Misplaced Pages

Mutualism (economic theory): Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:30, 13 November 2006 editAnarcho-capitalism (talk | contribs)6,472 edits Mutualist economics: mainstream definition from merriam-webster← Previous edit Latest revision as of 22:48, 28 November 2024 edit undoVif12vf (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users80,063 edits Restored revision 1258583770 by CohenTheBohemian (talk)Tags: Twinkle Undo 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Anarchist school of thought and socialist economic theory}}
:''This article is about the economic theory. For the biological term, see ].''
{{about|the anarchist school of thought and economic theory|the biological term and other uses|Mutualism (disambiguation)}}
{{Anarchism}}
{{use dmy dates|date=July 2019}}
'''Mutualism''' is an ] theory or system, largely associated with ], based on a ] which holds that in extreme ], market competition will cause the market values (prices) of commodities and services to align with the amount of labor embodied in those things. Specifically, mutualism is the political and economic theory that:
{{anarchism sidebar|schools}}
'''Mutualism''' is an ] and anti-capitalist market<ref>Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles W. (2011). ''Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty.'' Brooklyn: Minor Compositions/Autonomedia. pp 5. “…’mutualism’ is now retrospectively used, in the twenty-first century, to refer to most anti-capitalist market anarchists…”</ref> socialist<ref> Fraser, Elizabeth. ''Selected Writings of P. J. Proudhon.'' Anchor Books: USA. 1969. pp 23. “Proudhon’s ’mutualism’ is a socialism of credit and exchange.”</ref> ] that advocates for ] of the ], a ] made up of individual ]s and ]s, and ]. As proponents of the ] and ], mutualists oppose all forms of ], ] and non-nominal ], which they see as relying on the ]. Mutualists seek to construct an economy without ] or ]. They also encourage the establishment of ], which they propose could be supported through the issuance of ] by ]s, with the aim of creating a ].


Mutualism has its roots in the ] of ] and ]. It first developed a practical expression in ]'s community experiments in the United States, which he established according to the principles of ] based on a system of ]. Mutualism was first formulated into a comprehensive economic theory by the French anarchist ], who proposed the abolition of ] and the establishment of a new economic system based on ]. In order to establish such a system, he proposed the creation of a "People's Bank" that could issue mutual credit to workers and eventually replace the ]; although his own attempts to establish such a system were foiled by the ].
# when labor or its product is sold, it ought to receive in exchange, an equal amount of labor or a product that required the same amount of labor to produce (receiving anything less is considered exploitation, theft of labor, or "usury"). Use of money denominated in labor hours (]) was advocated by Proudhon to facilitate "labor for labor" trade.
# labor is the only source of value, thus receiving an income from any source other than labor or from trade of labor's product is wrong (mutualists argue that rent and interest are such sources of income),
# support for ]s,
# support of ] in the product of labor in the full sense of a right to dispose of it as one wishes and a right to prevent others from taking or using it, except they do not support it for labor-transformed land, and instead support ] to land only as long as it remains in use or occupation (which Proudhon called "possession.")<ref>Swartz, Clarence Lee. </ref>


After Proudhon's death, mutualism lost its popularity within the European anarchist movement and was eventually redefined in counterposition to ]. Proudhon's thought was instead taken up by ], who came to be closely identified with mutualist economics. ] and ] developed on mutualist theories of value, property and mutual credit, while ] elaborated a mutualist ]. The American mutualist ] attempted to bridge the divide between communist and individualist anarchists, but many of the latter camp eventually split from the anarchist movement and embraced ].
As for capital goods ("means of production"), mutualist opinions differ on whether they are possession property or private property.


Mutualist ideas were later implemented in ]s and ] models, but the tendency itself fell out of the popular consciousness during the 20th century. The advent of the internet generated a revived interest in mutualist economics, particularly after the publication of new works on the subject by American libertarian theorist ].
There is a difference between individualist anarchists and mutualists. Mutualists are more concerned with association than individualists.<ref>Woodcock, George. Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements, Broadview Press, 2004, p. 20</ref> Voltairine de Cleyre distinguishes Josiah Warren and Benjamin Tucker as being individualists rather than mutualists, speculating that that they chose individualism because they had no experience with large-scale industrialism. She says "The Mutualists had; consequently, their leanings toward a greater Communism."<ref>de Cleyre, Voltairine. Loving Freedom</ref>


== History ==
===Origins===
According to ], the origins of mutualism lay in the events of the ], particularly in the ] and ] structure of the ].{{Sfn|Marshall|1993|pp=431-432}} The foundations of mutualist economic theory lay in the ] of English socialist ]. Drawing from the ], as well as the ] works of ] and ], Spence called for the abolition of ], and for the ] of production through ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=83}} The term "mutualism" was first used during the 1820s; originally defined synonymously with terms such as "], ] and ]".{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=213}} In 1822, French utopian philosopher ] used the term "convergent compound mutualism" ({{langx|fr|mutualisme composé convergent}}), in order to describe a form of ] that adapted the ] of ]s.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|pp=214-215}}


===Owenism and Josiah Warren===
==History==
], a follower of ] that established some of the first experiments in mutualism]]
Mutualism, as a term, has seen a variety of related uses. ] first used the French term "mutualisme" in 1822,<ref>Charles Fourier, ''Traité'' (1822), cited in Arthur E. Bestor, Jr., "The Evolution of the Socialist Vocabulary", ''Journal of the History of Ideas'', Vol. 9, No. 3 (Jun., 1948), 259-302.</ref> although the reference was not to an economic system. The first use of the noun "mutualist" was in the ''New-Harmony Gazette'' by an American ] in 1826.<ref>''New-Harmony Gazette'', I, 301-02 (14 June 1826) cited in Arthur E. Bestor, Jr., "The Evolution of the Socialist Vocabulary", ''Journal of the History of Ideas'', Vol. 9, No. 3 (Jun., 1948), 259-302.</ref> In the early 1830s, a labor organization in Lyons, France, called themselves the "Mutuellists." By 1846, ] was speaking of "mutualité" in his writings. ], in 1850, used the term "mutualism" to describe a system that was similar to that of Proudhon, who later adopted "mutualisme" to describe his economic philosophy as well.
Thomas Spence's mutualist platform was taken up by ], with ] becoming a pioneering force in the ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=83-84}}<!-- Further reading on Owen {{Sfn|North|2007|pp=42-50}}--> By 1826, the term "mutualism" was being used by members of Owen's ] of ], in order to propose a more ] and ] project.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|pp=214-215}} The following year, ] left New Harmony and established the ], which was based on his ideas of "equitable commerce".{{Sfnm|1a1=Marshall|1y=1993|1pp=385, 497-498|2a1=Martin|2y=1970|2pp=15-16|3a1=Wilbur|3y=2019|3p=215}} This system set ] and established exchange based on ].{{Sfnm|1a1=Marshall|1y=1993|1p=385|2a1=Wilbur|2y=2019|2p=220}} In keeping with his mutualist principles, Warren refused to substantially grow his business, maintaining the equal exchange between shopkeeper and customer.{{Sfn|Martin|1970|p=20}} He hoped the shop would eventually be the nucleus for the establishment of a "mutualist village".{{Sfn|Martin|1970|p=16}}


After running it for three years,{{Sfn|North|2007|p=50}} in May 1830, Warren decided to liquidate the Time Store in an attempt to pursue his plan of building a mutualist village in ].{{Sfn|Martin|1970|p=22}} This caught the attention of Robert Owen, who proposed that they instead build a mutualist community in ], but this project never met fruition.{{Sfn|Martin|1970|pp=24-26}} Warren made the decision to delay the establishment of his mutualist colony until 1833.{{Sfn|Martin|1970|p=31}} He spent the preceding years sketching out the ] of the planned community, together with other prospective members.{{Sfn|Martin|1970|pp=35-36}} They established their anarchist community in ], but it was short-lived, as an influenza epidemic forced them to abandon the village by 1835.{{Sfnm|1a1=Marshall|1y=1993|1pp=385-386|2a1=Martin|2y=1970|2pp=36-37}} Warren returned to New Harmony, where he established another Time Store, but he received little support from other community members and shut it down in March 1844.{{Sfn|Martin|1970|pp=43-44}} Nevertheless, his mutualist ideas were still taken up by other radicals of the period, with ] and his ] championing mutualist arguments against the ].{{Sfn|Martin|1970|pp=44-45}}
Mutualism has been associated with two types of currency reform. Labor notes were first discussed in ] circles, but received their first practical test in 1827 in the ] of ] ]. Mutual banking aimed at the monetization of all forms of wealth and the extension of free credit. It is most closely associated with ], but Greene drew from the work of Proudhon, as well as from the land bank tradition. Mutualism can in many ways be considered "the original anarchy," since Proudhon was the first to identify himself as an ]. Though mutualism is generally associated with anarchism, it is not ''necessarily'' anarchist. One statist form of mutualism was promoted by Wilhelm Weitling.


