Content area
Full Text
"Property is theft!" (Proudhon 202) With these ringing words Pierre Joseph Proudhon began his theory of property. The theory proved to be enormously influential as well as enormously controversial. This essay is designed to address this theory and is comprised of two parts. The first part is an explication of Proudhon's theory of property; this explication will at times be hindered by Proudhon's style. The emphases will be the distinction between property and possessions, the use of equality as a foundation for the theory, and Proudhon's actual critique of property. The second part is a critique of Proudhon's theory. The fundamental argument of this second part is that Proudhon does not offer an adequate justification for equality and indeed there is no justification to be found. Proudhon's theory of property is irreparably damaged when the natural right to equality is removed. However, the claim is made that perhaps if rights were understood as societal constructs, and not natural properties of man, the theory would have more validity.
What is Property?, the main work to be analyzed in this essay, is undoubtedly an interdisciplinary treatise that undertakes to prove a highly-contentious thesis. Yet, the arguments, resources, and justifications given by Proudhon are far from scientific. Thus, significant problems arise when attempting to examine and explicate Proudhon's theory of property, primarily as a result of his writing style. George Crowder is correct to say that the author's thesis is "supported by a smorgasbord of arguments and rhetorical flourishes drawn from philosophy, philology, jurisprudence, and political economy, some of it digestible, some not" (Crowder 485). So the task, not just for the critic but for all readers, is to determine exactly what Proudhon is attacking. Only after Proudhon's "twisted words and logic" are removed can his true philosophy of property can be examined (Forbes 704).
The stylistic problems in Proudhon's work can be most clearly seen in Marx's critique of his works. Although their original relations were cordial and Marx at first gave praise to What is Property?, a split was imminent. Although this schism occurred for purely ideological reasons, Marx's comments are deeply indicative of not just his differences of opinion, but also his frustration with Proudhon's imprecise style. Marx wrote that Proudhon "shared in the...