Anarchism and the right

Thu, 11/26/2009 - 10:59 Anarcho Printer-friendly version irst off, a cou!le of ne" !osts# The first is an intervie" $ conducted "ith %ar& 'eier for Black Flag (issue no# 229)# %ar& recently !u*lished a very +ood *io+ra!hy of ,a&unin (Bakunin: The Creative Passion) "hich $ thorou+hly reco--end# As an anarchist, he -ana+es to avoid the -a.or !ro*le- inflictin+ *oo&s *y acade-ics on anarchis- / he +ets it# ,y that $ -ean he understands "hy !eo!le *eco-e anarchists and "hy anarchis- is a*out# $0- not sure $0- -a&in+ -yself clear, *ut $ ho!e anarchists "ill &no" "hat $ -ean# The second is a revie" of an 12P *oo& on the rise of ascis- in $taly# This is a -uch edited version of -y 3The irresisti*le correctness of Anarchis-4 and it a!!ears in the ne" Black Flag (issue 250) / details of "hich can *e found in -y last *lo+# 6o", "ith that sha-eless !lu+ out of the "ay, $0ll -a&e a fe" co--ents on anarchis- and ri+ht# This "as !rovo&ed *y t"o thin+s# irstly, there is a section of -y introduction to the Proudhon 7eader "hich $0- "or&in+ on a*out atte-!ts to lin& Proudhon to the ri+ht# The introduction is a *it lon+ and this -ay *e cho!!ed (and, !erha!s, the 8al 9ra!er section as "ell)# As it is an i-!ortant issue, it should *e *etter &no"n / so you can !oint to it "hen so-e 9ra!er readin+ 'eninist !ontificates on Proudhon as *ein+ a !roto-6a:i or "hen a !ro!ertarian "itters on a*out hi- *ein+ a su!!orter of ca!italis-; 1econdly, there is the "ider issue of the insanity on the A-erican 7i+ht .ust no" on <*a-a, 3socialised4 -edicine and such li&e# That a -a.or cor!oration is su!!ortin+ these P7-co-!any funded 3!rotests4 is all that needs to *e said# That this ri+ht-"in+ !o!ulis- is contradictory does "ithout =uestion / and, !erha!s, even dan+erous to those in the elite "ho fer-ent it as an+er a+ainst *ail-outs fuelled *y dis+runtle-ent at a "orsenin+ socioecono-ic condition can easily turn to the rich as such rather than va+ue 3the li*eral elite4 *o+ey--an *eloved *y the ri+ht# Any"ays, a +ood analysis can *e found here: Po!ulis-: $t>s all the ri+ht-"in+ ra+e these days# And ?ho-&sy -a&es so-e +ood !oints (as usual): 2or&er <ccu!ations And The uture <f 7adical 'a*or 6eedless to say, the ter- 3li*ertarian4 is *anded a*out "ith re+ards to so-e of these !rotests# $0ve covered the history of that !articular a!!ro!riation else"here, *ut it raises the issue of "hy such o@y-orons as 3anarcho-ca!italis-4 and 3national-anarchis-4 are invented (for state socialists readin+ this and feelin+ su!erior, -ay $ !oint to 6ational1ocialis-, 6ational-,olshevis- and 6ational-?o--unis-A)# 2hat -a&es anarchis-, as a la*el, attractive to so-e on the ri+htA 2ell, first off, our o!!osition to %ar@is- and state socialis- / as the ri+ht see- to consider %ar@ as evil incarnate, $ su!!ose it -a&es sense to vie" its fore-ost o!!onents in a +ood li+ht# Particularly if you i+nore all that a"&"ard anti-ca!italist stuff anarchists "riteB Also, Proudhon "as in favour of !atriarchy and had so-e racist -o-ents (usually anti-1e-itic)# $n the latter, he "as .oined *y ,a&unin# 8o"ever, for so-e reason, the racis- of %ar@ and Cn+els does not ena-our them "ith the ri+ht# And the declarations of e=uality *et"een races and !eo!le Proudhon and ,a&unin -ade also does not see- to re+ister (nor for the li&es of 'eninist 8al 9ra!er)# Then there is the anarchist reco+nition that socialis-, e=uality, needs to *e *ased on freedo-# $f you assu-e that freedo- and e=uality need each other alon+ "ith all that socialis- and e=uality tal&, then it can a!!ear *y -eans of selective =uotin+ that anarchis- is individualistic# %oreover, if you are a+ainst the "elfare state you can

