Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
Proudhon’s contribution was of the utmost importance to socialist ideas, due above all to his influence during the period 1840-60, but also his in-depth theoretical analysis - economic philosophy and theory of value - and the originality of several of his arguments.
Rather than providing a full description of his ideas (see Haubtmann 1982, 1988; Vincent 1985), we shall focus on two key points: (1) the issue of the state and of mutualism, and (2) the issue of socialist economic organization. Proudhon is the main contributor to a socialist tradition that puts the state radically into question. In a society characterized by the exploitation of labour by capital, the state, in the same way as capital, had established itself as an autonomous power. Emancipation of society and of labour thus occurs through an upheaval, which establishes an unalienable and spontaneous right overriding any state legislation: the right of direct and reciprocal exchange between workers which guarantees both autonomy and solidarity. Mutualism is the application of this right within society and the socialist economic system.According to Proudhon and in the same way as for other socialist schools of thought, this requires the workers to gain access to the means of production and thus a shake-up of the ownership rules: private property restrains natural and reciprocal exchange thus enables the exploitation of man by man which is theft and thus immoral, because property is sacrosanct. While his views on the subject evolved over time (Proudhon 1846), Proudhon fundamentally opposed private property. However, private property could be maintained in the transition period during which the state remains present albeit within a contractual framework, and could also be used as a counterweight to the power of the state. The new model also advocates associations similar to those suggested by Saint-Simonians between sponsors and partners in a public limited liability company, and the use of promissory notes (instead of metal coins and bank notes) but with a federative structure: an exchange bank should provide everyone with the means to produce when clients have declared their intention to buy the products (proposal of a “Banque du Peuple”, made to the 1848 Luxembourg Commission). Furthermore, no interest is paid in this mutual credit system.
Finally, the Proudhonian model advocates federalism on an agricultural and industrial level, which must progressively dissolve the state and is based on workers’ associations. Abolition of the exploitation of man by man comes with abolition of the exploitation of the government of man and development of an economically and politically decentralized system (hence the deep contention with Blanc and Leroux).The last important point concerns Proudhon’s view on equality. Proudhon argued that the Saint-Simonian position (from each according to his abilities and to each according to his performance) and Fourierian position (from each according to his capital, his work and his skill) are both false and unjust. Capital cannot justify payment: if property or possession can only be justified as being the result of labour, then receiving farm rent would inevitably turn the farmer into a proprietor. As far as remuneration of labour is concerned, Proudhon returns to his theory of “collective force”: payment proportional to work performed is unjust as society on the whole only exchanges products of equal value - individual differences are abolished. Workers are associates and equal, so wages must be equal. Natural inequality is gradually neutralized as the association develops. Property is the only thing that can bring back inequality. When labourers are associated, the right of each is limited by the right of all. As soil is limited, the law of absolute equality takes effect (Proudhon 1840 [1867]: ch. 3, s. 6). With this anti-state mutualism, Proudhon thus developed an “anarchist” line of thought (Knowles 2004), but very different from that of Blanqui. His egalitarian ideas also contrast considerably with the Saint-Simonian and Fourierian approaches - with the exception of their stance on women.