Warren returned to Ohio, where he founded the mutualist community of ] in 1847, taking over from an earlier Fourierist community that had established the settlement.{{Sfnm|1a1=Marshall|1y=1993|1pp=385-386|2a1=Martin|2y=1970|2pp=57-58}} The community adopted labor notes as its currency and committed itself to an economy of equitable commerce, with cost as the limit of price.{{Sfn|Martin|1970|pp=59-62}} Utopia grew to about one hundred residents and established various enterprises, demonstrating to Warren the potential of his economic principles of decentralisation.{{Sfn|Martin|1970|pp=62-63}} By the 1850s, Warren himself had moved on from Ohio and established the ] on Long Island, New York,{{Sfnm|1a1=Marshall|1y=1993|1p=386|2a1=Martin|2y=1970|2p=63}} but his mutualist experiments would decline with the outbreak of the ].{{Sfn|Martin|1970|p=63}} Warren's mutualist communities of Utopia and Modern Times ultimately lasted for twenty years,{{Sfn|North|2007|p=50}} eventually evolving into traditional villages with only minor mutualist tendencies.{{Sfn|Marshall|1993|p=386}}
Nineteenth century mutualists considered themselves ]s<ref></ref>. While still oriented towards ], mutualists favor ] solutions, believing that most inequalities are the result of preferential conditions created by government intervention.<ref> by Paul E. Gagnon</ref> Mutualism is something of a middle way between ] and socialism, with some characteristics of both.{{ref|middleway}} Modern-day Mutualist Anarchist Kevin Carson, considers anarchist mutualism to be "free market socialism".


===Formulation by Proudhon===
== Mutualist thoughts on capitalism ==
], the first self-described anarchist and the primary proponent of mutualism]]
=== The "cost principle" or "cost the limit of price" ===
The term "mutualist" was adopted in 1828 by the '']s'' of ], who went on to lead a ] throughout the 1830s.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|pp=214-215}} At this same time, the young French activist ] was first being drawn towards Fourier's ]; by 1843, Proudhon had joined the Mutualists in Lyon.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=215}} The adoption of the term "mutualist" by Proudhon and his development of ] would result in a shift of its meaning and understanding.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|pp=213-214}}
{{main|Cost the limit of price}}
Mutualists argue that most of the economic problems associated with capitalism come back to a violation of the ''cost principle'', or as Josiah Warren interchangeably said, "Cost the limit of price." It was inspired by the ], popularized, though not invented, by ] in 1776 — Proudhon mentions Smith as an inspiration. The labor theory of value holds that the actual price of a thing (or the "true cost") is the amount of labor that was undertaken to produce it. Proudhon and Warren, working without association or apparent knowledge of each other, accepting this axiom, drew from this the conclusion that it is therefore ''unethical'' to charge higher price for a thing than the amount of labor that was undertaken to produce it. In Warren's terms, cost should be the "limit of price." Anyone who sells goods should charge no more than the cost to himself of acquiring these goods.


Proudhon held "]" (or "exchange in kind") to be a core part of his economic theory.{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=91|2a1=Wilbur|2y=2019|2pp=215-216}} In his ''System of Economic Contradictions'' (1846), Proudhon described mutuality as a synthesis of "private property and ]".{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=91}} The mutualist principle of reciprocity provided the basis for all its proposed institutions,{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1pp=91-92|2a1=Wilbur|2y=2019|2pp=215-216}} including ], ] and ]. Proudhon considered the perfect expression of mutuality to be a ] of equal exchange between ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=91-92}} Proudhon considered the ] to be at the root of the ] and believed that a truly ] ought to be built on reciprocity, without ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=92}} He concluded that under such conditions, commerce would progress towards equal exchange, where the value of a product or service reflects only the cost of its production.{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=92-93}} He envisioned the eventual "]" and its replacement with a system of economic contracts between individuals and collectives.{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=93|2a1=Vest|2y=2020|2pp=113-114}}
As far as determining payment for goods, they should pay for those goods with an equivalent amount of labor lest they violate the cost principle. In terms of employment, an employer should not be paid unless he labors and, if he labors less than an employee, then he should be paid less than that employee. Therefore, if the cost principle is followed, profit to an employer through the labor of others is not possible — everyone receives the "full produce" of his own labor and receives no produce of the labor of another unless he pays with an equivalent amount of labor. Warren says that this is in contrast to "Value the limit of price" where the only limit to price is the highest amount someone is willing to pay for a thing based on his own subjective valuation (see '']'').


Proudhon claimed that ] constituted a form of ], as proprietors used their title to extract labour-value from others,{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1pp=93-94|2a1=Vest|2y=2020|2pp=113-114}} or as he characterised it: "the proprietor reaps where did not sow".{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=93-94}} To Proudhon, ] represented the enclosure of the value of collective production, with the capitalist collecting ] from their workers in the form of ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=94}} Proudhon's anti-capitalist economic theories stood in sharp contrast to liberal economists of the time, such as ] and ], who argued in defense of landlords and capitalists from the claims of workers.{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=95-96}} Proudhon claimed that landlords and capitalists contributed nothing to production, and that their only claim to the contrary was by not impeding access to the ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=96}}
=== Property ===
] was one of the most famous philosophers to have articulated thoughts on the nature of property. He is known for exclaiming "]," but is less known for also exclaiming "property is freedom," and "property is impossible." According to Colin Ward,{{ref|wardOnProudhon}} Proudhon did not see a contradiction between these slogans. This was because Proudhon distinguished between what he considered to be two distinct forms of property often bound up in the single label. To the mutualist, this is the distinction between property created by coercion and property created by labor. Property is theft "when it is related to a landowner or capitalist whose ownership is derived from conquest or exploitation and only maintained through the state, property laws, police, and an army". Property is freedom for "the peasant or artisan family a natural right to a home, land cultivate, to tools of a trade", and the fruits of that cultivation - but not to ownership or control of the lands and lives of others. The former is considered illegitimate property, the latter legitimate property.


In the wake of the ], Proudhon began elaborating his proposal for a "Bank of the People".{{Sfnm|1a1=North|1y=2007|1p=50|2a1=Wilbur|2y=2019|2p=216}} He thought such a bank could guarantee ] to all workers, enabling them bring the product of their labour under the ] of all that participated in production.{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1pp=94-95|2a1=North|2y=2007|2p=50|3a1=Wilbur|3y=2019|3p=216}} After he was ], Proudhon lobbied for the transformation of the ] into such a "Bank of the People"; he proposed that a 2-3% interest rate would be enough to cover all public expenses and would allow for the abolition of ]ation. Proudhon's "Bank of the People" was officially ] but was never able to establish itself in practice, as Proudhon was arrested and imprisoned following the rise to power of ].{{Sfn|North|2007|pp=50-51}} In his final attempt at writing a comprehensive mutualist programme, ''The Political Capacity of the Working Classes'' (1865), Proudhon proposed the establishment of a "mutualist system" of ].{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=216}} <!-- Further reading on Proudhon:
Proudhon argued that property in the product of labor is essential to liberty, while property that strayed from "possession" ("occupancy and use") was the basis for tyranny and would lead a society to destroy itself. The conception of entitlement property as a destructive force and illegitimate institution can be seen in this quote by Proudhon,
{{Sfn|Castleton|2017|pp=144-146, 148, 153-155, 157, 164, 166, 169}}
<blockquote>''Then if we are associated for the sake of liberty, equality, and security, we are not associated for the sake of property; then if property is a natural right, this natural right is not social, but anti-social. Property and society are utterly irreconcilable institutions. It is as impossible to associate two proprietors as to join two magnets by their opposite poles. Either society must perish, or it must destroy property. If property is a natural, absolute, imprescriptible, and inalienable right, why, in all ages, has there been so much speculation as to its origin? — for this is one of its distinguishing characteristics. The origin of a natural right! Good God! who ever inquired into the origin of the rights of liberty, security, or equality?'' (What is Property?)</blockquote>
{{Sfn|Crowder|1991|pp=87, 102-109, 112, 117}}
{{Sfn|Douglas|1929|pp=782-783, 786, 791, 794-802}}
{{Sfn|Marshall|1993|pp=7-8, 236, 242-244, 252-256, 258-262}}
{{Sfn|Shantz|2009|p=1}}-->


=== Anarchism and the IWA ===
Mutualist, ], says in ''What is Mutualism'':
During the early 1860s, the ] first began to develop an organised expression, establishing ]s and ] systems inspired by Proudhon's mutualist theories.{{Sfn|Marshall|1993|p=435}} Towards the end of his life, Proudhon himself had grown more cautious of using the term "anarchist" and instead referred to himself as a "federalist"; his followers also eschewed the "anarchist" label, instead calling themselves "mutualists" after his principle of mutual exchange.{{Sfn|Marshall|1993|p=434}} After Proudhon's death in 1865,{{Sfn|Shantz|2009|p=2}} his mutualist followers helped establish the ] (IWA).{{Sfnm|1a1=Marshall|1y=1993|1p=431|2a1=Shantz|2y=2009|2p=2|3a1=Wilbur|3y=2019|3p=216}}


], the leader of the anti-authoritarian faction of the IWA, who argued that his ] was an extension of Proudhonian mutualism]]
<blockquote>''It is, therefore, one of the purposes of Mutualists, not only to awaken in the people the appreciation of and desire for freedom, but also to arouse in them a determination to abolish the legal restrictions now placed upon non-invasive human activities and to institute, through purely voluntary associations, such measures as will liberate all of us from the exactions of privilege and the power of concentrated capital.''</blockquote>
In the early years of the IWA, the organisation was largely mutualist,{{Sfnm|1a1=Shantz|1y=2009|1p=2|2a1=Wilbur|2y=2019|2p=216}} as exemplified by its contractual demands during its 1866 ] and 1867 ]. But in the following years, French mutualists began to lose control over the organisation to Russian and German communists based in ],{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=216}} and mutualism was gradually overshadowed by other anarchist schools of thought.{{Sfnm|1a1=North|1y=2007|1p=51|2a1=Shantz|2y=2009|2p=2}} By the end of the 1860s, the French section of the IWA was already shifting away from mutualism, with ] and ] convincing it to adopt ]'s platform of ];{{Sfn|Marshall|1993|p=435}} Bakunin himself held his collectivist theories to be "Proudhonism, greatly developed and taken to its ultimate conclusion".{{Sfnm|1a1=Marshall|1y=1993|1p=434|2a1=Wilbur|2y=2019|2p=217}}


