious. In other w^ords, it will fail in 
 France if it is not rendered universal throughout the whole 
 world.^^ 
 
 (1) Revolution of ideas. 
 
 Revolution is a French name for the new idea. There is a 
 distinction between progress and revolution. When our ideas on 
 any subject, material, intellectual or social, undergo a thorough 
 change because of new observations, we call that movement of the 
 mind revolution. If the ideas are simply extended or modified, 
 there is only progress. Thus the system of Ptolemy was a step 
 in astronomical progress, that of Copernicus was a revolution.^^ 
 As soon as the idea is vulgarized, or popularized, the transforma- 
 tion of society will be accomplished, with or without the support 
 of government.-^^. 
 
 (2) Education. 
 
 In close connection with the revolution of ideas is education. 
 Proudhon strongly attacked the old system of education. 
 "Schools are the seminaries of the aristocrats," he said; "It is 
 not for the people that the polytechnic school, the normal school, 
 the law school, and the school of Saint-Cyr have been founded. 
 It is mainly for maintaining and fortifying the distinction of 
 classes between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat that they have 
 come into existence." ^^ 
 
 ^^Ibid: II, p. 122. Justice II, p. 94. Corresp. II, pp. 194-200. 
 
 15 Ibid: I, p. 350. 
 
 16 Corresp. II, pp. 199-200. Proudhon admitted, however, the right of 
 legal resistence. "Resistance legale, c'est-a-dire maintien, defense et 
 conservation de la constitution et des droits qu'elle consacre." Melange 
 II, p. 68. 
 
 1^ Idee Generale, p. 297. 
 
 18 Justice I, p. 67. What is Property, p. 55. 
 
 19 Corresp. IV, p. 149. See also Justice I, pp. 133-134. 
 
 20 Idee Generale, p. 291. 
 
98 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 Proudhon, therefore, substituted his new idea for the old 
 idea of education. First, education must be secular. It must 
 be freed from ontological and religious speculations.-^ Second, 
 education must be professional. By the obligation of appren- 
 ticeship, by cooperation with all the parts of the collective work, 
 the division of labor will no longer be a cause of degradation for 
 the working men; on the contrary it will become an instrument 
 of education, and a pledge of security for them.-^ To separate 
 education from apprenticeship, and what is more detestable still, 
 to distinguish professional education from the real, useful, serious 
 daily exercise of the profession, is to reproduce under another 
 form the separation of powers, and the distinction of classes, the 
 two most energetic instruments of governmental tyranny and of 
 subordination of the workingmen.-^ Thirdly, education must be 
 democratic. It must be the same for all the people.^^ Through 
 the democratization of education, we shall arrive at a stage in 
 which intellectual equality may be approached, if not completely 
 realized. 
 
 (3) Economic revolution. 
 
 /Economic anarchy is the chief cause of the existence of gov- 
 ernmental institutions.-^ If economic forces are well organized, 
 there would be no need of government. In the place of the 
 feudal, military or governmental regime, we should establish the 
 industrial regime.^^ How will the economic forces be organized? 
 Proudhon's answer to this question is rather complicated, and 
 sometimes contradictory. Broadly speaking, we may divide his 
 economic reforms into three classes: (a) industrial, (b) com- 
 mercial and (c) agricultural. 
 
 21 Justice II, p. 148. 
 
 22 Idee Generale, p. 235. 
 ^3 Ibid: p. 290. 
 
 2* Melange I, p. 115. 
 25 Idee Generale, p. 297. 
 28/fciV; p. 115. 
 
How Can Anarchy be Realized 
 
 99 
 
 (a) Industrial reforms. 
 
 Proudhon knew perfectly well that the progress of society 
 might be measured by the development of industry.-'^ First, he 
 urged the division of labor,28 the equalizing of wages,-*^ the com- 
 plete subordination of capital to labor, and the identification of 
 the workers with the capitalists.^" Second, he urged the cen- 
 tralization of industry — centralization of the industries affecting 
 natural resources (including mining, fishing, hunting and gather- 
 ing of fruits), centralization of manufacturing industries, cen- 
 tralization of commercial industries, centralization of agricultural 
 industries and centralization of science, literature and the arts. 
 The organization in each of these five great categories should be 
 democratic. Each should elect its own minister by relative or 
 absolute majority. Each should form its own central administra- 
 tion and support it at its own expense.^^ Thirdly, he urged the 
 organization of workingmen's societies (Conipagnies ouvrieres). 
 Since a great number of workers are employed in the industries, 
 it will be necessary for them to organize into different societies. 
 These societies will be the real basis of the future industrial or- 
 ganizations. It is in them that Proudhon laid his hope for the 
 
 2^ Creation de I'ordre, p. 242. 
 
 28 Melange II, p. 23. 
 
 -9 Proudhon's theory of wages underwent three stages of change: (1) 
 equality of wages for all the workers regardless of their service (1840), 
 (2) abolition of wages (1851) and (3) equal wages for equal service 
 (1858). In 1840 he strongly advocated the equalizing of wages. "The 
 limited quantity of available material proves," he said, "the necessity of 
 dividing labor among the whole number of laborers. The capacity given 
 to all for accomplishing a social task — that is, an equal task — and the 
 impossibility of paying one laborer save in the products of another, 
 justify the equalizing of wages." (What is Property? p. 137.) In 1851, 
 he urged the abolition of wages (Idee Generale, p. 297). He changed 
 his idea again in 1858, and did not favor the equalizing of wages among 
 all the workers because he believed that their services might not be 
 equal. He advocated the determination of one's wages by what he pro- 
 duced. (Justice II, p. 385.) 
 
 30 Melange III, p. 48. 
 
 ^-^Ibid: I, p. 71. Desjardin I, pp. 107-108. 
 
lOO The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 future of the workingman.^- Fourthly, he beHeved that each of 
 these workingmen's societies should be autonomous. Each house- 
 hold, each workshop, each corporation should have its proper 
 police, and should administer with exactitude its own affairs.^^ 
 In other words, all the affairs of police, justice and administration 
 would be managed by the workers.^^ Industrial organization 
 would take the place of political government.^'^ 
 
 (b) Commercial reforms. 
 
 There are two schools of socialism; one based on the theory 
 of production and the other on that of exchange. For the former 
 the technique of production is the basis of society; in order to 
 reform society, it is necessary for us to reform the technique of 
 production. For the latter, the technique of exchange, instead 
 of production, is the economic basis of society ; in order to trans- 
 form society, it is necessary to reform the technique of exchange. 
 Proudhon belongs to the second school. He believes that the 
 social problem is, fundamentally, a problem of correlation of 
 credit and exchange.^'^ He believes that the transformation of 
 the mechanism of exchange would bring about the reformation 
 of society. His plan for the reform of exchange is two-fold — 
 (x) the abolition of interest and (y) the abolition of money. 
 
 (x) The abolition of interest. 
 
 In exchange, the basis of all value should be labor.^^ The 
 price of the product should be made in terms of its real value, 
 that is, the net expense incurred in the process of production. 
 In this way, all the intermediary parasites will disappear. The 
 banker will get from his creditors a remuneration corresponding 
 to the cost of services which he has rendered to them, and noth- 
 ing more. Such will be the case with the money-lender, the land- 
 owner, and in general with all those who render services to other 
 
 32 Idee Generale, p. 232. 
 
 83/6id; p. 289. 
 
 ^*Ibid: p. 297. 
 
 ^^ Ibid: p. 259. Confessions, p. 33. See also Desjardin I, p. 176. 
 
 86 Bougie, p. 173. 
 
 37 Cont. Eco., I, pp. 92 and 97. 
 
How Can Anarchy be Realized ioi 
 
 people. They will violate the law of reciprocity if they exact 
 any excessive remuneration, passing beyond the cost which the 
 rendition of the service may entail. In short, all the forms of 
 usury should be abolished. There would be no discount for the 
 money-lenders, no rent for the landlords, no interest or dividend 
 for the stockholders.^^ 
 
 (y) The abolition of money. 
 
 In substitution for the old system of exchange, Proudhon is in 
 favor of instituting a new system of exchange in which reciproc- 
 ity and justice would be the guiding principles.^^ The interme- 
 diary of money would be abolished. We should use banknotes 
 only. The buyer of a product, instead of paying his creditor 
 in cash would meet his debt by a letter of exchange which the 
 seller would immediately take to the bank. The bank would give 
 him, in exchange for his letter, a bank-note in value equal to the 
 amount inscribed upon the letter. With the bank-note the seller 
 could then obtain such merchandise as he needed. Having in his 
 hand a legal promise, redeemable at sight, he finds himself losing 
 nothing by the suppression of money. The bank in all these 
 operations would not run any risks, because the social paper 
 {papier social) or the letter of exchange that he obtained from 
 the seller, is secured by commodities.^" 
 
 (c) Agricultural reforms. 
 
 In applying the principle of contractual justice, the small 
 farmers would, by the payment of rent, gradually gain a right 
 to a part of the property. Through the development of this 
 process, the great land-owners would tend to disappear and the 
 
 38 Melange I, pp. 60-62 (See also Melange II, p. 41-42). 
 
 39 Solution du Probleme social, p. 93. 
 
 *o L'organization du credit et de la circulation, pp. 111-131. Proudhon's 
 theory of money, and credit may be found in the sixth volume of his 
 complete works and in the second volume of his "Economic Contradic- 
 tions." For a brief view of his idea, see Marc Aucuy "Les Systemes 
 Socialistes d'echange," Paris, 1908, p. 137. Pareto "Systemes Socialistes," 
 II, pp. 267-280. Osgood "Scientific Anarchism," pp. 13-18. Miilberger, 
 "P. J. Proudhon" pp. 87-88, 104-117, 129-138. 
 
c c ♦ ■, "» c t 
 « <■ e ( f r r 
 
 102 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 small farmers would become directly and without any interme- 
 diary, the proprietors of the land they cultivated. Proudhon con- 
 sidered this system preferable to the social project of nationali- 
 zation or communizing of the soil, because it would fundamentally 
 satisfy the desire " proprietiste" of the peasant." In the organ- 
 ized republic, agriculture, formerly the work of the slave, would 
 become the first of the fine arts for the people. They would pass 
 their lives in innocence, free from all seductions of the ideal. ^^ 
 
 The result of the economic revolution would be two-fold: (1) 
 social and (2) political. Socially, there would be no strong and 
 weak in the state. There would be no capitalists, but all pro- 
 ducers.*^ Politically, the economic revolution would end in the 
 disappearance of government within and the growth of interna- 
 tional peace without. Within the state, the governmental sys- 
 tem would tend to merge into the economic system.^'* The in- 
 dustrial regime would be substituted for the military or govern- 
 mental regime.*^ There would be no courts, no law, no police."*^ 
 Between the states all the agricultural, financial and industrial 
 interests would become identical and solidified. The commer- 
 cial market would be open to all. Its advantages would be the 
 same for all the nations. There would be no need of diplomatic 
 officers, nor national distinctions. The producers and consumers 
 of the world would be merged into one another.*''^ 
 
 (4) Social revolution. 
 
 Historically speaking, Proudhon asserts, society has undergone 
 three stages of development. The first period was that of equal- 
 ity. All men were equal, socially as well as economically. They 
 were all producers. 
 
 *^ Idee Generale, pp. 217-226. 
 
 •12 Justice II, p. 133. 
 
 " Melange II, p. 18. Melange III, p. 48. 
 
 ** Idee Generale, p. 196. 
 
 ^^Ibid: p, 297-298. 
 
 *8 Cont. Eco. I, p. 208. See also Corresp. V, p. 66. 
 
 *7 Idee Generale, pp. 297-298, 301-302. 
 
 I 
 
The Social Revolution 103 
 
 The second period was that of military conquest. As the 
 result of war, those who were taken prisoners became the slaves 
 of the conqueror. Society was then divided into two classes: (1) 
 the privileged class composed of the priests and nobles, especially 
 devoted to the altar and to the vocation of war, and (2) the 
 slaves, servitors or serfs, charged with the care of the household, 
 the providing of food, and the performing of those services which 
 concern industry and production. The distinction between the 
 privileged class and the slaves was based upon a double prejudice 
 — cult and war. If we should abolish war and religion, we would 
 abolish the distinction between these two classes. 
 
 The third period was that of economic exploitation, in which 
 the bourgeoisie class was formed between the privileged class and 
 the servile class. There grew up, consequently, a distinction in 
 industry analogous to that of master and slave : on the one hand, 
 we see the capitalists, proprietors, entrepreneurs, or bourgeoisie; 
 on the other, we see the laborers or proletariat. While grad- 
 ually ameliorating their economic conditions, the former serfs be- 
 came merged into the laborers and formed a new class which we 
 call by the generic name of plebeians. Notice, then, that the dis- 
 tinction between the bourgeoisie and the plebeian is no more 
 rational and legitimate than the distinction between the master 
 and the slave. It is based upon the no less arbitrary separation 
 of labor and capital.^^ 
 
 The bourgeoisie may again be divided into three subdivisions : 
 
 (1) those who live on the rent of their land and houses, on the 
 interest of their capital and on the profits of their enterprises, 
 
 (2) the small manufacturers, artisans, shopkeepers and farmers, 
 and (3) the laborers, or employees whose income surpasses in 
 some degree the average income of the people.'*^ The first sub- 
 division constitutes the capitaHstic bourgeoisie; the second and 
 the third the "pciite bourgeoisie," or the "classe moyenne." ^° In 
 another place we find that Proudhon divided French society into 
 
 48 Justice VI, pp. 87-89. 
 
 49 Justice II, pp. 6 and 159. 
 
 50 Capacite, p. 178. 
 
104 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 three classes instead of two: (1) the bourgeoisie, (2) the middle 
 class, and (3) the proletariat.^^ 
 
 His attitude toward these three classes was inconsistent. 
 In 1848-1849, he thought that the economic problem would be 
 solved through the combined effort of the bourgeoisie and the 
 proletariat.^^ Later on in 1851, he appealed especially to the 
 bourgeoisie for the accomplishment of the revolution. Though 
 the workingmen may be capable of realizing social readjustment 
 and the reconstitution of property, they are incapable of manag- 
 ing great interests such as those of industry and commerce.^^ The 
 bourgeoisie are, on the contrary, the most intrepid, the most skil- 
 ful of revolutionaries.^* It is upon the bourgeoisie alone that 
 Proudhon laid his hope of the revolution. "The revolution holds 
 its arms to you," said Proudhon; "save the people, save yourselves 
 as your fathers have done by revolution." ^^ 
 
 In 1852, however, he changed his mind. Not in the capitalis- 
 tic bourgeoisie, but in the middle class, he saw the hope of the 
 nation. The bourgeoisie who have endeavored to perpetually 
 maintain the antiquated relation of labor and capital, deserve 
 the criticism hitherto addressed to them. They are destined to 
 disappear, for they have no plausible excuse for existence. The 
 middle class, in whose bosom lives and moves the spirit of liberty, 
 holds the hope of the future. Even though it is oppressed by the 
 bourgeoisie insolence from above, and the proletarian jealousy 
 from below, the middle class will nevertheless form the heart and 
 the brain of the nation. "^^ 
 
 As for the plebeians, or the workingmen, Proudhon generally 
 entertained a very low opinion of them between 1840 and 1858.°^ 
 First, the plebeians represented two of the lowest elements of 
 society: (1) the former slaves, and (2) the degenerated men of 
 
 51 Revolution Social, p. 135. See also Manuel du Speculateur, p. 450. 
 
 52 Melange III, p. 161. 
 
 53 Idee Generale, p. 235. 
 "/6id: p. 1. 
 
 55/6iJ; p. 3 (See also Melange III, pp. 124, 161). 
 
