Add new comment

read this somewhere: "Proudhon, the father of modern anarchism, was a fan of private property, but not the sort that generates capital without labor. For Proudhon (as well as other socialists), real estate speculation, money lending at interest, and trading in stocks and bonds were considered unsavory because there was no actual physical work put into them. This is what he meant when he famously wrote “Property is Theft.” Proudhon’s People’s Bank, along with the romanticized pastoralism of small-scale (cottage) industry and agriculture, were the hallmarks of his anti-statist social vision. Exchange of goods and services directly between the producers and consumers was to be the basis of a free and fair economy; prices or exchange values were to be negotiated and determined by the producers and consumers themselves without the interference of bankers, economic planners, or other experts and bureaucrats. That’s what he meant when he less-famously wrote “Property is Liberty.” Writing as Marx’s contemporary in the mid-nineteenth century, Proudhon was reacting to the fitful implementation of industrialism and its accompanying process of proletarianization, finding fault with its centralizing and monopolizing tendencies. Marx and Engels (et al) found in that centralization the perfect mechanism for the creation of a self-conscious class, a revolutionary subject capable of expropriating the Means of Production once they (both the class and the means of production) became fully developed. Proudhon believed that the proletarianization of former peasants and ruined shopkeepers would only create a mass of alienated and submissive workers."

seems to me that whenever self-declared anarchists work (and i do mean work) to rehabilitate PJPs thoroughly outdated notions of economic so-called egalitarianism (we can cringe at his cancel-worthy attitudes toward blacks, women and jews another time), they aren't playing with fire so much as with damp matches. this alienated and dreary labor-intensive small-scale production is nothing more than wistful nostalgia for the Jeffersonian model of the Gentleman Farmer. it is best suited to 18th century europe (and all the relentless whiteness that implies), not a 21st century global system.