Although inspired by Proudhon's arguments for federalism, Bakunin broke from his mutualist economics and argued instead for the ] of ].{{Sfn|Marshall|1993|p=275}} By the 1870s, as divisions between the ] and the ] in the IWA grew sharper, Proudhonian mutualism gradually lost its remaining influence; although it continued to see minor developments by collectivists such as ] and ],{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=217}} as well as in the programme of the ] of 1871.{{Sfnm|1a1=Marshall|1y=1993|1p=435|2a1=Shantz|2y=2009|2p=2}} When the IWA finally split, members of the ] slowly adopted "anarchism" as the label for their philosophy.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|pp=217-218}}
Swartz also states that mutualism differs from anarcho-communism and other collectivist philosophies by its support of private property: "''One of the tests of any reform movement with regard to personal liberty is this: Will the movement prohibit or abolish private property? If it does, it is an enemy of liberty. For one of the most important criteria of freedom is the right to private property in the products of ones labor. State Socialists, Communists, Syndicalists and Communist-Anarchists deny private property.''"


Following Bakunin's death in 1876,{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=214}} the Russian anarchist ] had taken anarchist philosophy beyond both Proudhon's mutualism and Bakunin's collectivism.{{Sfn|Marshall|1993|p=327}} He argued instead for ], in which resources are distributed "]."{{Sfnm|1a1=Marshall|1y=1993|1p=327|2a1=Wilbur|2y=2019|2p=218}} This quickly became the dominant form of anarchism,{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=214}} and by the 1880s, mutualism was slowly defined in opposition to anarchist communism.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=218}} Mutualism was redefined as a non-communist form of anarchism, due to its emphasis on reciprocity, ] and ]. As a result, different tendencies and interpretations of mutualism started to emerge.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=214}}
However, Proudhon warned that a society with private 'property' without equality would lead to statist-like relations between people.


===Development by American individualists===
<blockquote>''"The purchaser draws boundaries, fences himself in, and says, 'This is mine; each one by himself, each one for himself.' Here, then, is a piece of land upon which, henceforth, no one has right to step, save the proprietor and his friends; which can benefit nobody, save the proprietor and his servants. Let these multiply, and soon the people . . . will have nowhere to rest, no place of shelter, no ground to till. They will die of hunger at the proprietor's door, on the edge of that property which was their birth-right; and the proprietor, watching them die, will exclaim, 'So perish idlers and vagrants.'"'' <ref>Proudhon, Pierre-Joseph. ''What is Property?'' p. 118</ref> </blockquote>
Warren's mutualist experiments, which inspired the ] of ] and ],{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=91|2a1=Marshall|2y=1993|2p=387}} laid a foundation for the introduction of Proudhonian mutualism to the country.{{Sfn|Marshall|1993|p=387}} Warren himself was later retroactively labelled a "mutualist" by the individualists of this period, who were inspired by his system of "equitable commerce".{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=220}} American newspaper editor ] synthesised Proudhon's mutualism with ] and ], conceiving of "the coming era of mutualism" in ] terms.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|pp=218-219}} Proudhonian mutualism was later discussed in articles by a number of American utopian theorists, including ], ] and ].{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=219}}


====Theoretical developments====
Unlike capitalist private property-supporters Proudhon stressed equality, he wanted everyone to be a private owner.
], an early American mutualist who advocated for ] property rights and upheld the ]]]
Two of the most important figures of this period were ] and ],{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=102|2a1=Wilbur|2y=2019|2p=219}} who were inspired by Proudhon's mutualist ideas as elaborated by Dana,{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=103|2a1=Marshall|2y=1993|2p=236|3a1=Vest|3y=2020|3p=114}} synthesising it with American individualist traditions pioneered by Warren.{{Sfnm|1a1=Marshall|1y=1993|1pp=387, 497-498|2a1=Vest|2y=2020|2p=115}} Ingalls was a vocal proponent of the ] and an advocate of workers receiving the ].{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=103|2a1=Martin|2y=1970|2pp=139-140}} He also argued against the ], which he believed to be the principal source of ],{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=103|2a1=Martin|2y=1970|2pp=140-142}} and instead called for the institution of ].{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=103|2a1=Martin|2y=1970|2pp=144, 148-149}}


Drawing from ], Greene presented Proudhonian mutualism as a successor to Christianity, describing it as "the religion of the coming age."{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=219}} Greene proposed the establishment of ]s,{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=102|2a1=Wilbur|2y=2019|2p=219|3a1=Vest|3y=2020|3p=114}} which would issue loans at a ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=102}} He believed these could outcompete the high interest rates charged by ]s and lead to wages rising to the "full value of the work done".{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=102}} Greene's model for a ], which he argued would trend towards ] as ]s and ]s were abolished, represented a break from Owen and Warren's "labor for labor" theory of exchange.{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=102-103}} Greene argued that the fruit of all human labors was a product, not only of individual effort, but also of social circumstances that aided them in that effort.{{Sfn|Vest|2020|p=115}} <!-- Further reading on William Batchelder Greene: {{Sfn|Martin|1970|pp=125-138}} -->
== Mutualist economics ==
The major tenets of mutualism are '''free association''', '''mutualist credit''', '''contract''' (or '''federation'''), and '''gradualism''' (or '''dual-power'''). Mutualism is often described by its proponents as advocating an "anti-capitalist free market".


In 1869, ] and ] established the ] (NELRL), which published the individualist anarchist magazine '']'' and widely distributed the works of American mutualists such as Warren and Greene, who were also members of the organisation.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=220}} From 1872 to 1876, the NELRL attempted to lobby the ] to establish a mutual bank, but they were ultimately unsuccessful,{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=102|2a1=Vest|2y=2020|2p=114}} convincing them that state legislatures had already undergone ] by capitalists.{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=102-103}}
Contemporary mutualist author ] holds that ] is founded on "an act of robbery as massive as feudalism," and argues that capitalism could not exist in the absence of a state. However, it must be noted that he uses an unconventional definition of capitalism. He says "t is state intervention that distinguishes capitalism from the free market"<ref>Carson, Kevin. , Preface</ref>, whereas Merriam-Webster Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged, which defines capitalism as "an economic system characterized by private or corporation ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision rather than by state control, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly in a free market." Carson argues the centralization of wealth into a ] is due to state intervention to protect the ], by using a money monopoly, granting ]s and ] to corporations, imposing discriminatory ], and intervening militarily to gain access to international markets. Carson’s thesis is that an authentic ] would not be capitalism as the separation of labor from ownership and the subordination of labor to capital would be impossible, bringing a class-less society where people could easily choose between working as a freelancer, working for a fair wage, taking part of a cooperative, or being an entrepreneur. He notes, as did Tucker before him, that a mutualist free market system would involve significantly different property rights than capitalism is based on, particularly in terms of land and intellectual property. {{ref|carsonIronFist}}


====Anti-capitalist critique====
=== Free association ===
], whose critique of ]'s tendency towards ] provided a foundation for the development of mutualist alternatives]]
Mutualists argue that association is only necessary where there is an organic combination of forces. For instance, an operation that requires specialization and many different workers performing their individual tasks to complete a unified product, i.e., a factory. In this situation, workers are inherently dependent on each other -- and without association they are related as subordinate and superior, master and wage-slave.
Inspired by the older mutualists within the NELRL, the young League member ] quickly rose to prominence as one of the leading figures of individualist anarchism in the United States.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=220}} Tucker integrated the earlier iterations of mutualism into a single ideological doctrine,{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=104}} adopting Greene's ideas on mutual banking and synthesising Proudhonian mutualism with the American individualist tradition of Warren and Spooner.{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=104|2a1=Vest|2y=2020|2pp=114-115|3a1=Wilbur|3y=2019|3p=220}} Through his magazine '']'', which he established in 1881, he contributed to the development of anarchist political thought.{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1pp=104-105|2a1=Vest|2y=2020|2p=115|3a1=Wilbur|3y=2019|3p=220}}


Drawing from the mutualism of Warren and Proudhon, he argued that the exploitation of labour derived from ] of the ],{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1p=105|2a1=Wilbur|2y=2019|2pp=220-221}} which collaborated with capitalists in order to extract labour value in the form of "interest, rent and profit".{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=105}} In order to combat coercive practices that allowed the proliferation of wealth and privilege, Tucker proposed the establishment of a "] of ]", in which all forms of monopoly were abolished.{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=105-106}} Tucker derided profit as antithetical to free competition and criticised capitalism for "abolishing the free market", arguing that a truly free market was governed only by the cost of production. {{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=106-107}} At the center of his anti-capitalist critique were what he called the "Four Monopolies":{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=107-108}} that of ], ], ]s and ]s.{{Sfnm|1a1=Carson|1y=2018|1pp=107-108|2a1=Vest|2y=2020|2p=115}}
An operation that can be performed by an individual without the help of specialized workers does ''not'' require association. Proudhon argued that peasants do not require societal form, and only feigned association for the purposes of solidarity in abolishing rents, buying clubs, etc. He recognized that their work is inherently sovereign and free. In commenting on the degree of association that is preferable Proudhon said:


While Tucker was intensely critical of capitalism, he was uninterested in speculating on the makeup of a future mutualist society. This was eventually taken up by ], who built on Tucker's critique to advocate for ] and ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=108}} Tucker's followers dedicated themselves to elaborating mutualist projects, with ], ] and ] all writing extensively on the subject of mutual credit.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=221}} <!-- Further reading on Benjamin Tucker: {{Sfn|Martin|1970|pp=212, 223, 258, 259, 277}} -->
<blockquote>''"In cases in which production requires great division of labour, it is necessary to form an ASSOCIATION among the workers... because without that they would remain isolated as subordinates and superiors, and there would ensue two industrial castes of masters and wage workers, which is repugnant in a free and democratic society. But where the product can be obtained by the action of an individual or a family... there is no opportunity for association."''<ref></ref></blockquote>


====Divisions and decline====
For Proudhon, mutualism involved creating ''"industrial democracy,"'' a system where workplaces would be ''"handed over to democratically organised workers' associations . . . We want these associations to be models for agriculture, industry and trade, the pioneering core of that vast federation of companies and societies woven into the common cloth of the democratic social Republic."'' <ref>Guerin, Daniel (ed.) '''No Gods, No Masters''', AK Press, vol. 1, p. 62</ref> He urged ''"workers to form themselves into democratic societies, with equal conditions for all members, on pain of a relapse into feudalism."'' This would result in ''"Capitalistic and proprietary exploitation, stopped everywhere, the wage system abolished, equal and just exchange guaranteed."'' <ref>'''The General Idea of the Revolution''', Pluto Press, p. 277 and p. 281</ref> Workers would no longer sell their labour to a capitalist but rather work for themselves in co-operatives.
], a Tuckerite mutualist that attempted to bridge the divide between individualist and communist anarchists]]
By the beginning of the ], Proudhonian mutualism was firmly identified with American individualism,{{Sfnm|1a1=Vest|1y=2020|1pp=114-115|2a1=Wilbur|2y=2019|2p=221}} while Tucker's followers came to define themselves in opposition to ].{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=218}} Although Tucker himself didn't make the distinction, anarchists such as ] increasingly contrasted mutualism against communism, with mutualism eventually being used to refer to "non-communist anarchism".{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=221}} One of Tucker's disciples, ], attempted to bridge the divide between the American individualists and the growing ], which was developing sympathies for ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=108-109}} In the 1880s, Lum joined the ] (IWPA), in which he developed a '']'' analysis of "]" that proposed a form of ] and a ]ing system.{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=109}}


Over the years, Lum worked to develop ties between different radical tendencies, hoping to create a "pluralistic anarchistic coalition" capable of advancing a ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=109-110}} By the time of the ], Lum had aligned with the IWPA's view of ] as a means to both combat the exploitation of labour and to ] a future ]. In the 1890s, Lum joined the ] (AFL), within which he introduced workers' to mutualist ideas on banking, land reform and cooperativism through his pamphlet ''The Economics of Anarchy''.{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=110}} Lum was instrumental in synthesising mutualist economics with ] into a "uniquely American ideology",{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=110-111}} one which was taken up by the American individualist ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=111}}
As Robert Graham notes, ''"Proudhon's market socialism is indissolubly linked to his notions of industry democracy and workers' self-management."'' <ref>"Introduction", '''General Idea of the Revolution''', p. xxxii</ref> K. Steven Vincent notes in his in-depth analysis of this aspect of Proudhon's ideas that ''"Proudhon consistently advanced a program of industrial democracy which would return control and direction of the economy to the workers."'' For Proudhon, ''"strong workers' associations . . . would enable the workers to determine jointly by election how the enterprise was to be directed and operated on a day-to-day basis."'' <ref>'''Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and the Rise of French Republican Socialism,''' Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1984, p. 230 and p. 156</ref>

But factional divides also began to exacerbate at this time, as Tucker's individualist group in Boston and immigrant ] in Chicago split into opposing camps, while Lum attempting to mend relations between the two.{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=110}} Lum and Decleyre together developed a perspective of "]", in an attempt to overcome the ongoing feud between individualist and communist anarchists.{{Sfn|Carson|2018|pp=111-112}} But eventually the split drove many of Tucker's disciples away from the anarchist movement and towards ], with some like ] coming to embrace ] and setting the groundwork for modern ].{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=112}}

=== Contemporary developments ===
] mural]]
During the early 20th century, mutualist concepts were developed by the economists ] and ]; while mutualist ideas were implemented within ]s and by models of ].{{Sfn|Shantz|2009|p=2}}<!-- Further reading:
Gesell {{Sfn|North|2007|pp=63-66}}
LETS {{Sfn|North|2007|pp=xi, xiii, 79-101}}
Alternative currencies {{Sfn|North|2007|pp=xii, xiv, 77-78, 147-148, 176-182}} --> ], who became a leading figure in the ] during the ], adopted a mutualist programme of ], equal exchange and usufruct property rights.{{Sfn|Marshall|1993|pp=413-414}} Some anarchist theorists of the late 20th century were also inspired by mutualism, including American social critic ], Italian essayist ], British social historian ],{{Sfn|Shantz|2009|p=2}} and American philosopher ].{{Sfnm|1a1=Marshall|1y=1993|1p=682|2a1=Shantz|2y=2009|2p=2}} In order to provide an alternative to the dominant anarchist schools of thought, ] attempted to revive the mutualist movement; he established the Voluntary Cooperation Movement, which managed to recruit the British anarchist ] and the American individualist ], but it was short-lived.{{Sfn|Carson|2018|p=116}}

By the end of the 20th century, mutualism had largely fallen out of the popular consciousness, only experiencing a revival in interest when the ] improved public access to old texts. American libertarian theorist ] was central to the renewed interest in the subject, self-publishing a series of works on mutualism. Carson's ''Studies in Mutualist Political Economy'' proposed a synthesis of ] and ], developing a form of "]" based on Tucker's conception of mutualism. Interest in Proudhon's works was also renewed during the 21st century, with many of his texts being published by the Proudhon Library and compiled into the collection ''Property is Theft''.{{Sfn|Wilbur|2019|p=222}}

== Theory ==
The primary aspects of mutualism are ], ], reciprocity in the form of ], ], ], ] and dual power. Mutualism is often described by its proponents as advocating an ]. Mutualists argue that most of the economic problems associated with capitalism each amount to a violation of the cost principle, or as ] interchangeably said, cost the limit of price. It was inspired by the ], which was popularized—although not invented—by ] in 1776 (Proudhon mentioned Smith as an inspiration). The labor theory of value holds that the actual price of a thing (or the true cost) is the amount of labor undertaken to produce it. In Warren's terms of his ] theory, cost should be the limit of price, with cost referring to the amount of labour required to produce a good or service. Anyone who sells goods should charge no more than the cost to himself of acquiring these goods.<ref name="Wilbur 2018">Wilbur, Shawn P. (2018). "Mutualism". In Adams, Matthew S.; Levy, Carl. ''The Palgrave Handbook of Anarchism''. Springer. pp. 213–224. {{ISBN|9783319756202}}.</ref>

=== Contract and federation ===
Mutualism holds that producers should exchange their goods at cost-value using contract systems. While Proudhon's early definitions of cost-value were based on fixed assumptions about the value of labour hours, he later redefined cost-value to include other factors such as the labour intensity, the nature of the work involved, etc. He also expanded his notions of contract into expanded notions of federation.<ref name="Wilbur 2018"/>

=== Free association ===
Mutualists argue that association is only necessary where there is an organic combination of forces. An operation requires specialization and many different workers performing tasks to complete a unified product, i.e. a factory. In this situation, workers are inherently dependent on each other; without association, they are related as subordinate and superior, master and wage-slave. An operation that an individual can perform without the help of specialized workers does not require association. Proudhon argued that peasants do not require societal form and only feigned association for solidarity in abolishing rents, buying clubs, etc. He recognized that their work is inherently sovereign and free.<ref name="Wilbur 2018"/>

For Proudhon, mutualism involved creating ]. In this system, workplaces would be "handed over to democratically organised workers' associations.&nbsp;... We want these associations to be models for agriculture, industry and trade, the pioneering core of that vast federation of companies and societies woven into the common cloth of the democratic social Republic".<ref>Guerin, Daniel, ed. (2006) ''No Gods, No Masters''. '''1'''. Oakland: AK Press. p. 62. {{ISBN|9781904859253}}.</ref>

K. Steven Vincent notes in his in-depth analysis of this aspect of Proudhon's ideas that "Proudhon consistently advanced a program of industrial democracy which would return control and direction of the economy to the workers". For Proudhon, "strong workers' associations&nbsp;... would enable the workers to determine jointly by election how the enterprise was to be directed and operated on a day-to-day basis".<ref>Vincent, K. Steven (1984). ''Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and the Rise of French Republican Socialism''. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 156, 230. {{ISBN|9780195034134}}.</ref>


=== Mutual credit === === Mutual credit ===
Mutualists support ] and argue that ] should be taken back by the people to establish systems of free credit. They contend that banks have a monopoly on credit, just as capitalists have a monopoly on the means of production and landlords have a land monopoly. Banks create money by lending out deposits that do not belong to them and then charging interest on the difference. Mutualists argue that by establishing a democratically run ] or ], it would be possible to issue free credit so that money could be created for the participants' benefit rather than the bankers' benefit. Individualist anarchists noted for their detailed views on mutualist banking include ] and ].<ref name="Wilbur 2018"/>
{{main|Mutual credit}}
Mutualists argue that ] should be taken back by the people to establish systems of free credit. They contend that banks have a monopoly on credit, just as capitalists have a monopoly on land. Banks are essentially creating money by lending out deposits that do not actually belong to them, then charging interest on the difference. Mutualists argue that by establishing a democratically run ] or ], it would be possible to issue free credit so that money could be created for the benefit of the participants rather than for the benefit of the bankers. Individualist anarchists noted for their detailed views on mutualist banking include ], ], and ].


