There are quite a number of things I didn’t find in my searches through the Boston Investigator this week, but one of the things I did find was “Capital and Labor: Socialism in Massachusetts,” by OMEGA—one of the essays by William Batchelder Greene that was incorporated into his Equality (1849), reprinted from the Worcester Palladium. For some time, I have been wrestling with the question whether or not I could justify research travel to track down these articles, since they, and the book they were turned into, all appear to have been written in a matter of months, late in 1849, and it has been uncertain how much difference there was likely to be between the forms. The question is at least partially answered now—there are real and interesting differences.
Anarchism
Socialism in Massachusetts, the Palladium version
You can look at this wiki page for a comparison of the Worcester Palladium and Equality versions of William B. Greene’s essay, “Socialism in Massachusetts,” both from late 1849. MediaWiki’s ability to collate versions should be a very useful tool for demonstrating the development or aguments in archived texts. For those unfamiliar with the publishing history involved, you can start with my comments on the 1870 Mutual Banking.
Uncategorized
“The current unintelligent tampering…with the moral order of business”
In 1873, William Batchelder Greene was asked by Ezra Heywood to explain Pierre-Joseph Proudhon’s ideas on property. Greene sent along translations of the first three, and last three pages of What is Property? and a short, fascinating account of Proudhon and his ideas, based on Greene’s acquaintance with Proudhon during his years in Paris, roughly 1853-1861. It is clear from the account that Greene was most familiar with Proudhon’s earlier works. Some of Greene’s explanation is not consistent with the works from the 1860s, and some of it is consistent, as when Greene likens property to Satan, but in ways […]
mutualism
Should labor be paid or not? part 1
I’ve been involved in a number of discussions recently on the issue of wages, as it was understood by the mutualists and their successors among the Liberty group. There seems to be a widespread sense, among social anarchists, but also among some who consider themselves of the mutualist-individualist school, that wages per se are a Bad Thing. Very few anarchists of any stripe would disagree that waged labor, under present conditions and under any conditions where large accumulations of capital, what we used to call “monopoly power,” and state-backed privilege exist, is unlikely to return to labor its fair share […]