Carnival of Anarchy #2

Just another of those interesting definitions of “socialism,” from the mid-19th century. I first encountered this particular passage in Proudhon’s posthumously published study of Napoleon III, but is originally from the still-untranslated second part of The Federative Principle. “Qui dit socialisme, dans le bon et vrai sens du mot, dit naturellement liberté du commerce et de l’industrie, mutualité de l’assurance, réciprocité du crédit, peréquation de l’impôt, équilibre et sécurité des fortunes, participation de l’ouvrier aux chances des entreprises, inviolabilité de la famille dans la transmission héréditaire.” “Whoever says socialism, in the good and true sense of the word, says naturally […]

Here’s another statement from Liberty on the relationship between anarchism and socialism (the topic of this weekend’s Carnival of Anarchy), which originally appeared in the issue of March 8, 1890 (p.4). Armies that Overlap. Of late the “Twentieth Century ” has been doing a good deal in the way of definition. Now, definition is very particular business, and it seems to me that it is not always performed with due care in the “Twentieth Century” office. Take this, for instance: A Socialist is “one who believes that each industry should be coordinated for the mutual benefit of all concerned under […]

At times, even the most resolute hearts, those most firmly fixed on the sacred belief of progress, come to lose courage and to feel full of disgust at the present. In the 16th century, when one murdered in our civil wars, it was in the name of God and with a crucifix in the hand; it was a question of the most sacred things, of things which, when once they have procured our conviction and our faith so legitimately dominate our nature that it has nothing to do but obey, and even its most beautiful appanage disappears thus voluntarily before the divine will. In the name of what principle does one today send off, by telegraph, pitiless orders, and transform proletarian soldiers into the executioners of their own class? Why has our epoch seen cruelties which recall St. Bartholemew? Why have men been fanaticized to the point of making them coldly slaughter the elderly, women, and children? Why has the Seine rolled with murders which recalls the arquebuscades of window of the Louvre? It is not in the name of God and eternal salvation that it is done. It is in the name of material interests.