=== Property ===
Some modern forms of mutual credit are ] and the ] project.
] was an anarchist and socialist philosopher who articulated thoughts on the nature of property. He claimed that "]", "property is liberty", and "property is impossible". According to ], Proudhon did not see a contradiction between these slogans. This was because Proudhon distinguished between what he considered to be two distinct forms of property often bound up in a single label. To the mutualist, this is the distinction between property created by coercion and property created by labour. Property is theft "when it is related to a landowner or capitalist whose ownership is derived from conquest or exploitation and only maintained through the state, property laws, police, and an army". Property is freedom for "the peasant or artisan family a natural right to a home, land cultivate,&nbsp;... to tools of a trade" and the fruits of that cultivation—but not to ownership or control of the lands and lives of others. The former is considered illegitimate property, while the latter is legitimate property.<ref>Ward, Colin (2004). ''Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction''.</ref>


In ''What Is Mutualism?'', ] wrote:
=== Contract / Federation ===
<blockquote>It is, therefore, one of the purposes of Mutualists, not only to awaken in the people the appreciation of and desire for freedom, but also to arouse in them a determination to abolish the legal restrictions now placed upon non-invasive human activities and to institute, through purely voluntary associations, such measures as will liberate all of us from the exactions of privilege and the power of concentrated capital.<ref name="Bojicic 2010">Bojicic, Savo (2010). ''America America or Is It?'' Bloomington: AuthorHouse. p. 369. {{ISBN|9781452034355}}.</ref></blockquote>
Mutualism holds that producers should exchange their goods at cost-value using systems of "contract." While Proudhon's early definitions of cost-value were based on fixed assumptions about the value of labor-hours, he later redefined cost-value to include other factors such as the intensity of labor, the nature of the work involved, etc. He also expanded his notions of "contract" into expanded notions of "federation." It is possible that these ideas, more fully developed, could strongly resemble ] today.{{fact}}


Swartz also argued that mutualism differs from ] and other collectivist philosophies by its support of private property, writing: "One of the tests of any reform movement with regard to personal liberty is this: Will the movement prohibit or abolish private property? If it does, it is an enemy of liberty. For one of the most important criteria of freedom is the right to private property in the products of ones labor. State Socialists, Communists, Syndicalists and Communist-Anarchists deny private property."<ref>Weisbord, Albert (1937). ''The Conquest of Power: Liberalism, Anarchism, Syndicalism, Socialism, Fascism, and Communism''. '''I'''. New York: Covici-Friede. p. 235.</ref> However, Proudhon warned that a society with private property would lead to statist relations between people.<ref name="Bojicic 2010"/> Unlike ] private-property supporters, Proudhon stressed equality. He thought that all workers should own property and have access to capital, stressing that in every cooperative, "every worker employed in the association an undivided share in the property of the company".<ref>Quoted by James J. Martin. ''Men Against the State''. p. 223.</ref>
=== Gradualism / Dual-power ===
<blockquote>''Beneath the governmental machinery, in the shadow of political institutions, out of the sight of statemen and priests, society is producing its own organism, slowly and silently; and constructing a new order, the expression of its vitality and autonomy...'' <ref>Proudhon, ''General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century.'' Translated by John Beverly Robinson. New York: Haskell House Publishers, Ltd., 1923, 1969 . p 243.</ref></blockquote>


=== Usufruct ===
Proudhon noted that the shock of the ] failed the people, and was instead interested in a federation of worker cooperations that could use mutualist credit to gradually expand and take control of industry. This is similar to economic models based on worker cooperatives today, such as the ] in Spain and ] in San Francisco.
Mutualists believe that ] should not be a ] to be bought and sold, advocating for conditional titles to land based on occupancy and use norms. Mutualists argue whether an individual has a legitimate claim to land ownership if he is not currently using it but has already incorporated his labour into it. All mutualists agree that everything produced by human labour and machines can be owned as ]. Mutualists reject the idea of non-personal property and non-] ] ]. Any property obtained through violence, bought with money gained through ], or bought with money that was gained violating ] property norms is considered illegitimate.<ref name="Martin 1970">Martin, James J. (1970). ''Men Against the State''. Colorado Springs: Ralph Myles Publisher. pp. viii, ix, 209. {{ISBN|9780879260064}}</ref><ref name="Wilbur 2018"/>


== Mutualism today == == Criticism ==
In Europe, a contemporary critic of Proudhon was the early ] ]. Unlike and against Proudhon, he argued that "it is not the product of his or her labor that the worker has a right to, but to the satisfaction of his or her needs, whatever may be their nature".<ref name="Graham2005">{{cite book|last=Graham|first=Robert|title=]|year=2005|publisher=Black Rose Books|isbn=978-1-55164-251-2}}</ref><ref name="Alain Pengam. Anarchist-Communism">Pengam, Alain. . According to Pengam, Déjacque criticized Proudhon as far as "the Proudhonist version of Ricardian socialism, centred on the reward of labour power and the problem of exchange value. In his polemic with Proudhon on women's emancipation, Déjacque urged Proudhon to push on 'as far as the abolition of the contract, the abolition not only of the sword and of capital, but of property and authority in all their forms,' and refuted the commercial and wages logic of the demand for a 'fair reward' for 'labour' (labour power). Déjacque asked: 'Am I thus right to want, as with the system of contracts, to measure out to each—according to their accidental capacity to produce—what they are entitled to?' The answer given by Déjacque to this question is unambiguous: 'it is not the product of his or her labour that the worker has a right to, but to the satisfaction of his or her needs, whatever may be their nature.' For Déjacque, on the other hand, the communal state of affairs—the phalanstery 'without any hierarchy, without any authority' except that of the 'statistics book'—corresponded to 'natural exchange,' i.e. to the 'unlimited freedom of all production and consumption; the abolition of any sign of agricultural, individual, artistic or scientific property; the destruction of any individual holding of the products of work; the demonarchisation and the demonetarisation of manual and intellectual capital as well as capital in instruments, commerce and buildings."</ref>
] is a contemporary mutualist and author of ''Studies in Mutualist Political Economy''.


One area of disagreement between ] and mutualists stems from Proudhon's alleged advocacy of ]s to compensate individuals for their labour and markets or ]s for goods and services. However, the persistent claim that Proudhon proposed a labour currency has been challenged as a misunderstanding or misrepresentation.<ref>McKay, Iain (Spring 2017). . ''Anarchist Studies''. Retrieved 28 August 2020.</ref> Like other anarcho-communists, ] advocated the abolition of labour remuneration and questioned, "how can this new form of wages, the ], be sanctioned by those who admit that houses, fields, mills are no longer private property, that they belong to the commune or the nation?"<ref>Kropotkin, Peter (1920). . ''Freedom Pamphlets'' (1). Retrieved 28 August 2020.</ref> According to ], Kropotkin believed that a wage system, whether "administered by Banks of the People or by workers' associations through ]", is a form of compulsion.<ref>Woodcock, George (2004). ''Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements''. Broadview Press. p. 168.</ref>
], some ] movements and some ] projects such as ] and ] follow a similar spirit, focussing on ], decentralization and free association (see ]).


] ] was an adamant critic of Proudhonian mutualism as well,<ref>Bookchin, Murray (1998). '']'' (illustrated revised ed.). Oakland: AK Press. p. 25. {{ISBN|9781873176047}}.</ref> stating: "How ridiculous are the ideas of the individualists of the Jean Jacques Rousseau school and of the Proudhonian mutualists who conceive society as the result of the free contract of individuals absolutely independent of one another and entering into mutual relations only because of the convention drawn up among men. As if these men had dropped from the skies, bringing with them speech, will, original thought, and as if they were alien to anything of the earth, that is, anything having social origin".<ref>Maximoff, G. P. (1953). ''Political Philosophy of Bakunin''. New York: Free Press. p. 167. {{ISBN|9780029012000}}.</ref>
==Notes and references==
===Notes===
#{{note|middleway}} "Involved with radical politics and in his contact with the Marxists, he soon rejected their doctrine, seeking rather a middle way between socialist theories and classical economics." - Irving Horowitz, The Anarchists, 1964, Dell Publishing
#{{note|carsonIronFist}} See .
===References===
<references />


==See also== == See also ==
{{Portal|Anarchism|Communism|Socialism}}
* ]
{{cols|colwidth=21em}}
* ]
* ] * ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ] * ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
{{colend}}