 56 Revolution Sociale, p. 233. 
 
 57 Justice VI, pp. 86-125. 
 
The Social Revolution 105 
 
 the superior class. From the slaves, they derived a strain of 
 cruelty or savagery. From the degenerate bourgeois among them, 
 they have in their midst the element of baseness and of corrup- 
 tion.^^ Second, the plebeians are pitilessly ignorant. They are 
 incapable of seeing further than their noses. They lack the spirit 
 of originality, of initiative, and of revolt. What they want is the 
 increase of their wages, the reduction of their working hours, and 
 the diminution of the price of bread and rent.^^ 
 
 Having considered briefly the nature of the three social classes, 
 we come now to the question of how Froudhon was going to 
 transform society. He strongly opposed the idea of class war. 
 He claimed that his work was a plan of general conciliation, a 
 project for the treaty of peace between the different classes.®" 
 He declared emphatically, "There is no greater crime in my eyes 
 than the excitation to civil war." ®^ Instead of an armed conflict 
 of hostile classes, Froudhon would effect the abolition of economic 
 classes. As mentioned above, his distinction between the bour- 
 geoisie and the proletariat is based upon the distinction between 
 labor and capital. If we abolish the distinction between labor 
 and capital we also do away with the distinction between the 
 bourgeoisie and the proletariat. There would then be no more 
 capitalists and laborers; all would be producers,®^ all would be 
 members of the middle class.®^ 
 
 (5) Folitical Revolution.®* 
 
 Folitical revolution is closely connected with economic revo- 
 lution. The chief poUtical reforms proposed by Froudhon were 
 
 58 Justice, VI, p. 90. 
 
 5^ Ibid: II, p. 13. Ibid., Ill, pp. 8, 160. Ibid., VI, pp. 91, 98. Corresp. 
 V, pp. 57-58. 
 
 60 Justice Poursuivie, p. 244. 
 
 61 Corresp. VI, p. 381. See also Idee Generale, p. 181. Manuel du 
 Speculateur, p. 479. (For a general view about his philosophical theory 
 of equilibrium vs. antagonism, see Melange II, p. 74 and Melange III, 
 p. 16.) 
 
 62 Justice VI, p. 89. Melange II, p. 138 (see also p. 74). 
 
 63 Revolution Social, p. 135. Manuel du Speculateur, p. 450. 
 
 64 It must be legal and pacific (Melange II, p. 125). 
 
io6 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 (a) the substitution of the industrial regime for the poHtical 
 regime; (b) the substitution of free contract for law; and (c) 
 the organization of universal suffrage. 
 
 (a) We have discussed the first question in connection with 
 the problem of economic revolution.^^ We may now consider the 
 second and third questions. 
 
 (b) The substitution of free contract for law. 
 
 Before discussing Proudhon's theory of contract, a little atten- 
 tion given to his criticism of Rousseau's theory of social contract, 
 would probably not be amiss. 
 
 First, the basic idea of Rousseau's contract as understood by 
 Proudhon is individualistic. According to Rousseau, the individ- 
 ual by himself is good. But he is depraved by society. It is, 
 therefore, desirable for him to abstain as much as possible from 
 all relations with his fellow men. While thus remaining in his 
 systematic isolation, all that he has to do is to form between him 
 and his fellows a mutual agreement for the mutual protection 
 of their persons and properties.^^ This, and tliis alone, is the aim 
 of Rousseau's contract. 
 
 Second, Rousseau's theory is political instead of economic. 
 He does not know economic principles. He neglects the funda- 
 mental elements of contract, and occupies himself with its secon- 
 dary questions only. He thinks that he will gain all if he has 
 established, by the simultaneous abdication of liberty, a power 
 before which all will yield. As to work, exchange, the value and 
 price of product, the mode of acquisition and transition of prop- 
 erty, and a series of important economic questions, Rousseau has 
 remained silent. He leaves all of them to the hazard of birth 
 and speculation.^^ 
 
 Thirdly, Rousseau's social contract is neither an act of reci- 
 procity between individuals nor even an act of society. Rousseau 
 has neglected all the essential conditions of a free contract — the 
 absolute liberty of the contractor, his direct and personal concern 
 
 65 See above pp. 98-102. 
 
 «6 Idee Generale, pp. 120-121. 
 
 ^Ubid: pp. 116-120, 122. 
 
The Defects of Rousseau 107 
 
 with the contract. The social contract for Rousseau is rather an 
 act creating arbiters, chosen by the people. These arbiters are 
 invested with power sufficient to carry out their judgment or 
 desire.^* "Where in your so-called contract do you provide for 
 my rights and stipulate my duties?" Proudhon asked. "Without 
 such provisions and stipulations your punishment for crime is an 
 excess of power; your juristic state, flagrant usurpation; your 
 policies, your judgment and your execution are all abusive acts." ^^ 
 
 Fourthly, the chief aim of Rousseau's contract being the 
 protection of persons and properties, his contract is, therefore, 
 nothing other than a defensive and offensive alHance of t hose. 
 who possess property against those who do not. It is the coali- 
 tion of the barons of property, of commerce and of industry 
 against the disinherited proletariat. It is a pact of hatred, a 
 monument of incurable misanthropy. It is the oath of social 
 war which Rousseau presumptously calls the social contract.^" 
 It is, finally, a dangerous fiction which tends to nothing less than I 
 the annihilation of liberty.'^^ 
 
 Proudhon is, however, not an obstinate opponent, but an en- 
 thusiastic advocate, of contract. What he attacks is the contract 
 creating arbiters, not the contract between free and independent 
 men. According to him, the notion of contract should succeed 
 that of government. '^^ The regime of contract should be substi- 
 tuted for the regime of law. This would constitute the true 
 government of man, the true sovereignty of the people, the true 
 republic. ^^ 
 
 In discussing Proudhon's theory of contract, we may, for 
 the sake of convenience, divide his work into three parts: (x) 
 How would the contract be drawn up? (y) what would be its 
 fundamental principles? and (z) how would it be observed? 
 
 ^^Ibid: pp. 118-19. See also Philosophie du Progres, pp. 38-39. Idee 
 Generale, p. 98. 
 
 69 Idee Generale. pp. 119-120. 
 
 ■'^Ihid: pp. 120-121. 
 
 ■'-^Ihid: p. 124. (See also Osgood, p. 9.) 
 
 ■'^Ihid: p. 130. 
 
 73 Justice II, p. 527. 
 
io8 The Political Theories of P, J. Proudhon 
 
 (x) How would the contract be drawn up? 
 
 The contract would be an act, by which two or several indi- 
 viduals would agree to organize for a fixed time the industrial 
 power which we have called barter and exchange. In conse- 
 quence the contractors would reciprocally guarantee to each 
 other a certain amount of services, products, advantages, or 
 duties which they are in the position of procuring from, or 
 rendering to, each other.^* The formula of the contract would 
 be as follows: "Promise to respect the person, liberty and prop- 
 erty of your brothers; promise never to take their product or 
 possessions by violence, by fraud, by usury or by stock- jobbing; 
 and above all, promise never to deceive in justice, in commerce 
 or in any of your transactions,"^^ 
 
 (y) What would be the fundamental principles of the free 
 contract ? 
 
 The fundamental principles of Proudhon's proposed free con- 
 tract are fivefold. First, the idea of contract is exclusive of that 
 of government, or of authority. Under the institution of authority, 
 liberty and the well-being of the people would be greatly dim- 
 inished.^^ Second, the contract cannot be perpetual. The idea 
 of the communists that the contract is signed once for all eternity 
 is absolutely wrong. It must be subject to revision.'''^ Thirdly, 
 the contract must be free. It must be freely debated, consented 
 to and signed by all those who participate in the agreement.^* It 
 must be the expression of the free will of the social individual.'^^ 
 In short, it must be a free contract which tends to unite all the 
 contracting groups.^" Fourthly, the contract must be reciprocal. 
 It must be an act by which those who have formed themselves 
 into groups declare the identity and solidarity of their respective 
 
 ^* Idee Generale, pp. 116-117. 
 
 '5 Ibid: p. 312. 
 
 76/&id; pp. 116-117, 236. 
 
 77 Justice II, p. 527. 
 
 78 Idee Generale, p. 118 (See also 116-117). 
 7o/fei3; p. 174. 
 
 »o Ibid: p. 236. 
 
The Free Contract 109 
 
 dignities and interests, and, therefore, assure to each other mutual 
 guarantees.^^ Fifthly, the basis of the contract must be economic. 
 It should be an economic rather than a political contract.^^ 
 
 So far we have discussed the main principles of contract. 
 There is still one compHcated question remaining to be considered 
 — that is, whether the contract should be general or special. In 
 respect to this question Proudhon's idea changed: (1) In 
 favor of universal contract (1851) and (2) in favor of special 
 contract (1858). 
 
 In 1851 Proudlion thought that the contract ought to embrace 
 the universality of all the citizens, of all their interests, and of 
 all their relationships. If any one man is excluded from the 
 contract, or if any one interest in which any member of the nation 
 is concerned, is omitted in the contract, the contract would be 
 more or less special. It could not then be called social. The 
 social contract ought to increase each citizen's liberty and well- 
 being. If any one class of the people finds itself, by virtue of the 
 contract, subdued and exploited by the other, the contract would 
 become null and void. It would then be a fraud. It could then 
 at any time, and with full right, be revoked and annulled by the 
 people. ^^ 
 
 In 1858, however, Proudhon changed his view. He then 
 contended that the contract could not be general. It ought to 
 be special. The idea of the communist that there should be only 
 one contract for the whole of humanity and of all its affairs 
 is entirely wrong. "One who engages himself in an association 
 of this kind . . . .," said Proudhon, "is surrounded with 
 numerous obstacles and is submitted to numerous burdens. He 
 does not have any initiative." ^* Proudhon, therefore, believed 
 that society could not engage all the actions of men by a general 
 contract without destroying in itself all personality and liberty 
 
 ^^Ibid: p. 222. 
 
 82 Bougie, pp. 244-245. 
 
 S3 Idee Generale, pp. 117-118. 
 
 84 Justice II, pp. 527-528. 
 
 85 Fourniere, p. 192. 
 
 85 
 
no The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 (z) How would the contract be observed? 
 
 One who is constituted a member of society through the 
 sentiment of justice which is immanent in his nature, is no longer 
 the same as one who lives in a state of isolation. Without 
 abandoning the rule of well-being, he will subordinate himself to 
 what is just. Through the lapse of time justice would become 
 for him a habit, a need, a second nature. In other words, it 
 would become another egoism for him. He would discover in the 
 observation of the contract a superior felicity.®^ 
 
 (c) The organization of universal suffrage. 
 
 Proudhon denounced the old system of universal suffrage as 
 the estrangement of public conscience, the suicide of popular 
 sovereignty, and the apostasy of revolution.^^ 
 
 In the first place, the majority of the people are unintelH- 
 gent.s-^ They are incapable of discerning at the first glance the 
 merit and the honesty of candidates.**^ Very often the candidates 
 are designated in advance. The worker nominates his employer ; 
 the domestic his master ; the farmer his landlord ; the soldier his 
 general. If we would give the vote to the woman she would 
 elect her husband. If we would give the children the vote, they 
 would elect their father.^" As long as people are uneducated, 
 universal suffrage is not an organ of progress, but a drag-chain 
 on liberty.^^ It is bound to violate the social will in its legitimate 
 manifestations.^^ "Whoever preaches universal suffrage as the 
 principle of order and certainty is a liar, a charlatan," said 
 Proudhon. "Sovereignty without knowledge is blind."®^ 
 
 In the second place universal suffrage is contra-revolutionary. 
 It is retrograding. Man has generally two instincts, the one 
 
 86 Justice I, p. 222. 
 »'' Ibid: II, pp. 4, 144. 
 
 88 What is Property, pp. 19-20. 
 
 89 Idee Generale, p. 145. See also Miilberger, "Studicn . . ." p. ZZ. 
 
 90 Justice VI, p. 105. 
 
 91 Miilberger "Studien . . .," p. 44. 
 
 92 Desjardin II, p. 216. Proudhon's letter of Sept. 27, 1853. 
 
 93 Corresp. I. p. 275. 
 
Against Universal Suffrage hi 
 
 for conservation, the other for progress. Each of these two 
 instincts never acts except in the interests of the other. Thus 
 each individual, judging everything from the point of view of 
 his private interests, understands by progress the development 
 of his private interests which are contrary to the collective in- 
 terests. The result of universal suffrage vviH be general retro- 
 gression instead of general progression.^* 
 
 In the third place, universal suffrage is the principle of 
 political atheism. It is atomistic. The legislator, unable to make 
 the people speak in a substantial unity, invites them to express 
 their idea per capita. The surest way of making the people He 
 is to establish universal suffrage.^^ 
 
 In the fourth place, universal suffrage legalizes oppression. 
 When the theorists of popular sovereignty claim that the remedy 
 for the tyranny of power consists of the establishment of popular 
 suffrage from which power will be drawn, they have turned like 
 squirrels in their cage. From the moment the chief elements of 
 power, that is, authority, property, and hierarchy, become fixed, 
 the suffrage of the people becomes no more than the consent of 
 the people to their oppression.®^ 
 
 In the fifth place, universal suffrage is a child's plan,®^ a 
 true lottery. It neglects individual rights. "Over the principle," 
 said Proudhon, "or the very essence of rights . . . over the 
 organization of industrial forces, over my work, my subsistence, 
 my life ... I denounce all presumptive authority, all in- 
 direct solutions. I wish to treat them directly, individually, for 
 myself." ®^ 
 
 In the sixth place, universal suffrage considers the sum total 
 of the individuals, instead of society as a whole, as the sovereign. 
 