a!!ro!riate our anti-statis- (if you i+nore all that a"&"ard stuff a*out +ettin+ rid of ca!italis- and the state *ein+ the -eans *y "hich the elite rule)# ,ut that is all *ased on out-of-conte@t =uotin+ and the -ista&en idea that anarchis- is !urely anti-state (rather than anti-hierarchy)# Perha!s it also flo"s fro- "hat differentiations the left fro- the ri+ht# $t is not freedo-, as the left can "itter on a*out that as -uch as the ri+ht (assu-in+ it is the correct for- of 3freedo-4, everyone is in favour of itB)# And, of course, in a clash *et"een freedo- and tradition or freedo- and !ro!erty, it is al"ays freedo- "hich +ets .ettisoned *y the ri+ht# 6or is it 3!ro!erty4 as such, +iven that socialists ai- to ensure access to the +oods thin+s in life for all rather than see the- -ono!olised *y the fe"# Proudhon0s advocacy of !ossession is not that different fro- %ar@0s co--ents in the Communist Manifesto on ho" !eo!le under co--unis- could a!!ro!riate "hat they needed *ut not turn that a!!ro!riation into a -eans of e@!loitin+ others# 1o "hat is itA $ "ould say it is e=uality# 2hether it is authoritarian or !ro!ertarian (the so-called 3li*ertarian4 ri+ht), the one definin+ feature of the ri+ht is hatred of e=uality and the *elief in the su!erior fe"# 8itler, for e@a-!le, !raised the ca!italists as *ein+ a true elite in ter-s Ayn 7and or von %ises "ould have a!!roved of# 7oth*ard confused e=ual "ith identical and "rote dis-issively of the -asses in favour of an elite# $t never see-ed to cross their -ind that, one, !eo!le are sha!ed ne+atively *y hierarchy and so the features they attac& 3the -asses4 for are a !roduct of the elites they su!!ort and the hierarchical relationshi!s that i-!lies# And, t"o, that li*erty out"ith e=uality is !retty for-al, at least for the -any# 1o the *eloved assu-!tion of classical li*eralis- that li*erty and e=uality are in conflict i+nores this (and conflates e=ual "ith identical)# 1uffice to say, *elief in e=uality is !retty stron+ in Proudhon, ,a&unin, Dro!ot&in and anarchis- in +eneral# Ees, Proudhon does have a +o at 3the -asses4 once in a "hile *ut that does not under-ine his desire for "or&in+ class self-e-anci!ation nor ho!e for e=uality# 8is su!!ort for !atriarchy is a -a.or self-contradiction# Ees, ,a&unin "as racist at ti-es *ut that "as, li&e Proudhon (and %ar@ and Cn+elsB), the !erson failin+ to reach the hi+h standards of their stated as!irations# 2hich is so-ethin+ "e all do, at so-e ti-e or another / *ut it ta&es -ore than a fe" !ersonal failin+s to -a&e so-eone ri+ht-"in+; ,ut, ulti-ately, $ +uess that "hy a fe" on the ri+ht "ant to associate the-selves "ith anarchis- "ill re-ain a -oot-!oint# $ su!!ose it -ay *e a case of !i++y-*ac&in+ onto a *i++er -ove-ent and see&in+ association "ith that to *oost a"areness of their ideolo+y# Perha!s it is .ust selective readin+ of the -aterial (and the li&es of Proudhon, as seen *efore, have *een su*.ect to -uch of thatB)# Perha!s it is .ust do"n to the !eculiarities of a fe" individuals# 1uffice to say, anarchists have *een at the forefront of fi+htin+ fascisand ca!italis- and there "e re-ain; 1o after -uch ra-*lin+, no real conclusion other than the fact that there can *e no 3ri+ht"in+4 anarchis- and that "hile, in A-erica, there is a tendency *y li*erals and the -edia to !roclai- the ri+ht-"in+ !o!ulists as *ein+ 3anti-+overn-ent4 they are, in fact, 3antithis-+overn-ent4B 6ot a !ee! fro- the- "hen the ,ush Funta "as active and increasin+ state !o"er and centralisin+ !o"er even -ore in the $-!erial Presidency# ,ut -ention health-care refor- and "e are on the road to the Third 7eich; Ah, *ut then there is the "hole ne" ri+ht-"in+ atte-!t to re-"rite history (and so-e are re"ritin+ the ,i*le to re-ove Liberal BiasB)# 6a-ely, the notion that fascis- "as 3left"in+#4 2hile this -ost recently has *een associated "ith Fonah Gold*er+>s Liberal Fascism (see 9avid 6ei"ert0s 3?onservatives and fascis-4 and 3'i*eral ascis-: The res!onse4 for +ood articles on Gold*er+), its roots !ro*a*ly lie -ore in von 8aye&0s 19H0s The Road to erfdom and is no" !ercolatin+ into the -ainstrea- via the ri+ht-"in+ noise--achine#

6ot that von 8aye&0s thesis "as convincin+, +iven that his -entor von %ises !raised fascis- in the 1920s (it 3cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aiming at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has, for the moment, saved European civilisation. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live eternally in history 4)# <r the !raise and su!!ort the ri+ht-"in+ hea!ed on %ussolini, 8itler and ranco (*efore they started to ste! on their toes and areas of interest)# ?an "e for+et the then and no" conservative !ail" Mail0s urrah for the Blac!shirts" headline of I Fuly 195HA <r the !ro-esta*lish-ent su!!ort for $talian fascisthe li&es of ?arlo Tresca had to fi+ht in the 1920s and 1950s A-ericaA <f course not# 8o"ever, .ust *ecause so-ethin+ is o*vious nonsense "ill it -ean that it "ill not +ain +round (loo& "hat ha!!ened to 3li*ertarian4 in A-erica as an e@a-!le)# The ri+ht are tryin+ to refra-e the de*ate and it is i-!ortant to resist it# 1o here is the -aterial on refutin+ Proudhon "as 3of the ri+ht4 (the references -ay *e a *it cry!ticB) / and tal&in+ of hi-, $ should !oint to this revie" of a *oo& on the occu!ied factories in Ar+entina# This =uote has a distinctly Proudhonian feel to it: #e always said the factory isn$t ours. #e are using it, but it belongs to the community. Jntil $ *lo+ a+ain, *e seein+ you; Proudhon and the Right As "ith -any influential thin&ers, !ost-death -any see& to a!!ro!riate Proudhon for their o"n reasons or, for !olitical ene-ies, to associate hi- "ith ideolo+ies that they ha!!en to disli&e# 1o-e on the ri+ht see& to i-!ose the la*el ri+htist on the rench-an and so-eti-es they are .oined *y ene-ies of anarchis- on the left# 1uffice to say, sections of the ri+ht (for "hatever reason *est &no"n to the-selves) have re!eatedly atte-!ted to a!!ro!riate left-"in+ ter-s, events and !eo!le to its cause# The list is lon+ (includin+ o@y-orons li&e 36ational ,olshevis-4, 36ational 1ocialis-4, 3Anarcho-?a!italis-4) and all are false# That Proudhon "as sin+led out *y rench ri+ht"in+ers does not -ean -uch in ter-s of his ideas, after all in the late %&'(s and during the war, fascist groups too tried to claim the heritage by honouring the )ommunards as *victims of the +epublic, and nationalist rebels. K1L 2hile Proudhon -ay not have *een consistently li*ertarian in all as!ects of his thou+hts (his se@is- and racis-, -ost o*viously), these "ere in contradiction to his e@!ressed ideals# The notion that Proudhon "as of the ri+ht si-!ly cannot *e sustained *y loo&in+ at his ideas as a "hole# That these atte-!ts are nonsense can *e seen fro- the fact that his *i++est influence "as on the li*ertarian socialist tradition# 1adly, it is necessary to refute such clai-s for althou+h such !ositions are, ri+htly, i+nored *y those "ho &no" Proudhon0s ideas they +et re!eated *y a fe"# Proudhon as Conservative 9ue to certain ele-ents of his thou+ht (such as his defence of traditional -arria+e and !atriarchy) and his attac&s on *oth state socialis- and statist de-ocracy, so-e on the ri+ht tried to a!!ro!riate Proudhon for reaction after his death# As Alan 7itter notes, -s.uch pronouncements -by conservatives. could hardly be convincing, since they deliberately ignored /roudhon,s ideas. 1u*se=uent atte-!ts *y the ri+ht, nota*ly *y those around Cercle Proudhon (founded in rance in 1911) did at least try to relate their clai-s to Proudhon0s "or&# 8o"ever, such -aterial "as far too selective in its a!!roach and so the thesis of reactionaries . . . does not withstand e0amination as it totally neglects some of his most clearly stated teachings, such as condemnation of tradition and the )hurch. $t also twists the meaning of those of /roudhon,s teachings it does consider.K2L