== References ==
{{reflist|30em}}

== Bibliography ==
{{refbegin|2}}
* {{cite book|last=Backer|first=Thomas B.|year=1978|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ny3_bwAACAAJ|title=The Mutualists: The Heirs of Proudhon in the First International, 1865–1878|publisher=]}}
* {{cite book|chapter=Anarchism and Markets|last=Carson|first=Kevin|author-link=Kevin Carson|year=2018|location=]|publisher=]|editor-first=Nathan|editor-last=Jun|title=Brill's Companion to Anarchism and Philosophy|isbn=978-90-04-35689-4|pages=81–119|doi=10.1163/9789004356894_005|url=https://brill.com/view/title/35861}}
* {{cite journal|last=Castleton|first=Edward|year=2017|title=Association, Mutualism, and Corporate Form in the Published and Unpublished Writings of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319098726|journal=History of Economic Ideas|volume=25|issue=1|pages=143–172|doi=10.19272/201706101006|issn=1724-2169|jstor=44806325}}
* {{Cite journal|last=Douglas|first=Dorothy W.|year=1929|title=P. J. Proudhon: A Prophet of 1848. Part I: Life and Works|journal=]|volume=34|issue=5|pages=781–803 |issn=0002-9602|doi=10.1086/214822|s2cid=264622055 }}
* {{cite journal|last1=Lloveras|first1=Javier|last2=Warnaby|first2=Gary|last3=Quinn|first3=Lee|year=2020|title=Mutualism as market practice: An examination of market performativity in the context of anarchism and its implications for post-capitalist politics|journal=]|volume=20|issue=3|pages=229–249 |issn=1470-5931|doi=10.1177/1470593119885172|s2cid=210535234 |url=https://e-space.mmu.ac.uk/623924/1/Symplectic%20-%20Mutualism%20as%20market%20practice%20.pdf}}
* {{cite book|first=Peter H.|last = Marshall|author-link=Peter Marshall (author)|title=]|year=1993|location=]|publisher=]|isbn=978-0-00-686245-1|oclc=1042028128}}
* {{cite book|last=Martin|first=James J.|year=1970|orig-year=1953|title=Men Against the State: The Expositors of Individualist Anarchism in America, 1827-1908|url=https://archive.org/details/menagainststatee00martrich|location=]|publisher=Ralph Myles Publisher|isbn=9780879260064|oclc=8827896}}
* {{cite book|last=North|first=Peter|year=2007|chapter=Utopians, Anarchists, and Populists: The Politics of Money in the Nineteenth Century|title=Money and Liberation: The Micropolitics of Alternative Currency Movements|publisher=]|pages=41–61|isbn=978-0-8166-4962-4|lccn=2006038757|jstor=10.5749/j.ctttt87r}} <!-- pp. 50-51 -->
* {{cite encyclopedia|last=Shantz|first=Jeff|year=2009|title=Mutualism|editor-first=Immanuel|editor-last=Ness|encyclopedia=The International Encyclopedia of Revolution and Protest|doi=10.1002/9781405198073.wbierp1058|isbn=9781405198073|pages=1–3}}
* {{cite book|last=Wilbur|first=Shawn P.|date=2019 |chapter=Mutualism|editor-last1=Adams|editor-first1=Matthew S.|editor-last2=Levy|editor-first2=Carl|title=The Palgrave Handbook of Anarchism|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=m7BhDwAAQBAJ&q=Mutualism|location=London|publisher=Palgrave Macmillan|isbn=978-3319756196|pages=213–224|doi=10.1007/978-3-319-75620-2_11|s2cid=242074567 }}
* {{cite book|last=van der Linden|first=Marcel|year=2018|chapter=Mutualism|editor-first1=Karin|editor-last1=Hofmeester|editor-first2=Marcel|editor-last2=van der Linden|title=Handbook The Global History of Work|publisher=]|pages=491–504|isbn=978-3-11-042835-3}}
* {{cite book|last=Vest|first=J. Martin|year=2020|chapter=Barbarians in the Agora: American Market Anarchism, 1945–2011|editor-first1=Gary|editor-last1=Chartier|editor-first2=Chad|editor-last2=Van Schoelandt|title=The Routledge Handbook of Anarchy and Anarchist Thought|pages=112–125 |location=]|publisher=]|isbn=9781315185255|doi=10.4324/9781315185255-8|s2cid=228898569 }}
{{refend}}