 ^* Melange I, p. 15. See also Miilberger "Studien . . ." pp. 18-21. 
 85 Melange I, pp. 19-20. Solution du Probleme Social, p. 62. See also 
 Miilberger "Studien . . .," p. 18. 
 
 96 Desjardin II, p. 223. 
 
 97 Idee Generale, p. 150. 
 ^^Ibid: p. 146. 
 
112 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 It confuses the generality o£ an opinion with the social idea, the 
 action of a multitude with the action of society.®® 
 
 In the seventh place, universal suffrage means the triumph of 
 the minority. We may take the election of 1848 for example. 
 In that election more than 400,000 citizens had the right to vote 
 in the Department of the Seine. But only 300,000 participated 
 in the election. About 100,000 were absent. Of the 300,000 
 votes, only thirteen candidates received more than one half of 
 the votes cast. There were twenty-one candidates who were 
 elected only by a relative majority of 144,000 to 104,000 votes. 
 How could they be called the representatives of the people when 
 they were elected by only a minority of them ? ^^^ 
 
 Proudhon attacked not the principle, but only the old system, 
 of universal suffrage. What he intended to do was not to 
 abolish, but to reorganize it. In order to make universal suffrage 
 intelligent, moral and democratic, it is necessary, he maintained, 
 after organizing the balance of services and assuring, by free 
 discussion, the independence of suffrage, to provide that the 
 citizens yote by groups, according to their respective occupations, 
 in conformity with the principle of collective force which is the 
 basis of society and the state.^"^ The candidates of the people 
 would then represent positive interests. They would be the 
 expression of organized labor. The people would have real repre- 
 sentation and real elections. ^^^ 
 
 III. What are the general characteristics of anarchism? 
 
 Proudhon's theory of anarchy may be divided into four 
 periods: (1) Anarchy vaguely defined (1840-1847), (2) anarchy, 
 the real formula of the republic (1840-1850), (3) anarchy in 
 its purest form (1851-1857), and (4) the anarchistic state 
 (1858). 
 
 »» Corresp. V, pp. 266, 268. 
 100 Melange I, p. 20. 
 i«i Justice II, pp. 4, 128, 145. 
 102 Melange I, p. 43. 
 
Characteristics of Anarchism 113 
 
 (1) Anarchy vaguely defined (1840-1847). 
 
 Proudhon constantly changed his idea, now lingering upon 
 the ideas of governmentalism, and statism, and now endeavor- 
 ing to abolish them completely. From 1840 to 1847 his thought 
 was always vague and even superficial. First, he defined anarchy 
 as the absence of master and sovereign.^"-^ Regarding questions 
 of how to constitute the regulation of anarchy he was silent. 
 Second, he fought against authority. "I labor to stir up the 
 reason of individuals to insurrection against the reason of auth- 
 orities," said he. '"According to the law of the society of which 
 I am a member, all the evils which afflict humanity arise from 
 faith in external teachings and submission to authority.^"* Thirdly, 
 he attacked government and the state. Government of man by 
 man, under whatever name it may disguise itself, is the reign of 
 will, of caprice and of oppression.^°^ The state, whatever form 
 it may assume, aristocratic or theocratic, monarchical or repub- 
 lican, as long as it is not the organ of a society of equals, will 
 be for the people a hell and a damnation." 
 
 106 
 
 (2) Anarchy the real formula of the republic (1848-1850). 
 
 From 1848 to 1850 Proudhon's idea became both negative 
 and positive. Negatively he attacked authority,^"^ government, 
 the state"^ and capital. Government of man by man is slavery.^^^ 
 Its chief aim is to protect the rich against the poor.^^° The 
 productivity of capital, which Christianity has condemned under 
 the name of usury, is the true cause of poverty, the eternal 
 obstacle to the establishment of the true republic.^^^ Positively, 
 he developed from the theory of anarchy the theory of the re- 
 
 "3 Qu'est-ce que la propriete, premier memoire, p. 216. 
 104 Ibid: deuxieme memorie, p. 354. 
 ^^^Ibid: premier memoire, p. 30. 
 lo^Cont. Eco., I, p. 267. 
 
 107 Melange II, pp. 12-13. 
 
 108 Solution du Probleme Social, p. 49. Melange II, p. 14. 
 io9Diehl pp. 110-11. 
 
 iio/feid; pp. 107-108. 
 Ill Melange I, p. 184. 
 
114 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 public. In one place he considered anarchy as the real formula 
 of the republic.^^^ In another, he defined the republic as positive 
 anarchy.^^^ 
 
 The republic, as conceived by him in 1849, was not anarchy 
 in its purest form, but direct popular government. "In the re- 
 public," he said, "all the citizens in doing what they desire and 
 nothing more than they desire, will participate as directly in 
 legislation and government as they participate in production and 
 the circulation of wealth.^^* The republic is also another name 
 for pure democracy. In pure democracy all the citizens ought 
 to participate in the formation of the law, in the government of 
 the state, in the exercise of public functions, in the discussion of 
 the budget, in the nomination of the functionaries. ^^^ Thus in 
 1849 the republic meant for Proudhon direct government or pure 
 democracy. It was opposed to monarchy as well as to de- 
 mocracy^^^ in its sophisticated form, that is, democracy of tlie 
 proletariat.^^''^ 
 
 No less important a fact we have to notice is the distinction 
 between the governmental republic and the perfect republic, or 
 the republic of anarchy. "In order to establish the republic, the 
 last expression of the revolution, it is necessary to begin by the 
 establishment of the governmental republic," said Proudhon. ^^^ 
 What is meant by him here as the governmental republic is the 
 republic in which the legislator and the magistrate act in con- 
 formity with the instinct and general tendencies of the people. 
 What is meant by him as the real republic, or in other words, 
 the most perfect form of the republic, is the government in which 
 every citizen is legislator and magistrate. ^^^ 
 
 The main characteristics of the real republic are fivefold. 
 
 "2 Melange II, pp. 12-13. 
 
 "3 Solution du Probleme Social, p. 87. 
 
 "4/6id: pp. 2 and 87. 
 
 ^^^Ibid: p. 61. 
 
 ^■^^Ibid: p. 87. 
 
 '^'^'' Ihid: p. 61. See Ch. V for his criticism of democracy. 
 
 118 Melange II, p. 205. 
 
 ^■^^Ibid: I, p. 84. 
 
Anarchy the Real Republic 115 
 
 First, the republic, or anarchy, is the affirmation of liberty — 
 liberty not submitted to order as in a constitutional monarchy, 
 nor imprisoned in order as in the provisional government of 1848, 
 but freed from all its obstacles, superstitions, prejudices, sophisms 
 and authorities. Liberty, in the republic, is reciprocal. It is 
 the mother rather than the son of order. All the opinions, all 
 the attributes of the people are free. Everyone is king because 
 he has full power. He governs and he is govemed.^^" Again, 
 liberty in the republic is positive as well as negative. The liberty 
 of religion, for example, is negative, but the liberty of free credit, 
 of universal association or of integral education is positive.^^^ 
 Second, in the republic, the people would be autonomous. They 
 would have no masters, no delegates, no representatives.^^- Each 
 one of them would be legislator and magistrate.^^^ There would 
 be no other rights except those which have been guaranteed by 
 the people, no other government than that of the people, no 
 other justice than that of the people, no other functionaries than 
 the people themselves. AH is for the people, by the people.^^* 
 Thirdly, the real republic means equality- — the coordinated equal- 
 ity of functions and persons.-^^^ There would be no monopoly, 
 no castes, no inequality of conditions. ^^^ Fourthly, the basis of 
 the real republic would be economic. Its social constitution would 
 be twofold : ( 1 ) The equilibrium of interests founded upon free 
 contract,^^'^ and (2) the organization of economic forces. What 
 
 120 Solution du Probleme Social, p. 87. See also Melange III, p. 59, 
 Confessions, p. 27. 
 
 121 Melange II, pp. 12-13; III, p. 147. 
 
 ^22 Ibid: II, pp. 12-13. Solution du Probleme Social, p. 49. 
 
 123 Ibid: I, p. 84. 
 
 ^^*Ibid: pp. 115-116. Ibid; p. 84. 
 
 ^25 Ibid: p. 141. 
 
 ^^^Ibid: p. 115-116. 
 
 127 An Stelle der Gesetze solten f reie Vertrage treten, die von den 
 Mitgliedern der einzelnen wirtschaftlichen Gruppen, Vereine, Gesell- 
 schaften, Korporationen, Assoziationen unter einander auf Grundlage des 
 freie Austausches des Produkte und des unentgeltlichen Kredits gesch- 
 lossen werden." Diehl, pp. 107-108. 
 
ii6 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 Proudhon meant by economic forces here, included, in general, 
 commerce, competition, money, machines, credit, property, col- 
 lective power, division of labor, equality in transactions and the 
 reciprocity of guarantees.^^^ As a result of the economic revolu- 
 tion there would be no capital,^^^ no state, no govemment,^^" 
 no strong and no weak in soclety.^^^ Fifthly, the state would 
 be absorbed in society. By the cessation of authority, the sup- 
 pression of governmental organs, the abolition of the impost, 
 the simplification of the administration, and the organization 
 
 of universal suffrage, there would be no other state than society 
 itself.132. 
 
 Between 1848 and 1850 Proudhon's idea went from a state 
 of vagueness to a state of confusion. In 1840 he fearlessly at- 
 tacked the government and the state, but he had no definite idea 
 of what would be their substitutes. In 1840-1850 he began to 
 have a general idea of what he meant by anarchy, but he con- 
 fused anarchism with governmentalism. Professing himself a 
 deadly enemy to government, he hesitated to eliminate it entirely. 
 On one hand, he identified anarchy with the republic, or direct 
 government. What he intended to abolish was not direct gov- 
 ernment, but all the other forms of government. On the other 
 hand, he admitted that, through the necessity of things, there 
 might exist a government which would be subordinate to the 
 people.^^^ 
 
 (3) The universal republic"* or anarchy in its purest form 
 (1851-1857). 
 
 In 1851 Proudhon's theory of anarchy reached the stage of 
 definiteness and clearness. For the old political regime, the 
 
 128 Confessions, p. 166-167. 
 
 129 Melange II, pp. 15, 17. "Capital and labor will be identified." 
 ^^oibid: II, p. 9. See also III, p. 50. 
 
 ^^^Ibid: II, pp. 15-17. 
 
 132 Ibid: III, p. 48. 
 
 133/Wc?; II, p. 67. 
 
 134 "L'institution gouvernementale abolie, remplacee par I'organisation 
 economique, le probleme de la republique universelle est resolu. Idee 
 Generale, p. 298. 
 
The Perfected Doctrine of Anarchy 117 
 
 regime of law, of authority, of divine right, he desired to sub- 
 stitute the new economic regime, the regime of industry, of con- 
 tract, and of human rights.^^^ The chief characteristics of the 
 new regime would be sevenfold. First, Proudhon denounced 
 authority, or the absolute being. He would substitute for it 
 the synthetic and positive idea of economics.^^^ Second, he 
 denied the state, the police and the public minister. As soon as 
 society should become well organized, all of these would dis- 
 appear.^^^ There would be no state, no nation, no war. There 
 would exist only a great harmonious humanity.^^^ Thirdly, he 
 denied all the forms of government. There would be no more 
 monarchy, no more aristocracy, »o more democracy. But the 
 most significant of all is that Proudhon also denied direct gov- 
 ernment. "Direct or indirect, simple or composite," said he, 
 "government of the people will be the juggling of the people. It 
 is always the man who commands the man."^^^ Fourthly, in 
 anarchy, each citizen, each workshop, each corporation, each 
 department would be sovereign. In consequence, each of them 
 would act, directly and by itself, in the management of its re- 
 spective interests and exercise in this regard the full power of 
 sovereignty.^*" Each of them would have its own police, and 
 administer its own affairs.^*^ Fifthly, in anarchy the interests 
 of the people would be harmonious. "The people are nothing 
 more than the organic union of wills individually free and sove- 
 reign, which union could and ought to act in concert, but never 
 be dissolved," said Proudhon. "It is in the harmony of interests 
 that this union should be sought, not in a factitious centralization 
 which, far from expressing the collective will, expresses the 
 alienation of the particular wills.^^^ Sixthly, in anarchy, the free 
 
 135 Idee Generale, pp. 257-258. 
 
 136 Philosophie du Progres, p. 48. 
 
 137 Idee Revolutionnaire, p. 91. 
 i38Diehl, pp. 115-116. 
 
 139 Idee Generale, p. 130. 
 ^^oibid: p. 292. 
 ^^^Ibid: p. 289. 
 ^^^Ibid: p. 292. 
 
ii8 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 contract would be substituted for law. The producer would 
 treat with the consumer, the commune with the canton, the 
 canton with the department, etc. It would be always the same 
 interests which would be exchanged, adjusted, and balanced widi 
 each other to the infinite.^'^^ Seventhly, science, particularly the 
 science of economics, instead of religion or authority, would be 
 the general rule of society and the sovereign arbiter of the in- 
 terests. The truth of science is universal. It knows no dis- 
 tinction between nations or races. It is the unity of mankind.^^^ 
 
 To sum up, the new regime of anarchy would substitute in- 
 dustrial organization for government, contract for law, economic 
 forces for political power, collective force for public power, 
 industrial societies for standing armies, identity of interests for 
 police, economic centralization for political centralization, and 
 finally the classification and specializing of agricultural, industrial 
 and commercial functions in place of the old class distinction 
 between the nobles and the serfs or between the bourgeoisie and 
 the plebeians.^^^ 
 
 (4) Anarchy and the state (1858). 
 
