Gutenberg Articles

Appearance

Excerpt ​

Excerpt from What is Property? An Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government, by P.-J. Proudhon

The authorities and examples cited in its favor disprove it. The
communistic republic of Plato involved slavery; that of Lycurgus
employed Helots, whose duty it was to produce for their masters, thus
enabling the latter to devote themselves exclusively to athletic sports
and to war. Even J. J. Rousseau--confounding communism and equality--has
said somewhere that, without slavery, he did not think equality of
conditions possible. The communities of the early Church did not last
the first century out, and soon degenerated into monasteries. In those
of the Jesuits of Paraguay, the condition of the blacks is said by all
travellers to be as miserable as that of slaves; and it is a fact that
the good Fathers were obliged to surround themselves with ditches and
walls to prevent their new converts from escaping. The followers
of Baboeuf--guided by a lofty horror of property rather than by any
definite belief--were ruined by exaggeration of their principles; the
St. Simonians, lumping communism and inequality, passed away like a
masquerade. The greatest danger to which society is exposed to-day is
that of another shipwreck on this rock.

Singularly enough, systematic communism--the deliberate negation of
property--is conceived under the direct influence of the proprietary
prejudice; and property is the basis of all communistic theories.

The members of a community, it is true, have no private property; but
the community is proprietor, and proprietor not only of the goods, but
of the persons and wills. In consequence of this principle of absolute
property, labor, which should be only a condition imposed upon man by
Nature, becomes in all communities a human commandment, and therefore
odious. Passive obedience, irreconcilable with a reflecting will, is
strictly enforced. Fidelity to regulations, which are always defective,
however wise they may be thought, allows of no complaint. Life, talent,
and all the human faculties are the property of the State, which has
the right to use them as it pleases for the common good. Private
associations are sternly prohibited, in spite of the likes and dislikes
of different natures, because to tolerate them would be to introduce
small communities within the large one, and consequently private
property; the strong work for the weak, although this ought to be left
to benevolence, and not enforced, advised, or enjoined; the industrious
work for the lazy, although this is unjust; the clever work for the
foolish, although this is absurd; and, finally, man--casting aside his
personality, his spontaneity, his genius, and his affections--humbly
annihilates himself at the feet of the majestic and inflexible Commune!

Explanation ​

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon’s What is Property? An Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government (1840) is a foundational anarchist text that critiques both capitalism and communism, arguing that property is theft (la propriété, c’est le vol). The excerpt provided comes from Chapter 5 ("Psychological Exposition of the Idea of Justice and Injustice, and a Determination of the Principle of Government and of Right"), where Proudhon dismantles communism as an alternative to private property, exposing its inherent contradictions and oppressive tendencies.

Proudhon was a French philosopher and the first self-proclaimed anarchist, whose work influenced later socialist, anarchist, and libertarian thought. This passage reflects his skepticism of centralized authority, whether under capitalism or communism, and his belief in mutualism—a system based on voluntary cooperation and individual sovereignty.

Detailed Explanation of the Excerpt ​

1. Historical Critique of Communism (First Paragraph) ​

Proudhon begins by historically dismantling communism, arguing that every attempt at communal living has either failed or required oppression to sustain itself. He cites several examples:

  • Plato’s Republic – Advocated a ruling class (Guardians) who owned no private property but relied on slaves to sustain their leisure and governance.
  • Sparta under Lycurgus – The Helots (state-owned serfs) labored so that Spartan citizens could focus on war and athletics.
  • Jean-Jacques Rousseau – Despite advocating equality, Rousseau (in The Social Contract) suggested that true equality might require slavery to eliminate economic disparities.
  • Early Christian Communities – The apostolic communism described in Acts 2:44-45 ("all things in common") quickly collapsed, evolving into monastic hierarchies where obedience was enforced.
  • Jesuit Reductions in Paraguay – The Jesuits’ communal experiments with Indigenous peoples were authoritarian; escape attempts were met with walls and ditches, making them effectively slave colonies.
  • Babeuf’s "Conspiracy of Equals" – A radical egalitarian movement during the French Revolution that sought to abolish property but collapsed due to its own extremism.
  • Saint-Simonians – A utopian socialist sect that mixed communism with elitism, dissolving into absurdity.