==Further reading==
<!-- Comment with which reliable source cited this work -->
{{refbegin|2}}
*{{cite book|last=Benello|first=C. George|year=1992|editor-first1=Len|editor-last1=Krimerman|editor-first2=Frank|editor-last2=Lidenfeld|editor-first3=Carol|editor-last3=Korty|editor-first4=Julian|editor-last4=Benello|title=From the Ground Up: Essays on Grassroots and Workplace Democracy|url=https://archive.org/details/fromgroundupessa00bene|location=Boston|publisher=South End Press|isbn=0-89608-390-X|lccn=91-28535|oclc=24376378}} <!-- Cited by Shantz 2009 -->
*{{cite book|last=Borsodi|first=Ralph|author-link=Ralph Borsodi|year=2019|orig-year=1929|title=This Ugly Civilization|url=http://www.thisuglycivilization.com/|location=Baltimore|publisher=Underworld Amusements|isbn=9781943687220|oclc=1244870407}}
*{{cite book|last=Carson|first=Kevin|author-link=Kevin Carson|year=2007|title=Studies in Mutualist Political Economy|url=https://kevinacarson.org/publication/mpe/|publisher=]|isbn=978-1419658693|oclc=172923433}} <!-- Cited by Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite book|last=Carson|first=Kevin|author-link=Kevin Carson|year=2008|title=Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective|url=https://kevinacarson.org/publication/ot/|publisher=]|isbn=978-1439221990|oclc=311323130}} <!-- Cited by Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite book|last=Carson|first=Kevin|author-link=Kevin Carson|year=2010|title=The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low Overhead Manifesto|url=https://kevinacarson.org/publication/hir/|publisher=]|isbn=9781439266991|oclc=697667745}} <!-- Cited by Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite book|last=Carson|first=Kevin|author-link=Kevin Carson|year=2016|title=The Desktop Regulatory State: The Countervailing Power of Individuals and Networks|url=https://kevinacarson.org/publication/drs/|publisher=]|isbn=978-1523275595}} <!-- Cited by Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite book|last=De Cleyre|first=Voltairine|author-link=Voltairine De Cleyre|year=2005|chapter=Anarchism|editor-first1=Sharon|editor-last1=Presley|editor-first2=Crispin|editor-last2=Sartwell|title=Exquisite Rebel: The Essays of Voltairine de Cleyre|url=https://archive.org/details/exquisiterebeles0000decl/|pages=67–82|publisher=]|isbn=978-0-7914-6093-1|lccn=2004059138}} <!-- Cited by Carson 2018 -->
*{{cite book|last=De Cleyre|first=Voltairine|author-link=Voltairine De Cleyre|year=2005|chapter=Anarchism and American traditions|editor-first1=Sharon|editor-last1=Presley|editor-first2=Crispin|editor-last2=Sartwell|title=Exquisite Rebel: The Essays of Voltairine de Cleyre|url=https://archive.org/details/exquisiterebeles0000decl/|pages=89–102|publisher=]|isbn=978-0-7914-6093-1|lccn=2004059138}} <!-- Cited by Carson 2018 -->
*{{cite book|last=Gesell|first=Silvio|author-link=Silvio Gesell|year=1958|orig-year=1916|title=]|location=London|publisher=]|translator-first=Philip|translator-last=Pye|oclc=920780}} <!-- Cited by Shantz 2009 -->
*{{cite book|last=Goodman|first=Paul|author-link=Paul Goodman|year=1977|editor-first=Taylor|editor-last=Stoehr|editor-link=Taylor Stoehr|title=Drawing the Line: The Political Essays of Paul Goodman|url=https://archive.org/details/drawinglinepolit0000good|location=New York|publisher=Free Life Editions|isbn=0-914156-17-9|lccn=77-71943|oclc=3417667}} <!-- Cited by Shantz 2009 -->
*{{cite book|last=Greene|first=William Batchelder|author-link=William Batchelder Greene|year=1919|orig-year=1850|title=Mutual Banking|url=https://archive.org/details/mutualbankingsho00greeiala|location=Denver|publisher=Reform League|oclc=645147153}} <!-- Cited by Martin 1970, Wilbur 2019 and Vest 2020 -->
*{{cite book|last=Greene|first=William Batchelder|author-link=William Batchelder Greene|year=1875|chapter=Communism vs. Mutualism|chapter-url=https://www.libertarian-labyrinth.org/mutualism/william-b-greene-communism-vs-mutualism/|title=Socialistic, Communistic, Mutualistic and Financial Fragments|location=Boston|publisher=]|oclc=2567184}} <!-- Cited by Martin 1970, Wilbur 2019 and Vest 2020 -->
*{{cite book|last=Kuehn|first=Herman|year=1901|title=The Problem of Worry: The Principles of Scientific Mutualism Applied to Modern Commerce|url=https://www.libertarian-labyrinth.org/anarchist-mutualism/herman-kuehn-the-problem-of-worry-1901/|location=Chicago|publisher=N. B. Irving|oclc=33202070}} <!-- Cited by Martin 1970 and Wilbur 2019 -->
* {{cite magazine|last=Lum|first=Dyer|author-link=Dyer Lum|year=1886|title=Communal Anarchy|magazine=The Alarm|volume=2|issue=15|page=2|url=https://www.libertarian-labyrinth.org/anarchism-without-adjectives/dyer-d-lum-communal-anarchy-1886/|via=The Libertarian Labyrinth}} <!-- Cited by Wilbur 2019 -->
* {{cite book|last=Lum|first=Dyer|author-link=Dyer Lum|year=1890|title=The Economics of Anarchy: A Study of the Industrial Type|url=https://archive.org/details/economicsanarch00lumgoog/|location=Chicago|publisher=]|oclc=7982163}} <!-- Cited by Carson 2018 and Martin 1970 -->
*{{cite wikisource|last=Proudhon|first=Pierre-Joseph|author-link=Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|year=1876|orig-year=1840|title=What is Property? Or, An Inquiry Into The Principle of Right and of Government|translator-first=Benjamin|translator-last=Tucker|translator-link=Benjamin Tucker|wslink=What is Property?}} <!-- Cited by Carson 2018, Shantz 2009 and Vest 2020 -->
*{{cite book|last=Proudhon|first=Pierre-Joseph|author-link=Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|year=1888|orig-year=1847|title=System of Economical Contradictions: or, The Philosophy of Poverty|url=https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/proudhon/philosophy/index.htm|translator-first=Benjamin|translator-last=Tucker|translator-link=Benjamin Tucker}} <!-- Cited by Carson 2018 and Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite wikisource|last=Proudhon|first=Pierre-Joseph|author-link=Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|year=1849|title=Confessions of a Revolutionary, to serve as a History of the February Revolution|wslink=Translation:Confessions of a Revolutionary}} <!-- Cited by Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite book|last=Proudhon|first=Pierre-Joseph|author-link=Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|translator-last=Robinson|translator-first=John Beverley|orig-year=1851|year=1989|title=]|location=London|publisher=]|isbn=9781853050671|oclc=220879063}} <!-- Cited by Carson 2018, Martin 1970 and Shantz 2009 -->
*{{cite book|last=Proudhon|first=Pierre-Joseph|author-link=Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|year=2012|orig-year=1853|title=The Philosophy of Progress|url=https://www.libertarian-labyrinth.org/working-translations/the-philosophy-of-progress-revised-translation/|translator-first=Shawn P.|translator-last=Wilbur|publisher=Libertarian Labyrinth}} <!-- Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite book|last=Proudhon|first=Pierre-Joseph|author-link=Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|year=1979|orig-year=1863|title=The Principle of Federation|url=https://archive.org/details/principleoffeder0000prou/|translator-first=Richard|translator-last=Vernon|publisher=]|isbn=978-1-4875-7422-2|jstor=10.3138/j.ctvcj2hr8}} <!-- Cited by Carson 2018 -->
*{{cite book|last=Proudhon|first=Pierre-Joseph|author-link=Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|year=1865|title=De la Capacité politique des classes ouvrières|trans-title=On the political capacity of the working classes|url=https://fr.wikisource.org/De_la_Capacit%C3%A9_politique_des_classes_ouvri%C3%A8res|location=Paris|publisher=E. Dentu|language=fr}} <!-- Cited by Marshall 1993 and Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite book|last=Proudhon|first=Pierre-Joseph|author-link=Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|year=1927|title=The Solution of the Social Problem|url=https://archive.org/details/proudhonssolutio0000pjpr|editor-first=Henry|editor-last=Cohen|location=New York|publisher=Vanguard Press|isbn=0877000441|oclc=2197518}} <!-- Cited by Shantz 2009 -->
*{{cite web|last=Seymour|first=Henry|author-link=Henry Seymour (secularist)|year=1894|title=The Two Anarchisms|url=https://www.libertarian-labyrinth.org/anarchist-beginnings/henry-seymour-the-two-anarchisms-1894/|location=London|publisher=Proudhon Press}} <!-- Cited by Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite book|last=Swartz|first=Clarence Lee|author-link=Clarence Lee Swartz|year=1945|orig-year=1927|title=What Is Mutualism?|url=https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.509231/|location=New York|publisher=Modern Publishers|oclc=19347096}} <!-- Cited by Martin 1970, Shantz 2009 and Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite book|last=Tucker|first=Benjamin|author-link=Benjamin Tucker|year=1897|orig-year=1893|chapter=State Socialism and Anarchism: How Far They Agree, And Wherein They Differ|chapter-url=http://fair-use.org/benjamin-tucker/instead-of-a-book/state-socialism-and-anarchism|title=Instead Of A Book, By A Man Too Busy To Write One|url=https://archive.org/details/cu31924030333052/|edition=2nd|pages=1–18}} <!-- Cited by Martin 1970 and Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite book|last=Warren|first=Josiah|year=1852|orig-year=1846|title=Equitable Commerce: A New Development of Principles for the Harmonious Adjustment and Regulation of the Pecuniary, Intellectual and Moral Intercourse of Mankind, Proposed as Elements of New Society|url=https://openlibrary.org/books/OL23157421M/Equitable_commerce|location=New York|publisher=]|ol=23157421M |oclc=489195268}} <!-- Cited by Martin 1970 and Wilbur 2019 -->
*{{cite book|last=Westrup|first=Alfred B.|year=1895|title=The New Philosophy of Money: A Practical Treatise on the Nature and Office of Money and the Correct Method of its Supply|url=https://archive.org/details/newphilosophyofm00west/|location=Minneapolis|publisher=F. E. Leonard|oclc=4739315}} <!-- Cited by Martin 1970 and Wilbur 2019 -->
{{refend}}


==External links== == External links ==
* , Mutualist web site * ] (2006). . BookSurge Publishing.
* Gambone, Larry (1996). . Red Lion Press.
* , a weblog written by ]
* ] (1850). .
* from ''The Conquest of Power'', by Albert Weisbord
* ] (1902). .
*
* ] (1927). . Individualist anarchist criticism.
* by Larry Gambone - contains a discussion on Proudhonist mutualism
* ], ed. (Winter 2006). '''20''' (1). This issue is devoted to Kevin Carson's ''Studies in Mutualist Political Economy'' and includes critiques and Carson's rejoinders.
* by ]
* ] (18 June 2006). . Mises Institute. Austrian School and Objectivist criticism.
* by ]
* by Clarence Lee Swartz (1927) - A classic text on Mutualism * ]. (1927). .
* ] (1829). . Mechanics Free Press.
* ] 1902
* ] (1937). . ''The Conquest of Power''.
* by John William Lloyd, a criticism`
* Carson, Kevin, ''et al.'' . Mutualist: Free-Market Anti-Capitalism.
* This issue is devoted to Kevin Carson's ''Studies in Mutualist Political Economy''. It includes critiques and Carson's rejoinders.
* by ].


{{anarchism}}
]
{{libertarianism}}
]
{{libertarian socialism navbox}}
]
{{schools of economic thought}}
{{socialism}}


{{DEFAULTSORT:Mutualism (economic theory)}}
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 22:48, 28 November 2024

Anarchist school of thought and socialist economic theory This article is about the anarchist school of thought and economic theory. For the biological term and other uses, see Mutualism (disambiguation).

Part of a series on
Anarchism
"Circle-A" anarchy symbol
Schools of thought
Methodology
  • Anarchy
  • Anarchist Black Cross
  • Anarchist criminology
  • Anationalism
  • Anti-authoritarianism
  • Anti-capitalism
  • Anti-militarism
  • Affinity group
  • Autonomous social center
  • Black bloc
  • Classless society
  • Class struggle
  • Consensus decision-making
  • Conscientious objector
  • Critique of work
  • Decentralization
  • Deep ecology
  • Direct action
  • Free love
  • Freethought
  • Horizontalidad
  • Individualism
  • Law
  • Mutual aid
  • Participatory politics
  • Permanent autonomous zone
  • Prefigurative politics
  • Proletarian internationalism
  • Propaganda of the deed
  • Refusal of work
  • Revolution
  • Rewilding
  • Sabotage
  • Security culture
  • Self-ownership
  • Social ecology
  • Sociocracy
  • Somatherapy
  • Spontaneous order
  • Squatting
  • Temporary autonomous zone
  • Union of egoists
  • Voluntary association
  • Workers' council
  • People
    Issues
    History
    Culture
    Economics
    By region
    Lists
    Related topics

    Mutualism is an anarchist school of thought and anti-capitalist market socialist economic theory that advocates for workers' control of the means of production, a market economy made up of individual artisans and workers' cooperatives, and occupation and use property rights. As proponents of the labour theory of value and labour theory of property, mutualists oppose all forms of economic rent, profit and non-nominal interest, which they see as relying on the exploitation of labour. Mutualists seek to construct an economy without capital accumulation or concentration of land ownership. They also encourage the establishment of workers' self-management, which they propose could be supported through the issuance of mutual credit by mutual banks, with the aim of creating a federal society.

    Mutualism has its roots in the utopian socialism of Robert Owen and Charles Fourier. It first developed a practical expression in Josiah Warren's community experiments in the United States, which he established according to the principles of equitable commerce based on a system of labor notes. Mutualism was first formulated into a comprehensive economic theory by the French anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, who proposed the abolition of unequal exchange and the establishment of a new economic system based on reciprocity. In order to establish such a system, he proposed the creation of a "People's Bank" that could issue mutual credit to workers and eventually replace the state; although his own attempts to establish such a system were foiled by the 1851 French coup d'état.