,en.a-in Tuc&er s!o&e for all li*ertarians "hen he ar+ued that Cercle Proudhon !ur!osely -isre!resented Proudhon0s vie"s: Every great writer who has criticised democracy and who, being in his grave, cannot enter protest, is listed as a royalist, a nationalist, and an anti12reyfusard. )hief among these helpless victims is the foremost of all 3narchists, to whom these impudent young rascals constantly refer as notre grand Proudhon . . . 4f course democracy is an easy mar! for this new party, and it finds its chief delight in pounding the philosopher of democracy, +ousseau. 5ow, nobody ever pounded +ousseau as effectively as /roudhon did, and in that fact the Cercle Proudhon finds its e0cuse. But it is not to be inferred that, because /roudhon destroyed +ousseau,s theory of the social contract, he did not believe in the advisability of a social contract, or would uphold a monarchy in e0acting an oath of allegiance. 4n the contrary, after demonstrating the falsity of +ousseau,s claim that e0isting society is founded on contract, he proceeded to find fault with e0isting society for the very reason that it is not so founded, and endeavoured to substitute for e0isting society, or to develop out of it, or to dissolve it in, a society having voluntary contract for its base. 3ll this, however, is carefully concealed by the Cercle Proudhon. 6t freely 7uotes and prints /roudhon,s attac!s on +ousseau, but utterly ignores the affirmative statements of its stolen hero . . . 6f, in face of it, it should be decided that /roudhon is their property, we might well say . . . 8 La proprit, cest le vol. #ith it in hand, the 3narchists answer to )harles 9aurras and all his followers8 5o, the author of Ide Gnrale de la Rvolution au Dix-neuvime icle is not your great /roudhon: he is 4;+<. K5L 1uffice to say, durin+ his lifeti-e no one in the rench ?onservative ri+ht tried to associate the-selves "ith Proudhon#KHL Proudhon as #arbinger of Fascism 6e@t to !roclai- Proudhon as a -e-*er of the ri+ht "as A-erican 'i*eral F# 1al"yn 1cha!iro for "ho- he "as a arbinger of Fascism.K5L This article is -ostly for+otten (and ri+htly so), *ut 1cha!iro0s clai-s have so-e currency in the 'eninist left than&s to 8al 9ra!er utilisin+ it to !roclai- The 9yth of 3narchist Libertarianism in his -isleadin+ !a-!hlet The T$o ouls of ocialism# 2hat is 1cha!iro0s thesisA That there are sinister overtones that haunt Proudhon0s "or& and he was a prophet of future discontents . . . The true significance of his writings can be seen only in the light of the political and social movement of our day !nown as fascism. $n su--ary: 6t is the thesis of this article that the great French polemist, /roudhon, was a harbinger of fascist ideas. 4therwise his views would be as bewildering to us as they were to his contemporaries. (!# M1M, !# M55, !!# M55-H) 1cha!iro0s article is the "orse &ind of anachronis-, see&in+ to (re-)define Proudhon in ter-s of an ideolo+y that did not co-e into e@istence until M0 years after his death# A -ove-ent, in fact, "hich "ould never have a!!eared if Proudhon0s -utualis- had *een successful as its erosion of the state and ca!italis- "ould have re-oved the soil u!on "hich fascis- +re"# Cven 1cha!iro had to ad-it to so-e difficulties in his case, such as the a"&"ard fact that Proudhon0s 3teachings -were. misunderstood as anarchy by his disciples (!# M5M) and that there "as no hint of the totalitarian corporative state in /roudhon,s writings. K6L (!# M56) There are -any reasons "hy 1cha!iro0s !ers!ective on Proudhon failed to convince -ost !eo!le# Cven a cursorily loo& at his article sho"s its "ea&ness# 7ather than e@a-ine all of Proudhon0s "or&, he concentrates on his corres!ondence and t"o of his lesser &no"n "or&s# That, in itself, su++ests that 1cha!iro is cherry-!ic&in+ -aterial# ,y i+norin+ Proudhon0s &ey contri*utions to the socialist -ove-ent and "hich secured his !lace in li*ertarian history he cannot *ut !roduce a distorted !icture# irst, it -ust *e ac&no"led+ed that 1cha!iro "as ri+ht to note that Proudhon "as not a consistent e+alitarian and so not a consistent li*ertarian# Proudhon0s se@is- and racisare -ost o*vious e@a-!les of this# Anarchists have ar+ued the sa-e# 8is ideas reflected his *ac&+round and "hile he *ro&e "ith -any of the assu-!tions and !re.udices of his

