Two-Gun Mutualism & the Golden Rule: As it turns out, property was already theft in 1838

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

As it turns out, property was already theft in 1838

In volume 4 of the Encyclopédie nouvelle, which appeared in 1838, Jules Leroux contributed a lengthy entry on Political Economy. There is a lot there that is of interest, but perhaps nothing that touches this passage for topical interest here in the mutualist blogosphere:

Et la propriété se trouve être nécessairement définie en ces termes: La possession et l'usage d'un objet propre à satisfaire un besoin.

Supprimez le mot possession, et la propriété disparaît.

Supprimez le mot usage, et la propriété devient une chose immorale, anti-humaine : c'est l'accaparement, c'est le vol.

"And property necessarily finds itself defined in these terms: The possession and use of an object to satisfy a need.

Suppress the word possession, and property disappears.

Suppress the word use, and property becomes an immoral, anti-human thing: it is monopoly; it is theft."

1838. Two years before What is Property? Ain't that some fun?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Mutualism is not a specific social, political or economic system. It is—at its core—an ethical philosophy. We begin with mutuality or reciprocity—the Golden Rule, more or less—and then seek to apply that principle in a variety of situations. As a result, under mutualism every meaningfully social relation will have the form of an anarchic encounter between equally unique individuals—free absolutes—no matter what layers of convention we pile on it. To the extent that our conventions, institutions and norms respect that basic premise, we can call them “mutualist.” To the extent that we commit ourselves to viewing our relations through this lens, and exert ourselves in the extension of mutualistic freedom, we can call ourselves “mutualists.” We don't take anarchy lightly and understand that archic relationships and coercive force come in lots of varieties, and the exertion matters—if mutuality is reduced simply to an outcome of this or that system, mutualism as such almost certainly disappears.

ANARCHIST THEORY IS LIKE A BRACE OF RUSTY PISTOLS — A HARD SET OF TOOLS WITH WHICH TO BUILD A WORLD OF FREEDOM AND HARMONY...

Picking up threads from Proudhon's early works—“the synthesis of community and property”—and his mature works—“the antinomy does not resolve itself"—and the wonderful image of the two pistols from Pierre Leroux's “Individualism and Socialism,” we get a silly name for a fairly heady, potentially risky project: to arm ourselves with both individualism and socialism—two ill-kept old implements indeed—and to try to make them serve the needs of an anarchism that slights neither individualities (at a dizzying range of scales) nor collectivities (ditto), when it's all too obvious that neither one is quite the tool for the job. It's a tactical, transitional project, an opportunity to gather ourselves, and tend to our tools, before the next campaign…