The previous post, “What is certain is that property is to be regenerated among us,” has spurred some further research on the relation of The Theory of Property to Proudhon’s works of the early 1860s. Check the comment thread for a number of of interesting items from Proudhon’s correspondence, and the Libertarian Library blog for the “Notice to the Reader” from The Principle of Art, the first of the Posthumous Works.
Contr'un
Notes on Occupancy & Use (The Infamous Summer House Thread)
[one_third][/one_third][two_third_last] The question of occupancy and use is one which seems particularly difficult to address in a way which escapes a constant return to the same questions. There are certainly logical reasons for that: There […]
Uncategorized
Orestes Brownson and Pierre Leroux
Pierre Leroux was the other half, along with P.-J. Proudhon, of the mutualist mix, as formulated by William B. Greene. Greene was introduced to Leroux’s work by Orestes A. Brownson, and adopted a number of […]
Contr'un
Proudhonian consistency—II
One of the stumbling blocks to accepting Proudhon’s post-1861 “New Theory” of property seems to be the fact that it is hard to image that “monopoly,” “absolutism,” even “despotism” (all words Proudhon used to describe […]