a+e, he did succeed "ith all of the-# 8o"ever, to +o fro- this to !roclai- that Proudhon "as a !roto-fascist is an ar+u-ent that rests on a wea! foundation. Fascists see! dictatorship, which /roudhon hated. Fascists spurn individual freedom, which to /roudhon was the greatest good. These differences between /roudhon and the fascists ma!e the resemblances in their thought too superficial to serve as proof that their ob=ectives are the same. KML 1econd, and far -ore i-!ortant, "hat te@ts and letters 1cha!iro does utilise he t"ists considera*ly and are usually =uoted co-!letely out of conte@t# <ften he fails to =uote Proudhon, instead su--arisin+ "hat he clai-s Proudhon thin&s# Jnsur!risin+ly, these 3su--aries4 are usually -isleadin+# The -ain *asis of his thesis is La R%volution sociale demontr%e &ar le Cou& d'(tat du ) decembre, "ritten *y Proudhon after the 1I51 cou! *y 'ouis 6a!oleon in "hich he dissolved the 6ational Asse-*ly# 1cha!iro is at !ains to su++est this "or& sho"s Proudhon0s fascist side, as, it is clai-ed, /roudhon hailed the overthrow of the <econd +epublic as a great step of progress and e0tolled Louis 5apoleon as the hope of revolutionary France. (!# M16) Proudhon, as re!resentative of the !etit-*our+eoisie, supported the coup d,etat of Louis 5apoleon as "ell as dictatorial government (!# M56) All this is nonsense# 1cha!iro !roclai-s that Proudhon welcomed the constitution of the <econd Empire that established the dictatorship of Louis 5apoleon. (!# M2M) The 1econd C-!ire "as !roclai-ed (*y a !le*iscite in favour of it) in 9ece-*er, 1I52, after Proudhon0s *oo& "as !u*lished and *y Autu-n 1I52 he had become convinced that the president was choosing the path of reaction, and was advancing the interests not of the wor!ers, but of the traditional financial and social elites. KIL 6or did he su!!ort the cou!, rather callin+ it the crime K9L and -ade it clear in his 1I52 "or& that -t.he coup d,>tat is accomplished. 6 do not accept it, without doubt, but 6 say that, France, having entered willingly or by force on this path, it is necessary it does not leave it with a retrograde movement, but in a direction correctly understood as !or"ard.K10L Proudhon "as res!ondin+ to an event he not only o!!osed, *ut !redicted, K11L tryin+ to -a&e the *est of a *ad situation# 8e sa" his *oo& as the only practical course to pursue, given that the coup d,>tat had already occurred and had little chance of being reversed. K12L And that is the !ro*le-: the cou! had !o!ular su!!ort# This is one of the -any !ertinent facts 1cha!iro fails to -ention# 'ouis-6a!oleon "as the de-ocratically elected President of the 7e!u*lic and he dissolved a 6ational Asse-*ly "hich had restricted universal suffra+e# 8e re-esta*lished universal suffra+e and used a !le*iscite on the 20th of 9ece-*er to confir- his actions as "ell the e@tension of his -andate for 10 years (his transfor-ation into C-!eror a year later "as si-ilarly over"hel-in+ly a!!roved *y a !le*iscite)# K15L 1adly 1cha!iro failed to discuss "hat the correct de-ocratic !osition on such events "ould *e# 9oes he res!ect the referendu- resultsA <r does he re.ect the "ishes of the -a.orityA $f the for-er, does authoritarian rule *eco-e acce!ta*le if ratified *y the -assesA $f the later, surely that is unde-ocraticA 2hile Proudhon +ra!!led "ith such issues, 1cha!iro re-ained silent# 8e did find ti-e to da-n Proudhon0s ne+ative co--ents a+ainst 3the -asses4 "hich su!!orted the cou! as elitist "hile also da-nin+ hi- for res!ectin+ the over"hel-in+ referendu- result and ur+in+ 6a!oleon to use his -andate for socioecono-ic refor-B ?learly, Proudhon could not "inB 1o, for 1cha!iro, *oth o!!osin+ and fatalistically acce!tin+ the results of a referendu- "hich destroys a de-ocracy -a&es you anti-de-ocratic; 2hile o!!osin+ the cou! and the ne" re+i-e, Proudhon "as "ell a"are that 6a!oleon had -assive !u*lic su!!ort and that resistance "as futile# This "as "hat drove his *oo&, to try and +et 6a!oleon to use the o*vious -andate fro- the referendu- su!!ortin+ his cou! to further refor-#K1HL As he !ut it, 6a!oleon0s mandate is to procure either revolution or counter1revolution.K15L $n effect, Proudhon tried to convince 6a!oleon0s re+i-e to co--it suicide *y i-!le-entin+ !olitical, econo-ic and social refor-s that "ould, eventually, !roduce a li*ertarian society# Fust as he had in 1I51 called u!on the *our+eoisie to !ursue the !ath of !eaceful social transfor-ation and li=uidate itself *y so