 In 1858, Proudhon changed his idea again. He now became 
 more or less moderate. For the sake of clearness we may classify 
 his work into two parts: (a) His criticism of the old regime, 
 and (b) the establishment of the new regime. 
 
 (a) His criticism of the old regime. 
 
 Proudhon denounced authority, government and the state be- 
 cause they all protect capitalism against the proletariat.^^^ He 
 attacked monarchy, aristocracy and democracy. "Democracy," 
 said he, "is simply a lie.""'^ 
 
 (b) The establishment of the new regime — the republic. 
 
 In contrasting Proudhon's idea of 1858 with that of 1851, 
 we see two great differences in the development of his thought. 
 
 "3 ide Gencrale, pp. 283-284. 
 
 "4 Ibid: pp. 297-300. 
 
 1*5 Ibid: p. 259. See also Philosophic du Progres, p. 56. 
 
 "6 Justice II, pp. 4 and 70. V, p. 184. 
 
 "7/fcid; II, pp. 115-116. (See also pp. 9-10.) 
 
The Anarhists State 119 
 
 First, in 1851 Proudhon attacked authority and the state just as 
 if they were two synonymous terms. In 1858, he differentiated 
 the state from authority. It was authority, not the state, that 
 he then attacked.^*^ Second, in 1851, he thought that there 
 should be no government, no state in anarchy. But in 1858, he 
 strongly affirmed the function of the state in civilization. "The 
 state," he said, "is the most energetic agent of civilization."^^^ 
 When he denied the state or government it was not the state 
 or government of the new regime, but that of the old regime. 
 In other words, he desired to create a new state and a new- 
 government in anarchy. 
 
 (x) The new state of anarchy. 
 
 The fundamental principles of the new state would be (1) 
 the developm.ent of economic forces, the first of which would 
 be the collective force, (2) the discovery of social power in 
 the relation of all the forces of society to each other, (3) the 
 idea of universal solidarity of humanitarian force, emerging now 
 from the struggle between, and now from the harmony of, the 
 states, (4) the balancing of economic or social forces, and (5) 
 the elaboration of rights, the supreme expression of man and of 
 society.^^® The aim of the new state would be to organize justice 
 and make it effective. Justice is the law of the material, intel- 
 lectual and moral world. It is the essential attribute, the principal 
 function of the state. Its formula is equality.^^^ 
 
 (y) The new government of anarchy — the real republic.^^^ 
 
 The real republic is a government in which liberty and right 
 would play the first role in opposition to all the other forms of 
 government founded upon the preponderance of authority and 
 the "reason of state." The more the action of liberty and right 
 
 "8 Justice V, pp. 183-184. 
 "9 76iJ; p. 183. 
 150/fcj'd; II, pp. 116-117. 
 "1 Ibid: V, p. 64. 
 
 152 "The republic is organized according to the principle of economy 
 and of right." Justice II, p. 132. 
 
120 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 would be generalized, the more would the republic be perfected. ^^•'^ 
 In order to establish the republican government in the true sense 
 of the word, the following five conditions would be necessary: — 
 (1) The definition of economic right, (2) the balance of econ- 
 omic forces, the formation of agricultural, industrial and com- 
 mercial groups,^^* and the organization of the services of public 
 utility (credit, discount, circulation and transportation, etc.) ac- 
 cording to the' principle of mutuality, of gratuity, or of net cost, 
 (3) the creation of political guarantees, that is, liberty of press 
 and of platform, liberty of meeting and of association, complete 
 separation of justice and of government, (4) administrativ.e 
 decentralization, and resurrection of communal and provincial 
 life, and (5) cessation of the state of war, demolition of fort- 
 resses and the abolition of the standing army. Under these five 
 conditions the principle of authority would tend to disappear. 
 The state, "the public thing," would rest upon an unshaken basis 
 of right and liberty. Government in its true sense (that is, in 
 its old sense of authority) would not exist. Society would be 
 carried on by its liberal and balanced forces.^^^ 
 
 Proudhon is confident about the triumph of the revolution.^^^ 
 Very often he indulged in the imagination of a revolutionary 
 Utopia. "Humanity," he said, "is, above all, passionate. What 
 should be our lives when we have no prince to lead us to war, 
 no priests to assist us in piety, no great personages to draw our 
 admiration, no villains or paupers to excite our sensibility : when 
 we could do what the philosopher Martin recommended in Can- 
 dide, we could cultivate our gardens. The exploitation of the 
 soil, formerly the work of the slave, would become the first of 
 the fine arts as it is the first of the industries. We would pass 
 our time in the calm of our lives and the serenity of our spirits.^^^ 
 
 The development of Proudhon's political thought from 1840 
 to 1858 is clearly shown in the following summary : 
 
 153 Justice V, pp. 178-179. 
 154 /6id; II, pp. 120-121. 
 155/t,Vi; V, p. 179. 
 
 156 Idee Generale, p. 9. 
 
 157 Justice II, p. 133. 
 
Growth of Anarchic Doctrine 121 
 
 (1) Anarchy chiefly negative (1840-1847) 
 
 (a) Definition— anarchy, the absence of master, of sovereign. 
 
 (b) Criticism against government and the state. 
 
 (2) Anarchy, the real formula of the republic (1848-1849) 
 
 (a) Negative 
 
 (x) Criticism against government 
 (y) Criticism against the state 
 
 (b) Positive 
 
 (x) The republic — positive anarchy 
 (y) The republic — direct government 
 (z) The republic — pure democracy 
 
 (3) Universal republic, or anarchy in its purest form 
 
 (a) Negative 
 
 (x) No government (against direct government also) 
 (y) No state 
 
 (b) Positive 
 
 (x) Economic organization for government 
 (y) Contract for law 
 
 (4) Anarchy or the republic 
 
 (a) Negative 
 
 (x) Criticism against authority 
 (y) Criticism against government 
 (z) Criticism against the state 
 
 (b) Positive 
 
 (x) The state as distinct from authority still exists 
 (y) Government in its true sense does not exist. 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 
 Proudhon's Theory of the State from the Standpoint of a 
 
 Federalist (1862-1865). 
 
 Proudhon acknowledged that he had been an anarchist al- 
 most all his life. In 1851 he defined his role as a theorist of 
 anarchy.^ He, however, changed his idea constantly. "After 
 having denied the state," he wrote in 1850 to his friend Darimon, 
 "we ought to make it understood that the question in point is to 
 carry on a simplification of the state to the vanishing point, not 
 to realize an immediate anarchy."- After 1862 he definitely 
 abandoned his anarchistic theory and formulated the theory of 
 federalism.^ 
 
 His theory of federalism passed through four stages of de- 
 velopment: (1) Federalism of the nobles (1840), (2) universal 
 federalism (1858), (3) Italian federation (1861), and (4) 
 federation of the small communities (1863).* 
 
 In 1840 he had not the faintest idea of considering federalism 
 as the ideal form of the state. "What was federalism?" he asked. 
 "A confederation of the great lords against the villeins and the 
 king . . . How did federalism end? In the alliance of the com- 
 munes and the royal authority. . . . What was the immediate 
 result of the struggle of the communes and the king against the 
 nobles? The monarchical unity of Louis XIV." ^ 
 
 In 1858 his attitude toward federalism became more favor- 
 able. "Glorious thought of Henry IV," said Proudhon, "is 
 
 1 Letter of March 7, 1851. 
 
 2 Corresp. Ill p. 96. 
 
 3 Bougie, p. 225. Desjardin II, p. 228. 
 
 * In French, the word is "etat" which is literally "state," but in fact 
 Proudhon was referring to "communities." 
 
 5 What is Property? (Second Memoir.) pp. 35-36. 
 
Federalism Versus Anarchism 123 
 
 universal federalism, supreme guarantee of all liberty and of all 
 right. Federalism is the political formula of humanity."^ 
 
 In 1861, after Garibaldi's expedition and the battle of Castel- 
 fidardo, Proudhon immediately saw that the establishment of 
 Italian unity would be a severe blow to the European equilibrium. 
 It was chiefly in order to maintain this equilibrium that he came 
 out so energetically in favor of Italian federation, even though 
 at first it should be only a federation of monarchs. To maintain 
 European equilibrium by diminishing great states and multiplying 
 small ones; to unite the latter in organized federations, not for 
 attack but for defense; and with these federations (which if not 
 republican already, would quickly become so) to hold the great 
 military monarchs in check: — this was his political program at 
 the beginnmg of the year 1861.'^ Later in the same year he 
 published "La Guerre et la Paix," in which he saw in the 
 principle of federalism the just equilibrium of liberty and gov- 
 ernment.^ 
 
 But it was only in 1862 that Proudhon definitely set federalism 
 as a principle over against anarchism. "If I began with anarch- 
 ism in 1840 because my study of government compelled me to 
 such a conclusion then," he said, "I now end with federalism 
 because I am convinced that it provides the truly proper safe- 
 S^uards for the rights of Europe's people, and is the imperative 
 s^roundwork for the organization of all its states."^ 
 
 The chief difference between anarchism and federalism is 
 that while anarchy is the affirmation of liberty ^° and the negation 
 of authority,^^ federation is the balancing of authority and 
 liberty.^2 Between 1840 and 1858, Proudlion was always a deadly 
 enemy of authority and a passionate lover of liberty. In 1863, 
 
 6 Justice II, p. 120. 
 
 7 What is Property? (Preface) p. 25. 
 sCorresp. I, pp. XXXVII. 
 
 ® Letter to his friend, Nov. 2, 1862. (See also Lagarde, p. 40, Des- 
 jardin II, p. 227.) 
 
 1° Revolution Social, p. 166. Melange III, p. 147. 
 
 11 What is Property, p. 354. 
 
 12 Du Principe Federatif, p. 11. 
 
124 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 however, he realized that hberty could not exist without authority, 
 and vice versa. The chief problem for him was not to suppress 
 authority in favor of liberty, but to find the equilibrium between 
 these two conflicting elements. All false balances mean disorder 
 and ruin for states and oppression and misery for their citizens. ^^ 
 In consequence, Proudhon substituted the theory of federation 
 for that of anarchy. 
 
 Before discussing his theory of federalism, we may, first, 
 consider his ideas concerning various types of government. There 
 are two kinds of government : that of theory and that of fact. 
 What Proudhon considered before 1858 was the government of 
 fact. What he discussed in 1863 was, on the other hand, the 
 government of theory, or a priori government. 
 
 The government of theory, according to Proudhon, is based 
 upon two opposing principles : authority and liberty. From these 
 two opposing principles, the political theorists deduce two oppos- 
 ing regimes : the regime of authority and the regime of liberty. 
 The regime of authority may be divided into two classes of gov- 
 ernment: (a) monarchy and (b) communism. The regime of 
 liberty may be further divided into two kinds of government: 
 (a) democracy and (b) anarchy. The essential character of the 
 first regime is the non-separation of powers ; the essential charac- 
 ter of the second is the separation of powers.^* 
 
 Monarchy is the government of all by one alone.^^ The 
 prince is the legislator, administrator, judge, general and pontiff 
 of the state. He has eminent domain over land and rent. He 
 is the chief of art, of trade, of commerce, of agriculture, of the 
 marine and of public instruction. He is invested with all rights 
 and all authority. In short, he is the representative of society, 
 the incarnation of the state.^® 
 
 Communism is the government of all by all.^'' The powers 
 of government without any separation are exercised by the social 
 
 13 Du Principe Fcderatif, pp. 10-11, 33. 
 
 14 Du Principe Federatif, pp. 13-14. 
 15/feid; p. 13. 
 
 16 Ibid: p. 20. 
 ^Uhid: 13-14. 
 
Government Reclaasfied 125 
 
 collectivity. In Athens, for instance, criminal judgments were 
 given by the entire mass of its citizens.^^ 
 
 Democracy is the government of all by each.^^ It is the 
 spontaneous expression of liberty. In a democratic state, all the 
 citizens would agree to, and would sign a social contract. The 
 aliens too would adhere to the same contract and would be given 
 the same rights as the citizens of the state.^° The chief difference 
 between monarchy and democracy is that in a democracy the 
 powers of government are separable, while in a monarchy they 
 are not.^^ 
 
 Anarchy is the government of each by each.^^ The political 
 functions would give place to economic functions. All govern- 
 mental institutions would be abolished. The basis of society 
 would be property and free labor.^^ 
 
 Proudhon favored neither democratic absolutism nor bour- 
 geois constitutionalism. Democratic absolutism, according to 
 him, is unstable. It is retrogressive. It has no restrictions, nor 
 principles. It is contemptuous of rights, hostile to liberty and 
 destructive of security and confidence. No less unstable is 
 bourgeois constitutionalism. With its legal form, its juristic 
 spirit, and its parliamentary solemnities, it is a vast system under 
 which politics are a matter of stock jobbing, and taxation, the 
 civil list of a caste.^* 
 
 Still more violent was his criticism against communism, which 
 is to him the subordination of the individual to the group,^^ the 
 exploitation of the strong by the weak.^^ In other words, it is 
 nothing less than the annihilation of the individual,^'^ the ex- 
 
 is Principe Federatif, p. 21. 
 
 ^^Ibid: pp. 13-14. 
 
 20 Ihid: p. 15. 
 
 ^^Ibid: pp. 21-22. 
 
 22/fci(f; pp. 13-14. 
 
 23 Ibid: pp. 16 and 27. 
 
 ^^Ibid: 36. 
 
