Apparently I missed a post on the C4SIF site last March, claiming that Proudhon was an advocate of intellectual property. Now, as I am a notorious softy on that question (or self-serving reactionary, depending on who you ask), I’m less inclined to “pistols at dawn” than some might be, but it doesn’t sound much like the Proudhon I know. You can check the comments for some discussion with Stephan Kinsella about the question, which is rendered more difficult because the text at issue is from the half-translated and notoriously difficult System of Economic Contradictions.
Proudhon Library
Frederick R. Burton, “Spencer and Proudhon” (1892)
[one_third padding=”0 10px 0 0px”][/one_third][two_third_last padding=”0 0px 0 10px”] Spencer and Proudhon. To the Editor of Liberty: About a year ago I enjoyed the highly esteemed privilege of a conversation with Mr. Herbert Spencer. That the distinguished philosopher did the lion’s share of the talking was natural and satisfactory. It was evident that he had prepared himself in some measure for the meeting, for he discoursed fluently on three or four topics without so much as a pause for questions. I was pleased to discover from this slight personal contact what I had gathered from so much study of his […]
Contr'un
Proudhonian consistency
I was amused to find that Proudhon’s first published article in 1839 begins with the following: “Is a universal alphabet possible? “If it is possible, is it practicable in the study and common usage of language? “Yes, a universal alphabet is possible, and I believe that possibility is demonstrated by the work that I am about to analyze. “No, that universal alphabet is not practicable and never will be, outside of some phonological comparisons and some literal connections. As the last proposition is a sort of negation of the preceding one, I must engage in some clarifications on the subject, […]
Proudhon Library
Note on Revolutionary Practice (March, 1851)
[These notes appear to refer to Ms. 2857 in the Besançon archives, “De la Pratique des révolutions,” a draft for a work abandoned in favor of The General Idea of the Revolution in the 19th Century. This is, of course, just one of the places where Proudhon uses “Destruam et ædificabo” as a kind of motto, but it is interesting to find it here, close to the “watershed” between Proudhon’s “critical” and “constructive” projects.] P.-J. Proudhon, Carnets, Vol. 4 (Carnet no. 9, 27-28; March 1851): 215. Revolutionary practice. — Book I, chapter I. — If I start with cannibalism, it […]