doin+# $n *oth cases, the ar+u-ents "ere !rovo&ed *y a desire to -a&e the *est of a *ad situation and to avoid -ore violence# Proudhon did not -a&e the decision to "rite his *oo& li+htly# As Alan 7itter notes, he de*ated "hether to !u*lish his "or&, considerin+ colla*oration as intrinsically evil and at one sta+e re.ected it on grounds of principle. The finished "or& shows that /roudhon,s 7ualms were not confined to his preliminary =ottings and he went out of his way to prevent unfavourable conse7uences from collaboration by strictly limiting the conditions under which it could occur. ence, despite the caricatures, /roudhon was no sycophantic admirer of the /rince /resident, willing to go to any lengths to curry favour. 4n the contrary, the dictator would have to go to e0traordinarily far in /roudhon,s direction to enlist his support. e would have to reform the constitution by ma!ing it more democratic and carry out social ands economic, as well as political reform. $f this "as not done, then mutualist collaboration is to be denied and the boo!, strictly interpreted, does rule out collaboration. <o e0acting are the conditions set for collaboration that they could not possibly be met. K16L Jlti-ately, Proudhon lon+-standin+ fears a*out 6a!oleon "ere confir-ed# The ne" re+i-e sided "ith the rulin+ elite: #here does the ?nd of 2ecember come from@ From the +evolution. #hat does it represent@ the counter1revolution K1ML 2hether Proudhon "as "ise to ur+e 6a!oleon to use his -andate for refor-, even "ith the nu-erous conditions he s!ecified, is a -oot-!oint# T"o thin+s are true# irst, it allo"ed Proudhon0s -any ene-ies to distort his ideas# 1econd, 1cha!iro0s account of the "or& and "hat -otivated it is si-!ly false# 1uffice to say, Proudhon0s doo-ed atte-!t to s"ay 6a!oleon did not last lon+ and he turned to his !osition of unre-ittin+ hostility to the re+i-e# The ne@t &ey "or& for 1cha!iro is Proudhon0s 1I61 *oo& La *uerre et la Pai+, 8ere he distorts its ar+u-ent and turns a *oo& see&in+ to end "ar once and for all into a +lorification of eternal conflictB This is, in !art, -ade easier *y Proudhon0s !resentation of his ar+u-ents, "hen he discusses the +ood and *ad sides of so-ethin+ *efore dra"in+ his conclusions# This laid hi- o!en to distortions *y %ar@ in 1IH6 "hen he utilised it in "stem of (conomical Contradictions# A!!lyin+ it a+ain in 1I61 +ave his -any critics a-*le o!!ortunity to distort his ideas# 8is e@!osition of the +ood side of "ar "as *lo"n out of !ro!ortion and -ade to loo& li&e the its sole !ur!ose "hile his e@!oundin+ on "ar0s *ad side and the *oo&0s connections "ith his overall social theory "ere i+nored# 1cha!iro follo"s this dishonest !ath, utterly failin+ to -ention Proudhon0s ne+ative co--ents on "ar (3lmost every page of La Guerre et la paix contains a glorification of war as an ideal and as an institution) and its conclusions (6n the view of /roudhon war was not a social evil that would be eradicated in the course of human progress. )# Proudhon was a glorifier of war for its own sa!e and his "or& nothin+ -ore than a hymn to war, intoned in a more passionate !ey than anything produced by the fascists of our time. (!# M50, !# M29) As 7o*ert '# 8off-an notes, the *oo& begins with lyrical praise of war . . . but ends by condemning war without reservation . . . some may not have read the reversal in the second part . . . where the praise of war at the beginning serves to set the stage for his conclusion that war is obsolete. Given this, it is difficult to see how his purpose and overall conception could have been mista!en by any who read the whole boo! with care.K1IL Though his aim was e0plicitly to show how civilisation progressed from war to peace, ar+ued Fac& 8ay"ard, his e0tended initial praise for war . . . made his subse7uent glorification of peace an anticlima0. K19L Geor+e 2oodcoc& a+reed, notin+ that the *asic ar+u-ent of the *oo& "as that "ar had *eco-e unreformable: the time has come for it to be superseded and for the urges that underlie it to be transformed in a positive direction $ndeed the anti1militarist who has not grown so impatient as to put aside the boo! finds the author swinging suddenly to his side. Proudhon0s ai- "as to sho" that war is a social phenomenon whose nature must be understood before one can tal! of bringing it to an end. 8e also lin&ed "ar to the econo-ic structure to society and so, in modern times, war is the conse7uence of the capitalist regime, which produces economic chaos. The only way to remedy this situation is to renew the economic e7uilibrium between the members of society. K20L

Thus "e find the *oo& ar+uin+, contra-1cha!iro, that the end o! militarism is the mission of the nineteenth century, under pain of indefinite decadence. K21L $n fact, the final "ords of the "or& are: umanity alone is large, it is infallible. owever, 6 believe 6 have the capacity to say on its behalf8 #umanit$ does not "ant an$ more "ar. This "as !ossi*le *ecause the +evolution made the public conscience the only interpreter of right, the only =udge of temporal and the only sovereign, which constitutes the true democracy and mar!ed the end of priesthood and militarism. K22L or Proudhon, -odern "ar can never be anything other than war fought in the name of e0ploitation and property and once a =ust economic system has been established between both nations and individuals, war has no further function on earth. This tas& "as not aided *y "ar: #hat we must do now is organise economic forces. #hat use would war and its bloody tribunal be in helping to solve this new problem@K25L Proudhon "as clear that "hat is wanted today is T E /E3)E. The world understands and desires no other. 8o"ever, if peace will become a serious reality beyond the reach of any attac! then -ore is re=uired than !olitical a+ree-ents# $t re=uires econo-ic refor-: The wor!ers alone are capable of putting an end to war by creating economic e7uilibrium. This presupposes a radical revolution in ideas and morals. K2HL Proudhon0s ai- "as to e@!lain "hy "ar ha!!ens in order to transcend it and so to be done with war, it is not enough to declaim against it li!e the pacifists. K25L $n su--ary: 6f in=ustice was the cause of war, it followed that conflict could not be eliminated until society was reorganised along egalitarian lines. /roudhon had wanted to prove that the reign of political economy would be the reign of peace, finding it difficult to believe that people really thought he was defending militarism. K26L ?learly, 1cha!iro0s co--ent that Proudhon0s advocacy of personal dictatorship and his laudation of militarism can hardly be e7ualled in the reactionary writings of his or of our day (!# M52) is totally at odds "ith reality# 2hat of his other char+esA These a-ount to a hysterical clai- that Proudhon unleashed a furious, almost obscene, assault on . . . popular sovereignty, natural rights, constitutions, parliaments, universal manhood suffrage, and ma=ority rule. (!# M25) That it "as Proudhon0s hatred of socialism "hich drove him to advocate anarchy as its very opposite. #hat he really saw in anarchy was not a solution of social problems but an antidote to socialism. (!# M52) /roudhon,s opposition to democracy arose from his contempt of the common man. (!# M2H) 8is contempt and hatred of democracy overflowed all decent bounds, and he descended to a degree of disgusting vilification, reached only by the fascists of our day. (!# M2H) $t "ould *e churlish to !oint out that Proudhon consistently and re!eatedly called hi-self a socialist# $t "ould also *e churlish to !oint to Proudhon0s re!eated call for "or&ers associations are effective evidence to refute 1cha!iro0s assertion that Proudhon0s anticapitalism was not the same as that of the socialists who attac!ed capitalism primarily as a system of production. e launched his attac! on capitalism as a system of e0change. (!# M22) $t should *e stressed that Proudhon "as only o!!osed to centralised for-s of de-ocracy and "as in favour of a decentralised de-ocratic re+i-e# As he !ut it in 1IH9: 6 am a republican and 6 have proved it . . . 6 am a democrat and my repeated e0planations of what 6 mean by anarchy testify to this fact. T"elve years later, he stressed that he re-ained what 6 will always be . . . a repu%lican, a democrat even, and a socialist into the bargain. K2ML 8is -utualist society "as funda-entally de-ocratic: #e have, then, not an abstract sovereignty of the people, as in the )onstitution of %A&' and subse7uent constitutions, or as in +ousseau,s <ocial )ontract, but an effective sovereignty of the wor!ing, reigning, governing masses . . . 6n this the wor!ing masses are truly, positively and effectively sovereign. 6ndeed, how could it be otherwise if they are in charge of the whole economic system including labour, capital, credit, property and wealth@ K2IL

