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