 25 Justice I, p. 126. 
 
 26 What is Property, pp. 249-250. 
 
 27 Bougie, pp. 220-221. 
 
126 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 ploitation of the state, and the glorification of the police.^s Even 
 at that time his attitude toward anarchy was more or less favor- 
 able. Anarchy, according to him, is rational and positive.^^ But 
 as a form of government it is ideal instead of practical. ^° Ulti- 
 mately it is found to fall into a state of perpetual longing for the 
 unattainable.^* 
 
 Proudhon then concludes that both the regime of authority and 
 that of liberty are ideal and abstract formulae. They are the 
 government of theory, or a priori government. They cannot be 
 realized in fact.^^ ^^le government of fact is a work of empir- 
 icism. It is variable to the infinite degree, and is, essentially 
 and without any exception, a composite or mixed government.^^ 
 Monarchy and democracy, for instance, are no more than two 
 ideals furnished by the theorists, and then cannot be realized 
 in the full rigor of their respective terms. In the most auto- 
 cratic state, we shall always find the democratic element. There 
 is no king without subjects. On the other hand, in all democracy 
 the autocratic element will incessantly appear. There is always 
 unity of power in the state, unity in each organic division. In 
 order to assure the unity of action in each organ we often indi- 
 dividualize and functionalize it.^^ Over against the authoritative 
 regime and the liberal regime Proudhon would, therefore, estab- 
 lish the regime of federation which tends to balance authority 
 and liberty.^^ 
 
 2s Cont. Eco. II, pp. 260-261. 
 
 2»Du Principe Federatif, p. 16. 
 
 3« "Ce (the sj'stem based upon the complete negation of authority, that 
 is, anarchy) sonl des conceptions ideals, dcs formules abstraitcs, d'apres 
 lesqucUes vont se constituer empiriquement et d'intuition tous les gouv- 
 ernements de fait, mais elles-memes ne sauraient passer a I'Etat de fait." 
 Du Principe Federatif, pp. 37-38. 
 
 ^^Ibid: p. 29. 
 
 ^^Ibid: p. 23. 
 
 ^^Ibid: p. 30 (See also p. 38). 
 
 34 Ibid: p. 30. Cont. Pol., p. 89. 
 
 35 In some places Proudhon seems to conceive the idea that federalism 
 is one form of the liberal regime. "In theory as well as in fact, authority 
 and liberty succeed each other as a sort of polarisation," he says. "The 
 
 I 
 
Theory of Federalism 127 
 
 In considering his theory of federation, we may, for the 
 sake of clearness, divide it into five parts, (1) geographical, (2> 
 political, (3) economic, (4) social and (5) educational. 
 
 (1) Geographical. 
 
 What Proudhon expected to establish was not universal feder- 
 ation, but the federation of the small communities. "Universal 
 federation would end," he says, "in the stagnation of all the forces 
 by their submission to a common authority. The federal regime 
 is applicable only to small communities, united for their mutual 
 defense against the attack of the great states." ^^ Proudhon's 
 ideal government, therefore, consists of medium-sized groups, 
 respectively sovereign, joined by a pact of federation.^'^ Europe 
 is too great for a unified confederation. Europe can form no 
 more than a confederation of confederations; that is to say, a 
 loose, rather than a strict, confederation. It is with this idea in 
 mind that Proudhon suggested the following plan as the first step 
 — the establishment of the Itafian, Greek, Scandinavian and 
 Danubian confederations, preceded by the decentralization of 
 the great states and, in consequence, their general disarmament.^^ 
 
 In applying the federal principle to the organization of France, 
 Proudhon would divide French unity into thirty-six sovereignties 
 with one million inhabitants each and an average size of 6,000 
 square kilometers. He would reduce the power of each of the 
 thirty-six communities to certain essential attributes fixed by 
 the contract of federation. Over above the confederate com- 
 munities, there would be a supreme council, the mandate of which 
 would in each community protect the citizen against the usurpa- 
 
 authoritative regime retreats before, or gives concession to, the liberal or 
 contractual regime. It is the idea of contract we ought to consider as 
 the dominant idea of politics." (Du Principe Federatif, p. 44, see also 
 pp. 41-42). Here, he commits the error of contradiction because federal- 
 ism means the balancing of authority and liberty; but the regime of 
 liberty is directly in opposition to authority. 
 
 38 "La Guerre et la Paix" I, 314. See also Principe Federatif, p. 58. 
 
 2'^ Du Principe Federatif, p. 58. 
 
 ^^Ibid: p. 62. 
 
128 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 tion of power by the local government, and the local government 
 against the insolence of factions.^^ 
 
 (2) Political. 
 
 With regard to the political conditions in the federal state, 
 we have four important questions to consider: (a) What would 
 be the basis of federation? (b) what would be the position of 
 the state? (c) how would the government be organized? and (d) 
 how would universal suffrage be organized? 
 
 (a) What would be the basis of federation — the contract? 
 
 Federation is the Latin foedus, that is, pact, contract, treaty, 
 convention, alliance, etc. It is a convention by which one or 
 more chiefs of the family, one or more communes, one or more 
 groups of communes or states, are reciprocally and equally obli- 
 gated to each other for one or more particular objects, the 
 direction of which is entrusted exclusively to the delegates of the 
 federation.**' 
 
 The contract in the federal system is neither a contract of 
 pure beneficence of the prince toward his subjects, nor a fiction 
 of the legalists as advocated by Rousseau." It would be, in the 
 first place, a positive and effective pact. It would really be pro- 
 posed, discussed, voted, adopted and then modified according to 
 the wish of the contractors.*^ jt would be, in the second place, 
 reciprocal and commutative.^^. The chiefs of the families, com- 
 munes, cantons, provinces or states would be reciprocally and 
 commutatively obliged to each other by the contract.** In the 
 third place, it would be restricted as to its subjects, to certain 
 limits. It could not, and should not exact from the contractors 
 the totality of their efforts and leave nothing for their independ- 
 ence.*^ In the fourth place, it would guarantee the liberty of 
 the individual, the commune and the state. "Governmental insti- 
 
 8^ Capacite, p. 276. 
 
 *^ Du Principe Federatif, p. 47. 
 
 *i Ibid: p. 47. 
 
 « Ibid: pp. 47, 67-68. 
 
 *^Ibid: p. 46. 
 
 ** Ibid: p. 47. 
 
 *^^Ibid: pp. 46-48. 
 
Theory of Federalism 129 
 
 tutions . . .," said Proudhon, "should be based upon a real 
 contract in which the sovereignties of the contracting parties, 
 instead of being absorbed in a central majesty altogether personal 
 and mystic, would serve as a positive guarantee for the liberty of 
 the state, the commune and its individuals.^® Thus the contract 
 would reserve for the individuals a participation in sovereignty 
 and in action greater than that which they abandon.*'^ It would 
 also guarantee to the confederated communities their territory 
 and sovereignty, regulate their differences, and provide by general 
 measures for all that concerns the security and prosperity of the 
 commune. The attributes of the federal government under the 
 contractual regime could, therefore, never exceed in number and 
 in reality the authorities of the communes or provinces.** 
 
 (b) What is the position of the state? 
 
 We have seen in the preceding chapter that in 1858 Proudhon 
 considered the state as the "chose publiqite" or "res puhltca" *^ 
 which would exist in the regime of anarchy. After 1863, how- 
 ever, his idea was modified. There were then two lines of thought 
 in his theory of the state: (x) The distrust of the state and (y) 
 the optimistic view of the state. 
 
 (x) The distrust of the state. 
 
 In 1863 Proudhon's idea was still tinged with distrust of the 
 state. Instead of having a fixed attitude on the matter,, he 
 wavered between the idea of utilizing the state and that of sup- 
 pressing it. He then believed that if the end of society was to 
 do away with the state, the reason for its existence was precisely 
 because it would satisfy the need which the individual outside of 
 the state would satisfy spontaneously and freely.^" It would 
 be quite justifiable for the collective force of the state to intervene 
 in the creation of all public utiUties.^^ When the state had, how- 
 
 *^ Capacite, p. 163. 
 
 *7 Du Principe Federatif, pp. 46-47, 52. 
 
 48 Ihid: p. 48, 52-58. 
 
 49 Justice V, p. 179. 
 ^ Fourniere, p. 150. 
 
 51 What was meant by him here was that state intervention was state 
 initiation, direction or regulation rather than state control of public utili- 
 ties. Du Principe Federatif, pp. 78-79. Capacite, p. 79-80. 
 
130 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 ever, given to us what we had expected from it, and had ex- 
 hausted its virtue, Proudhon thought that it ought to disappear. 
 If not, it would cease to be the expression of progress. "When, 
 as we see almost everywhere . . .," said Proudhon, "it (the 
 state) fails to carry on the services which it has created and 
 yields to the temptation of monopoly, it is no longer the genius 
 of collectivity which fertilizes it, directs it and enriches it. It 
 then becomes a vast field occupied by six hundred thousand 
 employes and six hundred thousand soldiers . . . who, in- 
 stead of coming to the aid of the nation, and serving the citizens 
 and the communes, would dispossess and oppress them. Soon cor- 
 ruption, fraud and laxity would creep into the system. All of 
 them would become possessed with the desire of maintaining and 
 augmenting their prerogatives, of multiplying the services they 
 receive and enlarging their budgets. The power of the state, 
 losing sight of its true role, would fall into the condition of 
 autocracy and stagnation. . . The nation, going astray from 
 its historical law, would begin to decay ."^^ 
 (y) The optimistic view of the state. 
 
 Proudhon is, however, essentially optimistic. "Society is in 
 continuous progress," he said. "The state is always in action 
 because it has new needs to satisfy and new questions to solve. 
 It is the expression of progress. "^^ He then saw in the con- 
 stitutions which had been multiplied by the nineteenth century 
 the mark of a new era — an era wherein the organization of the 
 nation would become finally conscious of itself. He praised the 
 treaty of 1815, not only because it had established equilibrium 
 among the powers of Europe, but also because it had promised 
 constitutional guarantees to the people.^^ He therefore believed 
 that the state in the future would not be the product of organic 
 nature, but the product of the intellectual nature, that is, the 
 spirit.''^ 
 
 52 Fourniere, p. 152. 
 
 53 Du Principe Federatif, p. 56. 
 
 54 Ibid: p. 54. 
 S5lbid: p. 15. 
 
Theory of Federalism 131 
 
 With these two conflicting ideas in his mind, Proudhon would 
 neither aboHsh the state nor trust it. He sought to utilize it on 
 the one hand, and limit its functions on the other. The state, 
 according to his idea, should, therefore, have the right of legis- 
 lation, of initiation, of creation, of inauguration, of installation, 
 but not the right of execution.^^ Its functions should be greatly 
 limited. Roads, canals, tobacco, posts, telegraphs, railways and 
 banks should be left to the public. The school should be separated 
 from the state. Justice too should not be considered as an 
 attribute of the central authority. The militia, the arsenals, 
 and the fortresses should be controlled by the local authority. 
 Only in time of war should they be turned to the federal gov- 
 ernment.^"^ 
 
 (c) How would the government be organized? 
 
 The basic principle of federation is decentralization or local 
 autonomy. Proudhon bitterly attacked the system of central- 
 ization. 
 
 In the first place, centralization is the vice of the political 
 system — vice which we could call constitutional.^* It is the 
 castration of liberty.^^ In a centralized government, the provinces 
 and cities which ought to enjoy their complete autonomy, are 
 governed and administered, not by themselves, but by a central 
 authority as a conquered population.^" The attributes of the 
 supreme power of the central government are multiplied and ex- 
 tended over against those of the communes.^^ Nothing is done 
 by initiative, by spontaneity, nor by the independent action of 
 the individuals. The central government undertakes all, directs 
 all, regulates all, obstructs all, and does all, without encountering 
 any effective resistance.^^ Hence not only communal and pro- 
 
 ^6 Principe Federatif, p. 54. 
 ^''Ibid: pp. 54-56. 
 58 Cont. Pol., p. 131. 
 s^ Idee Generale, p. 280. 
 60 Cont. Pol., pp. 131-132. 
 ^1 Principe Federatif, p. 49. 
 *2 Capacite, pp. 351-352. 
 
132 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 vincial liberty, but also individual and national liberty are de- 
 stroyed by tlie central government.^^ 
 
 In the second place, political centralization has as its principal 
 corollary mercantile anarchy, or anarchistic capitalism — that is 
 to say, the negation of all economic right and of all social 
 guarantees, in short, of all mutuality. So far as governmental 
 centraHzation shows itself incompatible with the liberty of '89, 
 so far it becomes marvelously reconciled to stock jobbing specula- 
 tion, to disorganization among the producers and, above all, to the 
 organization of monopoly.^^ 
 
 In the third place, centralization is simply a fiction. What- 
 ever the form of the centralized government may be, its power 
 always is a constitutional fiction, never a complete reality. The 
 reason for this is obvious. All organism which has passed beyond 
 its proper limit and which tries to invade, or annex other organ- 
 isms, will lose in power what it gains in extent. Soon it will fall 
 into decay. The centralized government which first controls 
 everything will end in disruption, chiefly because of its absolutism, 
 and will unavoidably fall into the abyss of anarchy .^^ 
 
 For the idea of centralization, Proudhon substitutes the idea 
 of decentralization. By decentralization, he means, first, the 
 diminution of the power of the central government. In the federal 
 regime, the central government w^ould consist of a national council 
 and a central executive commission. The council would be 
 formed by the delegates of the communities who, being in many 
 cases members of their respective community governments, will 
 exercise a close supervision over the acts of the federal assem- 
 bly.®^ The members of the council would choose, in their turn, 
 
 83 Principe Federatif, p. 49. 
 
 8* Capacite, p. 291. 
 
 esCont. Pol., pp. 150-151. 
 
 ^® Si Ics etats confcderes sont egaux entre eux, une assemblee unique 
 suffit ; s'ils sont d'une importance incgale, on retablit I'equilibre en creant, 
 pour la representation federale, deux chambres ou conseils: I'un dont les 
 membres ont ete nommes en nombre egal par les etats, quelle que sclent 
 leur population et I'etendue de leur territoire ; I'autre oij les deputes sont 
 nommes par les memes etats proportionnellemcnt a leur importance." 
 Capacite, p. 164. 
 