Thus universal suffrage provides us, on a reduced scale, or better still, in an embryonic state, with the complete system of future society. 6f it is reduced to the people nominating a few hundred deputies who have no initiative . . . social sovereignty becomes a mere fiction and the +evolution is strangled at birth. As Proudhon !ut it, my brand of democracy is not the same as that of the democrats K29L and he re.ected that for- of centralised statist de-ocracy "hich results in the !eo!le effectively votin+ for a ruler every H years (The destruction of natural groups in electoral transactions will be the moral destruction of the nation, the ruin of universal suffrage, the negation of the thought of the +evolution.K50L) 8enri de 'u*ac .ust stated the o*vious: is invectives against democracy were not those of a counter1revolutionary. They were aimed at what he himself called *the false democracy, . . . The attac!ed an apparently liberal *pseudo1democracy, which *was not economic and social, . . . *a Bacobinical democracy, Proudhon did not want to destroy, but complete, the wor! of %AC& and "hile he had a grudge against the *old democracy,, the democracy of +obespierre and 9arat he re!eatedly contrasted it with a *young democracy,, which was a *social democracy., K51L 1o althou+h Proudhon criticised *oth centralised de-ocracy and state socialis-, he still considered hi-self a de-ocrat and socialist: #e are also democracy and socialism: we may at times laugh at both the names and the personnel, but what those words cover and what those people stand for belong to us also: we must be careful of them" K52L 2hat of the clai- that he vie"ed the 3-asses4 in conte-!tA ?onte@t is i-!ortant here# As 2oodcoc& notes, after the plebiscite confirming Louis 5apoleon in power his faith in the people . . . fell . . . to its lowest level . . . no epithet was too severe for the classes in whom he had seen the great hope of humanity. K55L This !eriod sa" hi- use such ter-s as the vile multitude and the rabbleK5HL 2e can only "onder "hat 1cha!iro "ould have "ritten if Proudhon had !roclai-ed the "isdo- of the -asses in su!!ortin+ 6a!oleonB $n such circu-stances, it see-s far -ore de-ocratic to *e-oan the foolishness of the -asses than su++est that cou! of 9ece-*er 10th and the 1econd C-!ire "ere le+iti-ate *ecause the over"hel-in+ -a.ority of voters su!!orted *oth# Jlti-ately, 1cha!iro see-s to for+et that *ein+ a de-ocrat does not -ean you auto-atically +enuflect *efore the -a.ority re+ardless of the decisions that -a.ority -a&es# 6or does it *lind you that "or&in+ class !eo!le are sha!ed in a ne+ative "ay *y the o!!ression and e@!loitation "e are su*.ected to and that can, and does, e@!ress itself in less that li*eral "ays# $t does not -ean that Proudhon re.ected the a*ility of the -asses to +overn the-selves, si-!ly that they can, and do, -a&e serious -ista&es and that certain !olitical for-s (such as centralised de-ocracy) confound these errors and -a&e the- -ore li&ely# Jlti-ately, "hile -asses had a tendency to su!!ort autocratic de-a+o+ues at ti-es (li&e 'ouis 6a!oleonB), for Proudhon the army of liberty and progress will always be formed by the people, by virtue of their sub=ection and poverty. Labour is republican by nature and would be contradictory if it were otherwise. K55L Then there is the =uestion of racis-# Given that 1cha!iro see&s to !resent Proudhon as a !roto-6a:i, he indicates only t"o anti-1e-itic out-*ursts fro- his !u*lic "or&s# That, in itself, should confir- the "ea&ness of 1cha!iro0s !osition# As historian 1harif Ge-ie su--arises, racism was never the basis of /roudhon,s political thin!ing K56L "hile Graha- Purchase correctly notes that 3anti1semitism formed no part of /roudhon,s revolutionary programme.K5ML As Proudhon !ut it in one of his -ost "idely read "or&s: There will no longer be nationality, no longer fatherland, in the political sense of the words8 they will mean only places of birth. 9an, of whatever race or colour he may be, is an inhabitant of the universe: citiDenship is everywhere an ac7uired right. K5IL $t is hard to thin& of a 6a:i !roclai-in+ that, never -ind the ho!e that nationalities will increasingly disappear under the impact of economic organisation, the decentralisation of <tates, intermarriage between races and intercontinental communication. or Proudhon: #here man finds =ustice, there is his fatherland K59L