Proudhon’s point: Communism, in practice, has always required coercion, slavery, or authoritarianism to function. He warns that modern society risks "another shipwreck" if it repeats these failures.

2. The Paradox of Communism (Second Paragraph) ​

Proudhon makes a provocative claim: Communism is not the opposite of property—it is an extreme form of it.

  • "Systematic communism… is conceived under the direct influence of the proprietary prejudice" – Communism doesn’t abolish property; it centralizes it in the hands of the collective (the State or Commune).
  • "The community is proprietor… of the goods, but also of the persons and wills" – Under communism, individual autonomy is erased; the collective owns not just land and tools but people themselves.

This is a radical inversion of liberty—whereas private property (in Proudhon’s view) at least allows some individual control, communism replaces many small tyrants (private owners) with one massive tyrant (the State).

3. The Oppressive Nature of Communal Labor (Third Paragraph) ​

Proudhon argues that communism distorts labor from a natural activity into a forced duty:

  • "Labor… becomes a human commandment, and therefore odious" – Under capitalism, workers are exploited by bosses; under communism, they are exploited by the collective’s rules.
  • "Passive obedience… is strictly enforced" – No dissent is allowed; the system demands blind conformity.
  • "Life, talent, and all the human faculties are the property of the State" – The individual has no rights; everything belongs to the commune.

He then lists the absurdities of enforced equality:

  • The strong work for the weak (should be voluntary, not mandatory).
  • The industrious work for the lazy (unjust).
  • The clever work for the foolish (illogical).
  • Individuality is crushed – People must "annihilate themselves" before the "majestic and inflexible Commune."

Proudhon’s core objection: Communism does not liberate; it replaces one form of domination with another.

Key Themes & Literary Devices ​

Themes: ​

  1. The Illusion of Communist Liberation – Proudhon argues that communism does not abolish exploitation; it rebrands it under collective ownership.
  2. The Tyranny of the Collective – Even well-intentioned communal systems require coercion to function, making them as oppressive as private property.
  3. Individual Sovereignty vs. Collective Ownership – Proudhon values voluntary association (later developed in his mutualism) over forced equality.
  4. Historical Skepticism – He uses historical examples to show that communism always fails or becomes authoritarian.

Literary & Rhetorical Devices: ​

  • Irony & Paradox – "Systematic communism… is conceived under the direct influence of the proprietary prejudice" (communism is just state-enforced property).
  • Hyperbole for Emphasis – "man… humbly annihilates himself at the feet of the majestic and inflexible Commune!" (dramatic imagery of submission).
  • Historical Allusion – References to Plato, Sparta, Rousseau, Jesuits, Babeuf to build credibility.
  • Rhetorical Questions (Implied) – "How can communism claim to be free if it enforces labor and crushes individuality?"
  • Sarcasm – "the good Fathers were obliged to surround themselves with ditches and walls to prevent their new converts from escaping" (mocking the Jesuits’ "benevolent" communism).

Significance & Proudhon’s Broader Argument ​

This passage is central to Proudhon’s rejection of both capitalism and state communism. His alternative—mutualism—advocates for:

  • Worker-owned cooperatives (not state or private control).
  • Voluntary exchange (not forced communism or wage slavery).
  • Individual autonomy (not submission to either bosses or the State).

Proudhon’s critique foreshadows later anarchist and libertarian socialist arguments against authoritarian communism (e.g., Bakunin, Kropotkin, Bookchin). His warning that "property is the basis of all communistic theories" predicts how state socialism (e.g., USSR, Maoist China) would centralize property in the hands of a new ruling class—the Party elite—rather than abolish it.

Conclusion: Why This Matters ​

Proudhon’s excerpt is a scathing indictment of communism as a false solution to inequality. His key insights:

  1. Communism does not eliminate property—it monopolizes it.
  2. Forced equality requires oppression.
  3. True freedom requires voluntary association, not collective ownership.

His critique remains relevant in debates about socialism, anarchism, and libertarianism, challenging the assumption that abolishing private property automatically leads to liberation. Instead, Proudhon warns, it may just replace one master with another.