Theory of Federalism 133 
 
 a central executive commission. This commission would be 
 superior to the council and could sustain a conflict with it just 
 as if it were the elected royalty or the president of the people.^^ 
 The central government, so organized, instead of absorbing the 
 federal states or the communal and municipal authority, would 
 reduce its attributes to the simple role of general initiative, of 
 mutual guarantees, and of general supervision. Its decrees would 
 not be put into execution unless they were first endorsed by the 
 confederated governments.^^ 
 
 By decentralization Proudhon meant, in the second place, local 
 autonomy or municipal liberty. In the federal system, the com- 
 mune would be essentially sovereign. It would have the right of 
 governing, of administering, of levying taxes, of disposing of 
 its properties and revenues, of creating schools for its youth, 
 of maintaining police, gendarmes and civil guards, of nominating 
 its judges, of establishing banks, of issuing decrees and ordinances^ 
 and finally, of enacting laws. It would recognize no limitations 
 except those of its own choosing. It would be free from all 
 coercion from outside.^^ 
 
 (d) How would universal suffrage be organized? 
 
 We have seen in the preceding chapter that Proudhon ex- 
 pected to revolutionize the political order through the organiza- 
 tion of universal suffrage.'^'' After 1863 he believed also that 
 universal suffrage would form the basis of the federated com- 
 munities.'^ "The electoral right," he said, "is inherent in each 
 individual as well as in each group . . . each corporation 
 each commune, each city."'^^ ^ ^ust, therefore, be direct. It 
 must directly represent all ideas, all opinions, all rights, and all 
 interests of the people." Otherwise it would be indirect. Proud- 
 er Du Principe FecTeratif, pp. 70-71. See also Capacite, pp. 144, 164, 225. 
 
 68 Du Principe Federatif, p. 58 (See also pp. 49 and 73). 
 
 69 Capacite, p. 231. Cont. Pol. p. 142. 
 
 70 Melange III, p. 48. 
 
 71 Desjardin, II, p. 214. 
 
 72 Capacite, pp. 213 and 215. 
 
 ■'^Ihid: p 217. Cont. Pol., pp. 190-191. 
 
134 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 hoii then strongly opposed the pluraUty of candidacy. "Will you 
 call a direct vote the vote given by 10,000 communes, differing in 
 customs, territories and ideas," said he, "to an invididual who is 
 strange to all of them and vv^ho v^^ill represent them only from 
 the point of view of transitory sentiment, or from casual 
 fancy."'^'* In the system of direct universal suffrage, the basis 
 of representation would be not only population, but also territory, 
 property ,_ capital, industry and the natural religious and com- 
 munal groups. No group would be excluded from it.'^^ 
 
 (3) Economic: Mutualism and agricultural and industrial 
 federation. 
 
 The basic principle of Proudhon's economic theory was 
 mutualism.'*' The French words mutual, nmtualiie, mutilation, 
 which have for synonyms reciproque, or reciprocite, comes from 
 the Latin word mutuum, which signifies in a large sense ex- 
 change.^" 
 
 Human nature, according to the mutualists, is the highest 
 expression, if not the incarnation, of universal justice. Man gets 
 his rights directly from the dignity of his nature just as later 
 he achieves his well-being directly from his personal work and 
 the free exercise of his talents and virtues. The state is nothing 
 more than the union freely formed, of equal and independent 
 subjects. It represents only liberties and interests of the people. 
 There should be no other prerogative than that of liberty, no 
 other supremacy than that of right. Society, therefore, must 
 be considered, not as a hierarchy of functions and faculties, but 
 as a system of equilibrium between free forces, in which each is 
 assured the enjoyment of the same rights as the others and 
 after having fulfilled the same duties, of the same advantages in 
 exchange for the same services — a system, essentially based upon 
 equality and liberty, which would exclude all distinction of for- 
 
 ^* Capacite, p. 217. 
 " Cont. Pol., p. 189. 
 
 '8 He had vaguely formulated the theory of mutualism in 1846. Cont. 
 Eco. II, pp. 412-416. 
 '^ Capacite, p. 68. 
 
Theory of Federalism 135 
 
 tune, of rank and of class. Authority and charity would dis- 
 appear. Justice would become the dominant idea of society.^® 
 
 Mutualism is the formula of justice by virtue of which all 
 the members of society, be they corporations or individuals, 
 families or cities, manufacturers, agriculturists or public func- 
 tionaries, would reciprocally promise and guarantee to each other, 
 service for service, credit for credit, security for security, value 
 for value, information for information, good faith for 
 good faith, truth for truth, liberty for liberty, and property for 
 property.'^^ Hence all the institutions of mutualism, mutual 
 assurance, mutual credit, mutual help, mutual instruction, recip- 
 rocal guarantees of market, of exchange and of work, etc.^" 
 
 In order to carry out his principle of mutualism more effect- 
 ively, Proudhon urged the formation of an agricultural and in- 
 dustrial federation. The different industries must understand 
 that they are sisters, that their interests are closely allied with 
 each other and that one cannot escape when the others are suffer- 
 ing. They should therefore unite themselves into a federation, 
 not for the purpose of absorbing each other, but for the purpose 
 of mutually guaranteeing the conditions of property which are 
 common to all and the monopoly of which no one can claim.^^ 
 They should form a network of unions, of associations for the 
 reciprocal protection of industry and commerce, for the con- 
 struction of canals, roads, railways, and finally for the organ- 
 
 ■^^ Capacite, pp. 69-71. 
 
 ^9 Capacite, p. 151. 
 
 ^^Ibid: pp. 69-71. Mutualism is for Proudhon, not only an economic 
 principle. It is a principle of the state, a law of the state, or rather a 
 religion of the state. (Capacite, pp. 69-71). "What we call in particular 
 the pact of guarantee between the states is nothing more than one of the 
 most brilliant applications of the idea of mutuality," said Proudhon, 
 "which in politics becomes the idea of federation." (Capacite, pp. 351-352). 
 If we apply the principle of mutualism in the field of poHtics, we should 
 soon see that the government is no longer sovereign. (Capacite, pp. 
 69-71.) It is the people that is sovereign, here would be no centraliza- 
 tion but local autonomy (Capacite, p. 155). 
 
 81 Du Principe Federatif, p. 113. 
 
136 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 ization of credit and insurance.^- Through the formation of the 
 federation, they should protect the contracting nations from 
 bankruptcy, and from capitaHstic exploitation both from without 
 and within.^^ Then, and only then, would they approach equal- 
 ity.84 
 
 (4) Social. 
 
 Society consists mainly of two classes : the bourgeoisie and 
 the plebeians. The bourgeoisie may be divided into two sub- 
 divisions : the "haute bourgeoisie," or industrial feudality,^''' and 
 the "petite bourgeoisie," or "classe moyenne." ^^ The first division 
 consists of those who live on the rent of their land or houses, 
 on the interest of their investments and on the profit of their 
 enterprises ; the second consists of two distinct groups of people : 
 (1) Small manufacturers, artisans, shopkeepers, and fanners, 
 and (2) workers or employees whose incomes exceeds in certain 
 instances the average income of the common people."^'^ 
 
 For the "haute bourgeoisie" Proudhon had no sympathy. 
 Economically, he held, they do not produce anything themselves. 
 They live on the work of others^^ and are bound to ultimately 
 lead us to economic disaster, to mercantile and industrial anarchy 
 and to the feudality of capital.^^ PoUtically they favor, first, 
 administrative centralization, because it puts them in possession 
 of power and enables them to exploit the masses. Second, they 
 favor the separation of powers because it assists them to balance 
 the influence of the crown and to frustrate the personal politics 
 of the prince. Thirdly, they favor privileged suffrage because 
 it suppresses the aspiration of the plebeians and restricts the 
 political right to a group of qualified electors. "Under a regime 
 of administrative centralization and privileged suffrage," said 
 
 82 Principe Federatif, p. 110. 
 
 83 Du Principe Federatif, p. 111. 
 
 84 Ibid: p. 80. 
 
 85 Capacite, p. 179. 
 ^^Ibid: p. 178. 
 
 87 Justice II, pp. 6 and 159. 
 
 88 Capacite, pp. 160-161. 
 ^^Ibid: p. 227. 
 
Theory of Federalism 137 
 
 Proudhon, "the bourgeoisie through their majority became the 
 master of the government; all local life became annihilated; and 
 all agitation easily suppressed. Under such a regime, I say, the 
 working class, shut up in their workshops, are naturally doomed 
 to slavery. Liberty exists, but only in the sphere of the bour- 
 geoisie society."-"' In short, the government under such a regime 
 is a government for the upper bourgeoisie.^^ After having 
 passed from political catastrophe to political catastrophe and de- 
 generated to the last degree of moral and intellectual emptiness, 
 this element of the bourgeoisie becomes dissolved into a debased 
 mass which has nothing human except its egoism.^^ It is de- 
 finitely doomed. We are witnessing its moral death.^^ 
 
 As to the "petite bourgeoisie," or the middle class, their fate is 
 no more enviable. Attacked in the front by the rise of the work- 
 ingmen, and upon the flanks by taxation and competition or free 
 exchange, the middle class is going to be diminished day by day 
 until it degenerates into the proletarian class.^^ 
 
 It is quite natural for us to suspect that Proudhon might 
 appeal to violence for the accomplishment of the social revolution. 
 But after a careful study of his work, we see that he is absolutely 
 opposed to such procedure. "Far from me," said he, "all fer- 
 ment of hatred and of civil war. It is well enough known that 
 I am not what is called 'a man of action.' " ^^ The law of 1864 
 granted to the workingmen the liberty of union and of strike. 
 Proudhon denounced it as being anti-juristic, anti-economic, and 
 contrary to all society, and to all order.®^ ^^^ 
 
 The social revolution, according to him, would assume a 
 character peculiar to itself. It would no longer be a question 
 of combat between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, wherein^ 
 the latter would be the conqueror, but a question of searching 
 
 ^ Principe Federatif, pp. 35-36. 
 
 91 Capacite, pp. 171-173. 
 
 92 Ibid: p. 179. 
 9^ Ibid: p. 169. 
 9*md: p. 178. 
 »5 76id: p. 185. 
 
 96/fcid: pp. 331-346. See also Bougie, p. 308. 
 
138 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 for an equilibrium between the classes, or rather of a fusion of 
 all of the antagonistic classes into one middle class. The actual 
 distinction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat is simply 
 a revolutionary accident. "Both," said Proudhon, "must be^ 
 reciprocally blended into a higher consciousness."^'^ 
 
 After the social revolution, the worker would no longer be 
 a serf of the state. He would be a man positively and effectively 
 sovereign, acting upon his proper initiative and his personal re- 
 sponsibility.*^^ He would be sovereign in the truly charitable 
 society; in the chamber of commerce; in the corporation of art 
 and trade; in the society of the workers; in the exchange; in 
 the market; in the academies; in the schools; in the agricultural 
 societies ; in the electoral conventions ; in the parliamentary as- 
 semblies ; in the council of state ; in the national guard ; and even 
 in the church and in the temple.^'* 
 
 (5) Educational. 
 
 With federation education would become universal. Superior 
 instruction would be given to all the people.^"" From the day 
 of their birth up to the age of seven or eight, all the educational 
 expenses of the children would be provided by their parents. 
 From the age of seven or eight to that of eighteen the education 
 of youth would be continued either by the parents themselves, 
 a domicile, if such were their choice, or in any particular school 
 instituted and directed by them at their own expense if they did 
 not like to trust their children to the public schools. Thus the 
 
 °^ Capacite, p. 51. See also Theoric de la Propriete, p. 180. 
 
 ^8 Capacite, pp. 69-71. 
 
 ^^ Ibid, pp. 163-164. Of this work, the full title of which is "De 
 la Capacite politique des classes Ouvriercs," Chaudey wrote the last 
 chapter for Proudhon. He believed that the interests of the workers 
 were distinct from those of the bourgeoisie. Politics is not a matter of 
 sentiment. It is fundamentally the legal struggle of (class) interests. 
 (Capacite, p. 349). It is, therefore, nothing more than natural that the 
 working-men should consider the bourgeoisie their adversary. The social 
 revolution will be accomplished when the workingmen will ally them- 
 selves with the enlightened, active and capable bourgeoisie against the 
 insolent capitalistic bourgeoisie. (Capacite, p. 355.) 
 
 100 Du Principe Federatif, p. 239. 
 
Theory of Federalism 139 
 
 greatest liberty would be left to the parents and to the communes. 
 The state would intervene only as an auxiliary when the family 
 and the commune needed its assistance. In the school of the 
 state, professional instruction would be combined with scientific 
 and literary instruction. In consequence, the young people at 
 the age of nineteen or more would be compelled to do useful 
 and productive manual work. The cost of education would be 
 defrayed by returns from their products.^"^ 
 
 101 Capacite, pp. 287-288. 
 
CHAPTER VIII 
 Conclusion 
 
 (1) Proudhon's theory of nationalism and patriotism. 
 