This is not to su++est that Proudhon0s !ersonal *i+otry does not a!!ear in his !u*lic "or& / it occasionally does# 8o"ever, "hat *eco-es o*vious fro- readin+ his "or&s is that any such out*ursts are *oth rare and asides# Jnli&e 6a:is-, they are not at the core of his !olitics# To e=uate the e@tre-ely infre=uent !assin+ racist (usually anti-1e-itic) re-ar& or caricature "ith the syste-atic racis- of the 6a:is is si-!ly incredulous# Particularly "hen Proudhon re!eatedly !roclai-ed in his "or&s his su!!ort for e=uality *et"een races# Jlti-ately as vile, re!rehensi*le, and deservin+ of conde-nation as they are, the racist and se@ist re-ar&s -ade *y Proudhon should not *e +rounds for dis-issin+ his entire "or& (or, for that -atter, the entirety of anarchist theoryB)# Particularly as, firstly, -ost of the- surfaced lon+ after his death "ith the !u*lication of his !rivate corres!ondence and note*oo&s and, secondly, they are in direct contradiction to his o"n li*ertarian !rinci!les ("hich included, it -ust *e stressed, !u*lic state-ents in favour of e=uality *et"een all races)# $t "ould ta&e too lon+ to refute all of 1cha!iro0s other attac&s on Proudhon, e@ce!t to note that they re!eat his usual techni=ue of selective =uotin+# 1uffice to say to argue that /roudhon was a proto1fascist suggests that one has never loo!ed seriously at /roudhon,s writings.KH0L Proudhon as free-market ca&italist 2hat of the free--ar&et ri+htA Atte-!ts have *een -ade to su++est that Proudhon "as a !recursor of the !ro!ertarians (the so-called 3li*ertarians4 of the ri+ht)# 8istorian ,ernard %oss discounts Proudhon0s socialis- (althou+h he sought an associationist alternative to capitalism and to end the e0ploitation of the labouring classes) *ecause his regulating principles were more libertarian than socialist. Thus Proudhon "as a founder of libertarian anarchism KH1L 1harif Ge-ie su++ests that /roudhon proposed a version of mar!et capitalism, in which independent families would be loosely federated to each other. +ather than thin!ing in terms of wor!ers, co1 operatives, /roudhon understood *association, as the creation of ban!ing and credit facilities for small farmers and wor!shop owners. KH2L rancis 2heen, in his *io+ra!hy of %ar@, calls Proudhon a libertarian anarchist.KH5L 2e can safely assu-e that *y 3li*ertarian4, the li&es of %oss and 2heen are usin+ it in the A-erican sense of advocates of laisseD1faire ca!italis- and so toleratin+ the stealin+ of that ter- fro- the left *y the ri+ht# KHHL 1uch clai-s, ter-inolo+ical issues aside, are !re-ised on a *asic -isunderstandin+, na-ely that -ar&ets e=uate to ca!italis- and so a su!!ort for -ar&ets e=uates to a su!!ort for ca!italis-# Eet this hides the &ey definin+ feature of ca!italis-, na-ely "a+e-la*our# Thus ca!italis- is uni=uely -ar&ed *y "a+ela*our, not -ar&ets ("hich !re-date it *y centuries)# Thus it is !ossi*le for Proudhon to su!!ort -ar&ets "hile *ein+, at the sa-e ti-e, a socialist# Jnsur!risin+ly, then, "e find Proudhon ac&no"led+ed as a socialist *y other socialist thin&ers# Thus "e find %ar@ "ritin+ of the socialism of /roudhonKH5L "hile for Cn+els there "as the /roudhon school of <ocialism.KH6L ,a&unin tal&ed a*out Proudhon0s socialism, based on individual and collective liberty and upon the spontaneous action of free associations.KHML or Dro!ot&in, Proudhon laid anew the foundations of 3narchism (<ocialism without government)#KHIL 2hile it could *e ar+ued that the li&es of 2heen are not socialists and, as such, could *e e@cused for confusin+ ca!italis- "ith -ar&ets the sa-e cannot *e e@tended to %ar@ists "ho should, !resu-a*ly, &no" *etter# Eet "e find 9onny Gluc&stein assertin+ "ith casual a*andon that Proudhon0s ideas are easily recognisable as the precursor of neo1liberal economics today. But /roudhon,s ideas were located in a different conte0t and so too! a far more radical form when adopted by the male artisan class. KH9L 6ot only does this i+nore %ar@0s o"n focus on "a+e-la*our as the uni=ue identifier for ca!italis-, it also i+nores the reality of neo-li*eralis-#

1ince "hen did neo-li*eralis- refrain fro- usin+ the state to i-!ose its refor-s and s&e" the -ar&et in favour of the ca!italist classA 2hen has the ca!italist state ever left "or&in+ class !eo!le alone "hen they act for the-selvesA 2hen has an advocate of neo-li*eral econo-ics ever ar+ued that that idol of laisse:-faire ca!italis-, the la" of su!!ly and de-and, "as a deceitful law . . . suitable only for assuring the victory of the strong over the wea!, of those who own property over those who own nothing AK50L <r denounced ca!italist fir-s *ecause they result in the "or&er *ein+ subordinated, e0ploited8 his permanent condition is one of obedience and so !eo!le are related as subordinates and superiors "ith two . . . castes of masters and wage1wor!ers, which is repugnant to a free and democratic society and ur+ed co-o!eratives to re!lace the-AK51L <r su++ested that "e shall never have real wor!ingman,s associations until the government learns that public services should neither be operated by itself or handed over to private stoc! companies: but should be leased on contract to organised and responsible companies of wor!ersAK52L 6or "ould an ideolo+ue for laisse:-faire ca!italis- *e ha!!y "ith an a+roindustrial federation nor "ould they advocate re+ulation of -ar&ets: The advocates of mutualism are as familiar as anyone with the laws of suppl$ and demand and they will be careful not to infringe them. 2etailed and fre7uently reviewed statistics, precise information about needs and living standards, an honest brea!down of cost prices . . . the fi0ing after amicable discussion of a maximum and minimum profit margin, ta!ing into account the ris!s involved, the organising of regulating societies: these things, roughly spea!ing, constitute all the measures by which they hope to regulate the mar!et. K55L And "hat neo-li*eral .ournal "ould have #hat is the capitalist@ Everything" #hat should he be@ 5othing" as its *anner -ottoAK5HL Jnsur!risin+ly, Proudhon had nothin+ *ut conte-!t for the neo-li*erals of his ti-e and they for hi-#K55L 8e reco+nised the class *asis of -ainstrea- econo-ic ideolo+y: /olitical economy, as taught by 99. <ay, +ossi, Blan7ui, #olovs!i, )hevalier, etc., is only the economy of the property1owners, and its application to society inevitably and organically gives birth to misery.K56L As such, clai-s that Proudhon "as a !ro!ertarian or a su!!orter of neo-li*eralis- si-!ly -isunderstand *oth ca!italis- and Proudhon0s ideas# $n reality, he !ro!osed a version of -ar&et socialis- *ased on "or&ers0 co-o!eratives and their federation#K5ML 2e "ill leave the last "ord to Proudhon: The enemies of society are Economists.K5IL

K1L To-es, !# 19M K2L 7itter, !# M, !!# 9-10 K5L /roudhon and +oyalism, The .e$ Free$oman, <cto*er 1st, 1915 KHL %aurice A+ulhon re!orts a ty!ical e@a-!le of this anti!athy: a conservative provincial newspaper for a time considered it amusing to introduce its accounts of violence or larceny with headlines such as *9onsieur /roudhon,s lessons do not fall upon deaf ears, or *3nother /roudhonian highwayman", (The Re&ublican (+&eriment/ 0121-3) (?a-*rid+e Jniversity Press, 19I5) !# 9I) K5L /ierre Boseph /roudhon, arbinger of Fascism, The 4merican #istorical Revie$, Nol# 50, 6o# H (Ful#, 19H5), !!# M1H-M5M# All =uotes in this section, unless other"ise indicated, are fro- this article#

10

K6L 1cha!iro did not e@!lain the for-er "hile the latter "as *ecause the 3 economic condition of France, in his day, was such that a totalitarian state of the fascist type was inconceivable. (!# M56) KML 7itter, !!# 9-10 KIL Nincent, !# 206 K9L =uoted *y 7itter, !# 1IM K10L =uoted *y Nincent, !# 201 K11L Proudhon had, fro- 1IHI on"ards, o!!osed *oth the creation of a Presidential !osition ("hich he vie"ed as a threat to li*erty and essential %onarchical in nature) and 'ouis-6a!oleon (as a !o"er-see&er), !redictin+ that the Presidency "ould destroy the re!u*lic# 1cha!iro fails to credit Proudhon0s foresi+ht on *oth issues# K12L Nincent, !# 201 K15L %ar@ did not =uestion the validity of the !le*iscites, ar+uin+ that the Bonaparte who dispersed -the 3ssembly. is the chosen of peasantry. (M(R/ !!# 60M-I) 1ee section .'.& of 4F45 for the confusions %ar@ +ets into tryin+ to s=uee:e the cou! into his ideolo+ical fra-e"or&# K1HL the government of Louis15apoleon Bonaparte is condemned by the seven and a half million votes which absolved it, to do great things and, one way or another, to introduce all the reforms of socialism. (=uoted *y 8y-ans, Pierre-6ose&h Proudhon, !# 205) K15L =uoted *y Nincent, !# 205 K16L 7itter, !!# 1IM-I K1ML =uoted *y Nincent, !# 206 K1IL Revolutionar" 6ustice,!!# 210-1 K19L 8ay"ard, !# 215 K20L Proudhon, !# 255, !# 25H, 255, !# 25H K21L =uoted *y 2oodcoc&, !# 255 K22L La *uerre et la Pai+ (<euvres ?o-!lOtes, vol# P$N), !# 550, !# 52I K25L K2HL elected 7ritings of Pierre-6ose&h Proudhon ( 7), !# 211, !!# 211-2 7, !# 21H

K25L =uoted *y Chren*er+, !# 1H5 K26L Chren*er+, !# 1H5 K2ML K2IL K29L 7, !# 195, !# 201 7, !!# 116-M 7, !# 125, !# 200

11

K50L =uoted *y Nincent, !# 215 K51L The 8n-Mar+ian ocialist, !# 2I, !# 29

K52L =uoted *y de 'u*ac, !!# 29-50 K55L Pierre-6ose&h Proudhon: 4 Biogra&h", !# 1IH K5HL =uoted *y 2oodcoc&, Proudhon, !# 1IH K55L 7, !# 1M9

K56L Ge-ie, !!#200-1 K5ML Graha-, !# @@@vi K5IL *eneral 9dea, !# 2I5 K59L =uoted *y 8ay"ard, !# 215 KH0L Nincent, !# 25H KH1L The 4merican #istorical Revie$, Nol# 90, 6o# 5 (Fune 19I5), !# 69M KH2L Ge-ie, !# 15I KH5L :arl Mar+ ( ourth Cstate, 1999), !# 61 KHHL The very label *libertarianism, has been captured from the left by free1mar!et liberalism. (1teven 'u&es, E7uality and Liberty8 9ust They )onflict@ , !!# HI-66, Political Theor" Toda" (Polity Press, 1991), 9avid 8eld (ed#), !# 55) 1o to use the terlibertarian anarchist or libertarian anarchism sho"s a shoc&in+ i+norance of the history of the ter- 3li*ertarian4 (not to -ention the history and ideas of anarchis-B)# To an anarchist eye, it is an unnecessary redundancy and li&e "ritin+ Proudhon "as a libertarian libertarian B KH5L Ca&ital, vol# 1, !# 161f KH6L M(R, !# 625 KHML Michael Bakunin: elected 7ritings (Fonathan ?a!e, 19M5), !# 100

KHIL 9odern <cience, !!# 26-M KH9L Gluc&stein, !# M2 K50L =uoted *y 7itter, !# 121 K51L *eneral 9dea, !!# 215-216 K52L =uoted *y 9ou+las, !# H5 K55L 7, !# M0

K5HL As added to Le Re&r%sentant du Peu&le in Au+ust 1IHI "here it .oined #hat is the /roducer@ 5othing. #hat should he be@ Everything" (=uoted *y 2oodcoc&, Proudhon, !# 125, !# 156)

12

K55L The school of <ay, Proudhon ar+ued, "as the chief focus of counter1revolution and has for ten years past seemed to e0ist only to protect and applaud the e0ecrable wor! of the monopolists of money and necessities, deepening more and more the obscurity of a science -economics. naturally difficult and full of complications. (*eneral 9dea, !# 225) All of "hich see-s sadly too a!!lica*le todayB K56L =uoted *y de 'u*ac, !# 190fn K5ML There is a certain irony to see the then Thatcherite Fohn Gray state, a+ainst the socialist order (e=uated, of course, to central economic planning), that the -ar&et (e=uated, of course, "ith ca!italis-) may be considered the paradigm of a spontaneous social order and to illustrate /roudhon,s dictum, *Liberty is the mother of order., (Liberalism (<!en Jniversity Press), 2nd edition, 1995, !# 6I) Quotin+ a socialist to defend ca!italis- is a !arado@ Proudhon "ould have savouredB Gray, it should *e noted, su*se=uently re.ected neo-li*eralis- and +ained so-e understandin+ of the actual state i-!osed creation of ca!italis-# (False !a$n: The !elusions of *lobal Ca&italism (Granta ,oo&s, 2002)) K5IL Carnets, vol# 5, !# 209

published in: http://anarchism.pageabode.com/anarcho/anarchism and the right

13