 ^ This essay would be incomplete if we did not consider Proud- 
 hon's idea of nationalism and patriotism. From 1840 to 1861, 
 he had no definite idea about the position of the state. At first 
 he desired to abolish it completely, but later he decided it was 
 best to retain it in a changed form.^ After 1862, his idea became 
 clearer and more cautious. He urged the establishment of a 
 federation of small states. 
 ' — The perfection of the little autonomous spheres which the 
 Greek cities had manifested did not cease to excite his admir- 
 ation.2 What he opposed strongly at that time was the large 
 unified state. He opposed the unification of Italy because it 
 would create a strong military force, break the established equi- 
 librium of Europe, and provoke in the neighboring states agita- 
 tions which would terminate in the rearrangement of the political 
 map of Europe.^ 
 
 Still more significant is his idea relative to patriotism. As a 
 theorist, he entertained no special patriotic feeling toward France. 
 "Where one finds justice, there is his country," says he, "Poor 
 France, apostate on 18 Brumaire, apostate on December 2, 1851, 
 insolent against its constitutional kings, rampant with despots, 
 without principle, without dignity, without conscience. . . If 
 I were only twenty-five years old, I would go to America; if I 
 were thirty-five years old I would ask my naturalization in Bel- 
 gium." •* Proudhon was after all a Frenchman at heart. He 
 
 1 See Chap. VI. 
 
 2 Bougie, p. 253. 
 
 3 Desjardin II, p. 53. Bougie, pp. 249, 250, 253. 
 *Corresp. IV, pp. 255-256 (1860). 
 
Influence of Proudhon's Work 141 
 
 loved France as the country of those who sing eternal revolution. 
 In spite of all the forms of slavery that exist within it, there is 
 no place in the world, he maintained, where the spirit is so free 
 as in France.^ The absence of patriotic sentiment in the French- 
 man was to Proudhon a monstrosity.® 
 
 (2) Proudhon's influence upon anarchism, social radicalism 
 and syndicalism. 
 
 It is needless to say that with the exception of William God- "S 
 win,'^ Proudhon ranks as the first expositor of anarchism.^ Social 
 radicalism, which endeavors to reaUze justice and social peace, 
 and transform political democracy into social democracy, has also 
 been greatly influenced by him.^ But still greater is his influence 
 upon syndicalism. ''La Capacite politique des classes Ouvrieres," 
 says Bougie, "is the gospel of syndicalism."^*' The syndicalists'"^ 
 derive their theory of economic federalism chiefly from hmi}r 
 
 (3) Criticism of Proudhon's work. 
 
 Intellectually, Proudhon was fearless. He attacked the state,---^ 
 government and all the other institutions of society. He de^ 
 nounced the theory of Rousseau, that of the traditionalists and 
 of the Utopian socialists. He was the friend of no one, and the 
 enemy of all. In short, he was Proudhon himself. He knew no 
 authority except his own. 
 
 5 Revolution Sociale, p. 280. See also Melange III, p. 2)2>. 
 ^ Capacite, p. 41. 
 
 7 William Godwin (1756-1836) published his famous book "Enquiry 
 concerning political justice" in 1793. For a brief view of his life and his 
 idea, see Paul's "William Godwin, his friends and contemporaries," and 
 Stephen's "Enghsh Thought in the Eighteenth Century." 
 
 8 For Proudhon's influence upon the individual anarchists of the 
 United States, see Osgood, "Scientific Anarchism," pp. 18-25. 
 
 ^ For a general idea of social radicalism, see Brouilhet, "Le Conflit 
 des Doctrines," Book II, pp. 71-167. 
 
 1° Bougie, Avant-propos, p. VI. 
 
 11 G. Weill, "Mouvement social en France," Ch. II, pp. 36-42. Louis 
 Levine "Syndicalism in France, Ch. V-VI, Passim. For further detail, 
 see M. G. Pirau's "Proudhonisme et Syndicahsme Revolutionnaire," Paris, 
 Rousseau (1910). 
 
! 
 
 142 The Political Theories of P, J. Proudhon 
 
 There are three chief weakne sses in jii s writi ngs. In the first 
 place, he constantly changed his ideas. Even in the use of terms 
 he often fell into the abyss of confusion. He used, for instance, 
 the word "republic" in two senses. In one place he condemned 
 it as monarchy without a monarch.^- In another place he hailed 
 it as the ideal form of anarchy.^^ "^ thesecond place his ideas 
 are destructive rather than constructive^> He was strong in 
 
 y critical analysis, and weak in dogmatic exposition. In order to 
 I convince ourselves of this fact, it will only be necessary for us 
 \ to read his first memoir on property. No one more effectively 
 than he assailed all the existing systems of society; no one has 
 with the same vigor put the lawyers and the economists under 
 foot. But when he came to reveal to us his constructive plan, 
 he was decidedly inferior to all those whom he seemed to domi- 
 nate. He stammered, he lisped. His idea became at once vague 
 
 '•. and even incomprehensible. "S^n the third place, he was essentially 
 
 ^ a man of theory rather than of action^ What he tried to accom- 
 plish was ideal, Utopian rather than practical,)' 
 
 In general, he had great confidence in the indefinite perfect- 
 
 -•> ibility of the individual and of mankind.^* But on many occasions 
 his temper became violent. He condemned the people generally 
 as the most barbarous and, consequently, the most retrograded 
 of society.^^ He criticized the French people with particular 
 bitterness. In one place he said, "She (France) has no more 
 intelligence, no more moral conscience. She has lost even the 
 notion of morality."^® In another place he says, "The people are 
 apathetic, the youth epicurean and immoral; all the nation care- 
 less and sluggish. I don't know what will happen. Will a 
 
 ■*• hurricane fall upon France? I do not know, I do not care."^'^ 
 
 12 "Democratic ou Republique, n'cst que une monarchic sans monarque." 
 Revolution Sociale, p. 49. 
 
 13 Melange II, pp. 12-13. 
 
 1* Idee Generalc, p. 281. See also Justice I, pp. 131-132. Cont. Pol., 
 pp. 86-87. 
 
 15 Corresp. IV, p. 132. Justice VI, p. 269. 
 
 i« Justice I, p. 70. 
 
 "St. Beuve, p. 248 (letter to his friend, April 24, 1841). 
 
Defects of Proudhon's Work 143 
 
 In spite of all these accusations and denunciations, Proudhon 
 before 1861 was quite confident about the progress of mankind 
 and the triumph of the revolution.^^c3ut the more he became 
 experienced, the more he became convinced of the fact that what 
 he had cherished as the ideal form of society, that is, anarchy, 
 could not be realized^ In 1862 he wrote to his friend, "The public^ 
 order is based upon the liberty and the conscience of the citizen ; 
 anarchy, the absence of all authority, is the correlative of the 
 highest social virtue, and, consequently, the ideal of mankind. 
 We have not yet arrived at that stage. Centuries and centuries 
 will pass before the idea of anarchy will be realized."^^ 
 
 Proudhon knew perfectly well that in a given society, authority 
 of man over man is inversely proportional to the stage of intel- 
 lectual development which that society has reached.^*^ As long 
 as human nature remains what it was as condemned by him, 
 Proudhon's dream of anarchy, ofji revolutionary Utopia, will re- 
 main always a Utopia, a dream. "C^nd in 1863, Proudhon realized 
 that his anarchistic idea was after all simply a dream^ 
 
 isCorresp. Ill, p. 386 (1843) ; IV., p. 149; V., pp. 247-249 (1853). 
 
 19 Letter of Nov. 2, 1862. 
 
 2« What is Property, pp. 263-264. 
 
,^ APPENDIX 
 
 ^ (1) Proudhon's Life. 
 
 1809 (Jan. 15) Born at Besangon. 
 
 1816-1820 Cowherd. 
 
 1820 Cellar-boy in an inn. 
 
 1820-1822 Studied in the college of Besancon.f"^^/i^^k , 
 
 1827-1830 Worked for Gauthier Company in BesanQon, 
 
 first as proof-reader, then as compositor.to cLftU/»^'^ 
 
 1830-1831 Travelled in France on foot from Paris to 
 
 ,^oAJ^ //, Lyons, from Lyons to Marseilles, and obtained 
 P"^ i>>^ employment in Neufchatel, Lyons, Marseilles 
 
 and Draguignan. 
 
 1832 As an overseer of printing {prote) in the com- 
 
 pany of Gauthier in Besangon. 
 
 1836 Established a printing office of his own with 
 
 the aid of a friend. Completely failed. 
 
 1838 The publication of his "Essai de grammaire 
 
 generale" secured him a triennial pension of 
 1,500 francs from the Academy of Besangon, 
 known as the Suard Pension. At the end of 
 this year he moved to Paris. 
 
 1840 The publication of "Ou'est ce que la Propri- 
 ete?" The result of this publication was the 
 withdrawal of his pension by the Academy of 
 BesanQon because of his noxious opinions. 
 
 1841 (Jan.) He became a collaborator of M. Turbat and 
 
 worked upon the problem of reformatories — 
 "preventive prisons." 
 
 \ 
 
Appendix 145 
 
 1842 His third memoir on Property "Avertissement 
 
 aux Proprietaires" was published. As a result 
 of this publication he was prosecuted before 
 the cour d'assises of Besangon, but succeeded 
 in obtaining his acquittal. 
 
 1844-1847 Transportation agent at Lyons for the steam- 
 
 boat company of Mm. Gauthier Brothers. 
 
 1848 At the outbreak of the revolution of February rt*-*; 
 he went to Paris. On June 4 of the same year, t^ -a)^ 
 he was elected to the Constitutional Assembly \ ^; ' 
 as representative of the Department of Seine. 1^ jjiA 
 
 1849 He established the People's Bank. Being con-»>'^v«,*^*', 
 demned to three years' imprisonment, he was ^^a 
 obliged to give up his enterprise. On June 26th ^^ 
 and 27th of the same year, he published two uv^ 
 articles bitterly attacking Louis Napoleon. He \^ 
 was consequently summoned to the court of 
 assizes and sentenced to three years' imprison- 
 ment and fined 3,000 francs. In the prison he 
 married Mile. Euphrasie Piegard, a lace-maker 
 (Desjardin I,pp. 142-143). 
 
 1849-1852 Three years' imprisonment. 
 
 1852 He was set at liberty. 
 
 1858 Publication of "De la Justice dans la Revolution 
 
 et dans I'Eglise," and a pamphlet "Petition to 
 the Senate." He was declared guilty of five 
 misdemeanors in the book and two misde- 
 meanors in the pamphlet and sentenced to 
 three years' imprisonment and fined 4,000 
 francs. 
 
 1858-1862 Exile in Belgium. 
 
 1862 Returned to Paris after the enactment of the 
 
 special imperial act of 1860, supplementing the 
 Amnesty of 1859. 
 
 1865 (Jan. 16) Died at Passy, Paris. 
 
146 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 (2) Proudhon's theory of logic. 
 
 Proudhon's theory of logic passed through three stages of 
 development: (a) The law of series (1843), (b) the theory of 
 antinomy ended in fusion (1846), and (c) the theory of antinomy 
 ended in equilibrium (1858). 
 
 (a) The law of series (1843). 
 
 In 1843, Proudhon formulated a new logic — the law of series 
 against the law of syllogism and Bacon's law of induction.^ 
 According to him, any Judgment which is not based upon a regu- 
 lar series is necessarily a false judgment.^ The series has as its 
 prime element unity (I'unite). The former is the antitehsis of 
 the latter. The smallest series contains at least two unities, a 
 thesis and an antithesis, a coming and a going, the opposites, the 
 extremes, the polarity, the equilibrium, the good and the evil, 
 the yes and the no, the me and the non-me.^ These two unities 
 may stand in the same relation of identity as the teeth of a saw ; 
 in the same relation of progression as that of ten, one hundred, 
 and one thousand; or in the same relation of analogy as that of 
 tune and color ; and, finally, in the same relation of composition 
 as that of the different parts of a table, a statue, or a machine, etc. 
 
 The relation of unities is what we call the law of the series.* 
 Here we may notice that in the law of series, the idea of con- 
 tradiction is vaguely hinted at, but not very definitely developed.^ 
 
 (b) The theory of antinomy ended in fusion (1846). 
 
 In writing his "Sysieme dcs Contradictions Economiques," 
 Proudhon adopted the theory of antinomy from Hegel, whose 
 works, curiously enough, he had never read.« It was only through 
 
 1 Dichl, pp. 155-156. 
 
 2 De la Creation, p. 94. 
 
 3 Ibid: p. 125. 
 *Ibid: p. 128. 
 
 5 Proudhon borrowed his idea from Fourier. But to Proudhon the 
 law of series is essentially a method of dialectic, of logic; to Fourier, it is 
 rather a theory of social philosophy for the organization and develop- 
 ment of social life. Diehl, p. 159. (See also De la Creation, p. 120.) 
 
 sCorresp. II, p. 176. His letter to Bergmann, Jan. 19, 1845, and to 
 M. Tissot, Dec. 13. 1846. 
 
Appendix 147 
 
 his friendly conversation in Paris with Karl Marx'^ in 1844 and 
 with Karl Grun ^ in 1844-1845 that he happened to know the 
 principles of Hegelian logic.^ 
 
 Hegel's theory of antinomy, as formulated in his logic, is as 
 follows: All development in life as well as in philosophy rests 
 upon contradictions, that is, upon the existence of two laws or 
 two tendencies which are opposed to each other ; not only between 
 two things, but also within one and the same thing. If we think 
 logically, we must search for the contradictions. The logical 
 method consists of three parts, thesis, antithesis and synthesis. 
 The first is the opposite of the second. Between these two ideas, 
 there arises a third idea, which is higher than the two and 
 which reconciles them.''' 
 
 Proudhon rather faithfully followed Hegel's idea in his 
 "Systeme des Contradictions Economiques." It was for him the 
 best means of obtaining the truth, the absolute or mathematical 
 certainty. He did not, however, obtain the result he searched for. 
 The social question he tried to deal with was often too compli- 
 cated to fall within his inflexible system. He was obliged to force 
 his ideas to fit into his narrow and artificial frame. 
 
 In this connection, Karl Marx's criticism about his idea is 
 particularly significant. "The author of economic contradictions," 
 said he, "believes that he has made the HegeHan dialectic actually 
 
 ^ "C'est moi qui suis responsable de la sophistication de Proudhon, 
 c'est moi qui I'ai infecte d'hegelianisme." Karl Marx: "La misere de la 
 philosophic," p. 181. 
 
 8 Die grosse und erbahene Arbeit Kegels im absoluten Freiheit und 
 Notwendigkeit ineinander aufgehen zu lassen, das Problem der ISIenschheit 
 wenigstens gestellt zu haben dass meine Natur zugleich mein Werk sein 
 muss, diesse kolossale Wahrheit ... hat Proudhon vollstandig begriffen. 
 Nur von der Auflosung der deutschen Philosophic selbst durch die Kritik, 
 von der Vernichtung aller philosophischer Systematik hatte er noch keine 
 geschichtliche Kenntnis. Ich hatte das uncndliche Vergniigen, gewisser- 
 massen der Privatdozent des Mannes zu wrden, dessen Scharfsinn seit 
 Lessing und Kant viellcicht noch nicht iiberhalt wurde." Griin "Die 
 soziale Bcwegung in Frankreich und Belgien." 
 
 9 Diehl, p. 166. 
 
 10 Hegel's Werke. Bd., V., pp. 327-353. 
 
148 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 function. In reality, he has deformed and falsified it. Once 
 putting in balance the advantages and inconveniences of an 
 economic principle — division of work or competition — the problem 
 for him to deal with is to conserve the latter, and eliminate the 
 former. He is eclectic rather than Hegelian. And he is eclectic 
 because he takes an intermediate position between the two op- 
 posing classes. His mentality is that of a petit bourgeois-" ^^ 
 
 (c) The theory of antinomy ended in equilibrium (1858). 
 
 While in his "Systeme des Contradiction Economiques" 
 Proudhon considered synthesis as the fusion of thesis and anti- 
 thesis, in "De la Justice dans la Revolution et dans I'Eglise," he 
 saw that the antinomical terms did not cancel each other any 
 more than the opposite poles of an electric pile destroy each 
 other, that they were the procreative causes of motion, life and 
 progress, and that the problem for us to solve was to discover, 
 not their fusion which would be their death, but their equilibrium, 
 an equilibrium for ever unstable, var}dng with the development 
 of society.^^ 
 
 " Karl Marx "La Misere de la Philosophic," p. 181. 
 "Justice I, pp. 3 and 179. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 (1) General Works 
 
 A. Bebel, "Charles Fourier," Stuttgart, 1888. 
 
 A. Beauchrey, "ficonomie Sociale de P. J. Proudhon," Paris, 1867. 
 
 L. Blanc, "Organizateur de Travail," Paris, 1848. 
 
 Bonald, (a) "Oeuvres," Paris 1817-1819 (11 vols.) 
 
 Vol. I "L'Essai Analytique sur les Lois Naturelles de I'Ordre 
 
 Social," or "Du Pouvoir du Ministre et du Suject dans la 
 
 Societe." 
 
 Vol. II-IV "Legislation Primitive." 
 
 (b) "Oeuvres Completes," Paris 1864 (3 vols.) 
 
 Vol. I "Demonstration Philosophique du Principe Consti- 
 tutif." 
 C. Bougie, "Sociologie de Proudhon," Paris, 1911. 
 G. & H. Bourgin, "Le Regime de I'Industrie en France de 1814 a 1830," 
 
 Paris, 1912. 
 Cabet, "Voyage en Icarie," Paris, 1848. 
 Desjardin, "P. J. Proudhon, sa Vie, ses Oeuvres et sa Doctrine," Paris, 
 
 1896.. 
 Diehl, "P. J. Proudhon, seine Lehre und seine Leben." Jena, 1888-1896. 
 E. Fourniere, "Les Theories Socialistcs au XIX Siecle de Babeuf a 
 
 Proudhon," Paris, 1904. 
 De Gammond, "Fourier et son Systeme," Paris, 1839. 
 Karl Griin, "Die soziale Bewegung en Frankreich und Belgien," Darm- 
 stadt, 1845. 
 A. L. Guerard, "French Civilization in the Nineteenth Century," New 
 
 York, 1914. 
 Hayes, "A Political and Social History of Modern Europe," New York, 
 
 1917. 
 Hegel's "Werke," Berlin, 1834. 
 
 Paul Janet, "Saint Simon et la Saint Simonisme," Paris, 1878. 
 Kirkup, "History of Socialism," London, 1906. 
 
 E. Lagarde, "La Revanche de Proudhon," Paris, 1905. 
 
 F. De Lamennais, "Oeuvres Completes" II (Essai sur I'indifference en 
 
 matiere de religion), Paris, 1836-1837. 
 
I50 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 Laski, "Authority in the Modern State," New Haven, 1919. 
 Lavcrgne, "ficonomie Rurale dc la France depuis 1789." Paris, 1860, first 
 edition, 1877 fourth edition. 
 
 E. Levasseur, (a) Histoire des Classes Ouvrieres et de I'lndustrie en 
 
 France avant 1789," Paris, 1901. 
 (b) "Histoire des Classes Ouvrieres ct de I'lndustrie en 
 
 France de 1789 a 1870," Paris 1900-1907 (2 vols.). 
 (c) "Histoire du Commerce de la France," Paris, 1911- 
 1912 (2 vols.). 
 De Maistre, "Oeuvres Completes," Lyons, 1884-1893 (14 vols.). Vol. I 
 "£tude sur le Souverainte," "Essai sur le Principe Generateur 
 des Institutions Politiques." 
 Karl Marx, "La Misere de la Philosophic," Paris, 1847. 
 
 F. Miickle, "Geschichte der Sozialistischen Ideen im 19 Jahrhundert," 
 
 Leipzig, 1909. 
 
 A. Miilberger, (a) "P. J. Proudhon, Leben und Werke," Stuttgart, 1899. 
 (b) "Studicn iiber Proudhon," Stuttgart, 1891. 
 
 F. A. Ogg, "Economic Development of Modern Europe," New York, 1918. 
 
 H. L. Osgood, "Socialism and Anarchism," Boston, U.S.A. and London, 
 1889. 
 
 J. L. Puech, "La Proudhonisme dans I'Association Internationale des 
 Travailleurs," Paris, 1907. 
 
 Puthtz, "P. J. Proudhon, sein Leben und seine positiven Ideen," Berlin, 
 1881. 
 
 Saint-Beuve, "P. J. Proudhon, son Vie et sa Correspondance," Paris, 1872. 
 Excellent work but incomplete (1809-1845). 
 
 Saint-Simon. "Oeuvres," Paris, 1841. 
 
 Sargant, "Social Innovators," London, 1858. 
 
 S. Sugenhcim, "Geschichte der Aufhebung der Leibeigenschaft und Horig- 
 keit in Europe bis urn die Mitte des 19 Jahrhundert," St. Peters- 
 burg, 1861. 
 
 L. R. Villerme, "Tableau de I'Etat Physique et Moral des Ouvriers Em- 
 ployes dans les Manufactures de Coton, de Laine et de Soie," 
 Paris, 1840 (2 vols.). 
 
 (2) Proudhon's Works.i 
 (1) "Oeuvres Completes," Bruxelles, 1868-1876. 
 
 1837x "Un essai de gramm.airc generale" faisant suite aux: "les 
 elements primitifs des langues decouverts par la comparaison 
 des raison d'Hebrew avec celles du Grec, du Latin et du 
 FranCais," par Bergier. 
 
 1 An "x" preceding a title signifies that the work is not in the 
 "Oeuvres Completes." 
 
Bibliography . 151 
 
 1838x "Recherches sur les categories grammaticles et sur quelques 
 origines de la langue FranCaise" (written for the Institute of 
 BesanQon for the Volney prize but failed. Desjardin I; p. 24). 
 
 1839 "De la celebration du dimanche" ou "Recherches sur le principe 
 
 du droit et du gouvemement." O.C. II. 
 
 1840 Qu'est-ce que la propriete? Premier memoire, O.C. I. (Trans- 
 
 lated by Tucker, Philadelphia, 1888). 
 
 1841 Qu'est ce que la Propriete? Deuxieme memoire ou "Lettre a 
 
 M. Blanqui," O.C.I. 
 
 1842 "Avertissement aux proprietaires," ou "Lettre a M. Con- 
 siderant." O.C. II. 
 
 1842 "Explications presentees au ministere public sur le droit de 
 
 propriete," O.C. II. 
 
 1843 "De la creation de I'ordre dans I'humanite" ou "Principes d'or- 
 ganisation politique," O.C. III. 
 
 1845 "De la concurrence entre les chemins de fer et les voies navi- 
 gables," O.C. II. 
 
 1845 "Le miserere" ou "La penitence d'un roi," O.C. II. 
 
 1846 "Systeme des contradictions economiques" ou "Philosophie de la 
 misere." O.C. IV and V. (2 vols.). 
 
 1848 "La solution du probleme social," O.C. VI. 
 
 1848 "L'organisation du credit et de la circulation," O.C. VI. 
 
 1848 "Banque d'echange," O.C. VI. 
 
 1848 "Banque du peuple," O.C. VI. 
 
 1848 "Proposition relative a I'impot sur le revenu," O.C. VII. 
 
 1849x Idees revolutionaires. It is composed of articles, selected by 
 Alfred Darimon from "Le representant du peuple" (Oct. 1847- 
 August, 1848) and "Le Peuple" (Nov. 1848- June, 1849) Paris. 
 
 1847-1850 "Melanges." It is composed of articles selected from "Le 
 representant du peuple," "Le Peuple" and "La voix du peuplef 
 (Sept, 1848-1850) O.C. XVII, XVIII and XIX (3 vols.). 
 
 1849 "Les confessions d'un revolutionnaire, pour servir a I'histoire 
 de la revolution de Fevrier," O.C. XIX. 
 
 1849 "Interet et principal," O.C. XIX. 
 
 1851 "Idee generale de la revolution au XlXieme siecle," O.C. X. 
 1851x "Histoire generale de la dcmocratie moderne," (See Desjardin 
 
 I, pp. 171-172). 
 
 1852 "La revolution sociale, demontree par la coup d'fitat du 2 
 decembre," O.C. VIL 
 
 1853 Philosophie du progres, O.C. XX. 
 
152 The Political Theories of P. J. Proudhon 
 
 1854 "Des reformes a operer dans I'exploitation des chemins de £er 
 et des consequences qui peuvent en resulter, soit pour I'augmen- 
 tation du revenu des compagnies, soit pour I'abaissement des 
 prix de transport, I'organisation de I'industrie voituriere et la 
 constitution economique de la societe." O.C. XII. 
 
 1854 "Manuel du speculateur a la bourse," O.C. XI. 
 
 1855x Projet d'exposition perpetuelle. 
 
 1858 Petition au senat. O.C. XX. 
 
 1858 "De la justice dans la revolution et dans I'eglise" XXI, XXII, 
 XXIII, XXIV, XXV, and XXVI (6 vols.) O.C. 
 
 1858 "La justice poursuivie par I'eglise," O.C. XX (Memoire en 
 defense). 
 
 1861 "Theorie de I'impot," O. C. XV. 
 
 1861 "La guerre et la paix, recherches sur les principes et la consti- 
 tion du droit des gens." O.C. XIII & XIV (2 vols.). 
 
 1862 "Les majorats litteraires, O.C. XVI. 
 
 1862 "La federation et I'unite en Italie," O.C. XVI. 
 
 1862 "Nouvelles observations sur I'unite Italienne," O.C. XVI. 
 
 1863 Le principe federatif (See Lagarde, p. 40). O.C. VIII. 
 1863 Les principe federatif (See Lagarde, p. 40). O.C. VIII. 
 
 1863 "Si les traites de 1815 ont cesse d'exister," O.C. VIII. 
 
 (2) "Oeuvres" 
 
 1858 "Amour et mariage" (also published in the "Oeuvres Completes, 
 
 vol. XXIV). O. I. Paris, 1876. 
 1854 (?) "Cesarisme et Christianisme" (2 vols). O. II and III. 
 
 Paris, 1883. 
 
 (3) "Oeuvres Posthumes" Bruxelles, 1866-1875. 
 
 1862 "Theorie de la propriete," written by Proudhon after 1862 (See 
 Lagarde, p. 43) O.P. VII. 
 
 1864 "Contradictions politiques" ou "Theorie du mouvement con- 
 stitutionel au XlXieme siecle" commenced by Proudhon in 1864 
 and published by his friend in 1870. (Desjardin II, p. 75) 
 O.P. I. 
 
 1865 "La Pornocratie" ou "Les femmes dans les temps modernes" 
 O.P. II. 
 
 1865 "La Bible Annotee" (2 vols.) O.P. Ill and IV. 
 
 1865 "France et Rhin" O.P. V. 
 
 1865 "De la capacite politique des classes ouvrieres," vvrritten by 
 Proudhon in 1865 and published by Dentu in the same year. 
 The conclusion of this book was written by Chaudey. Des- 
 jardin II, p. 69). O.P. VI. 
 
 1865 "Du principe de I'art et de destination socialc" O.P. VIII. 
 
Bibliography 153 
 
 (4) Correspondance (14 vols.). Paris, 1875. 
 
 ". . . sa correspondance diflfere notablement de ses livres, en ce 
 qu'elle ne vous mit point martel en tete, elle vous place au 
 coeur de rhomme, vous I'explique et vous laisse sur une im- 
 pression d'estime morale et presque de securite intellectuelle. 
 On y sent de la bonne foi." St. Beuve, p. 278. 
 
VITA 
 
 The author of the foregoing essay was graduated in 1918 from 
 Columbia College with the degree of B.S. From 1919 to 1922, 
 he pursued graduate work at Columbia University, receiving the 
 degree of M.A. in 1920. 
 
 During the year 1919-1920 he was the editor-in-chief of the 
 Mun Hey Weekly (a weekly newspaper published by the Chinese 
 nationalist party in America) and also editor-in-chief of the 
 Chinese Political Science Quarterly. 
 
RD 
 
14 DAY USE 
 
 RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 LOAN DEPT. 
 
 RENEWALS ONLY — TEL. NO. 642-3405 
 
 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 
 
 on the date to which renewed. 
 
 Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. 
 
 -f€^ 
 
 ^^^■jQ ^11197Uf 
 
 m^ 
 
 tf. 
 
 iiuxh 1 1970 
 
 RECEIVED 
 
 ^ ' -^ /-- 
 
 J2 
 
 5 70 -1 f f^ 
 
 UOAN DEP" 
 
 HeC'DU) APR 
 
 7-; ^12 AM 5? 
 
 -' A 1Q7H 
 
 U 
 
 "F 
 
 JUL i D 1979 
 
 It. 
 
 LD21A-60m-6,'69 
 (J9096sl0)476-A-32 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley 
 
re 78050 
 
 r