    After Proudhon's death, mutualism lost its popularity within the European anarchist movement and was eventually redefined in counterposition to anarchist communism. Proudhon's thought was instead taken up by American individualists, who came to be closely identified with mutualist economics. Joshua K. Ingalls and William Batchelder Greene developed on mutualist theories of value, property and mutual credit, while Benjamin Tucker elaborated a mutualist critique of capitalism. The American mutualist Dyer Lum attempted to bridge the divide between communist and individualist anarchists, but many of the latter camp eventually split from the anarchist movement and embraced right-wing politics.

    Mutualist ideas were later implemented in local exchange trading systems and alternative currency models, but the tendency itself fell out of the popular consciousness during the 20th century. The advent of the internet generated a revived interest in mutualist economics, particularly after the publication of new works on the subject by American libertarian theorist Kevin Carson.

    History

    Origins

    According to Peter Kropotkin, the origins of mutualism lay in the events of the French Revolution, particularly in the federalist and directly democratic structure of the Paris Commune. The foundations of mutualist economic theory lay in the radicalism of English socialist Thomas Spence. Drawing from the Bible, as well as the liberal works of John Locke and James Harrington, Spence called for the abolition of private property, and for the workers' control of production through workers' cooperatives. The term "mutualism" was first used during the 1820s; originally defined synonymously with terms such as "mutual aid, reciprocity and fair play". In 1822, French utopian philosopher Charles Fourier used the term "convergent compound mutualism" (French: mutualisme composé convergent), in order to describe a form of progressive education that adapted the Monitorial System of pupil-teachers.

    Owenism and Josiah Warren

    Portrait photograph of Josiah Warren
    Josiah Warren, a follower of Owenism that established some of the first experiments in mutualism

    Thomas Spence's mutualist platform was taken up by Robert Owen, with Owenism becoming a pioneering force in the history of the cooperative movement. By 1826, the term "mutualism" was being used by members of Owen's utopian community of New Harmony, Indiana, in order to propose a more decentralised and libertarian project. The following year, Josiah Warren left New Harmony and established the Cincinnati Time Store, which was based on his ideas of "equitable commerce". This system set cost as the limit of price and established exchange based on labor notes. In keeping with his mutualist principles, Warren refused to substantially grow his business, maintaining the equal exchange between shopkeeper and customer. He hoped the shop would eventually be the nucleus for the establishment of a "mutualist village".

    After running it for three years, in May 1830, Warren decided to liquidate the Time Store in an attempt to pursue his plan of building a mutualist village in Ohio. This caught the attention of Robert Owen, who proposed that they instead build a mutualist community in New York, but this project never met fruition. Warren made the decision to delay the establishment of his mutualist colony until 1833. He spent the preceding years sketching out the voluntarist structure of the planned community, together with other prospective members. They established their anarchist community in Tuscarawas County, Ohio, but it was short-lived, as an influenza epidemic forced them to abandon the village by 1835. Warren returned to New Harmony, where he established another Time Store, but he received little support from other community members and shut it down in March 1844. Nevertheless, his mutualist ideas were still taken up by other radicals of the period, with George Henry Evans and his Land Reform Association championing mutualist arguments against the concentration of land ownership.

    Warren returned to Ohio, where he founded the mutualist community of Utopia in 1847, taking over from an earlier Fourierist community that had established the settlement. The community adopted labor notes as its currency and committed itself to an economy of equitable commerce, with cost as the limit of price. Utopia grew to about one hundred residents and established various enterprises, demonstrating to Warren the potential of his economic principles of decentralisation. By the 1850s, Warren himself had moved on from Ohio and established the Utopian Community of Modern Times on Long Island, New York, but his mutualist experiments would decline with the outbreak of the American Civil War. Warren's mutualist communities of Utopia and Modern Times ultimately lasted for twenty years, eventually evolving into traditional villages with only minor mutualist tendencies.

    Formulation by Proudhon

    Portrait painting of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
    Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, the first self-described anarchist and the primary proponent of mutualism

    The term "mutualist" was adopted in 1828 by the canuts of Lyon, who went on to lead a series of revolts throughout the 1830s. At this same time, the young French activist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon was first being drawn towards Fourier's utopian socialism; by 1843, Proudhon had joined the Mutualists in Lyon. The adoption of the term "mutualist" by Proudhon and his development of anarchism would result in a shift of its meaning and understanding.

    Proudhon held "mutuality" (or "exchange in kind") to be a core part of his economic theory. In his System of Economic Contradictions (1846), Proudhon described mutuality as a synthesis of "private property and collective ownership". The mutualist principle of reciprocity provided the basis for all its proposed institutions, including mutual aid, mutual credit and mutual insurance. Proudhon considered the perfect expression of mutuality to be a synallagmatic contract of equal exchange between equal individuals. Proudhon considered the unequal exchange to be at the root of the exploitation of labour and believed that a truly free market ought to be built on reciprocity, without coercion. He concluded that under such conditions, commerce would progress towards equal exchange, where the value of a product or service reflects only the cost of its production. He envisioned the eventual "withering away of the state" and its replacement with a system of economic contracts between individuals and collectives.

    Proudhon claimed that private property constituted a form of robbery, as proprietors used their title to extract labour-value from others, or as he characterised it: "the proprietor reaps where did not sow". To Proudhon, wage labour represented the enclosure of the value of collective production, with the capitalist collecting economic rent from their workers in the form of profit. Proudhon's anti-capitalist economic theories stood in sharp contrast to liberal economists of the time, such as Frédéric Bastiat and Henry Charles Carey, who argued in defense of landlords and capitalists from the claims of workers. Proudhon claimed that landlords and capitalists contributed nothing to production, and that their only claim to the contrary was by not impeding access to the means of production.

    In the wake of the French Revolution of 1848, Proudhon began elaborating his proposal for a "Bank of the People". He thought such a bank could guarantee mutual credit to all workers, enabling them bring the product of their labour under the collective ownership of all that participated in production. After he was elected to the Constituent Assembly, Proudhon lobbied for the transformation of the Bank of France into such a "Bank of the People"; he proposed that a 2-3% interest rate would be enough to cover all public expenses and would allow for the abolition of taxation. Proudhon's "Bank of the People" was officially incorporated but was never able to establish itself in practice, as Proudhon was arrested and imprisoned following the rise to power of Louis Napoleon Bonaparte. In his final attempt at writing a comprehensive mutualist programme, The Political Capacity of the Working Classes (1865), Proudhon proposed the establishment of a "mutualist system" of workers' self-management.

    Anarchism and the IWA

    During the early 1860s, the French anarchist movement first began to develop an organised expression, establishing trade unions and mutual credit systems inspired by Proudhon's mutualist theories. Towards the end of his life, Proudhon himself had grown more cautious of using the term "anarchist" and instead referred to himself as a "federalist"; his followers also eschewed the "anarchist" label, instead calling themselves "mutualists" after his principle of mutual exchange. After Proudhon's death in 1865, his mutualist followers helped establish the International Workingmen's Association (IWA).

    Portrait photograph of Mikhail Bakunin
    Mikhail Bakunin, the leader of the anti-authoritarian faction of the IWA, who argued that his collectivist anarchism was an extension of Proudhonian mutualism

    In the early years of the IWA, the organisation was largely mutualist, as exemplified by its contractual demands during its 1866 Geneva Congress and 1867 Lausanne Congress. But in the following years, French mutualists began to lose control over the organisation to Russian and German communists based in Belgium, and mutualism was gradually overshadowed by other anarchist schools of thought. By the end of the 1860s, the French section of the IWA was already shifting away from mutualism, with Eugène Varlin and Benoît Malon convincing it to adopt Mikhail Bakunin's platform of collectivism; Bakunin himself held his collectivist theories to be "Proudhonism, greatly developed and taken to its ultimate conclusion".

    Although inspired by Proudhon's arguments for federalism, Bakunin broke from his mutualist economics and argued instead for the common ownership of land. By the 1870s, as divisions between the Marxists and the anti-authoritarians in the IWA grew sharper, Proudhonian mutualism gradually lost its remaining influence; although it continued to see minor developments by collectivists such as César De Paepe and Claude Pelletier, as well as in the programme of the Paris Commune of 1871. When the IWA finally split, members of the anti-authoritarian faction slowly adopted "anarchism" as the label for their philosophy.

    Following Bakunin's death in 1876, the Russian anarchist Peter Kropotkin had taken anarchist philosophy beyond both Proudhon's mutualism and Bakunin's collectivism. He argued instead for anarchist communism, in which resources are distributed "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs." This quickly became the dominant form of anarchism, and by the 1880s, mutualism was slowly defined in opposition to anarchist communism. Mutualism was redefined as a non-communist form of anarchism, due to its emphasis on reciprocity, reformism and commerce. As a result, different tendencies and interpretations of mutualism started to emerge.

    Development by American individualists

    Warren's mutualist experiments, which inspired the American individualism of Lysander Spooner and Stephen Pearl Andrews, laid a foundation for the introduction of Proudhonian mutualism to the country. Warren himself was later retroactively labelled a "mutualist" by the individualists of this period, who were inspired by his system of "equitable commerce". American newspaper editor William Henry Channing synthesised Proudhon's mutualism with Fourierism and Christian socialism, conceiving of "the coming era of mutualism" in millenarian terms. Proudhonian mutualism was later discussed in articles by a number of American utopian theorists, including Francis George Shaw, Albert Brisbane and Charles Anderson Dana.

    Theoretical developments

    Portrait photograph of Joshua K. Ingalls
    Joshua K. Ingalls, an early American mutualist who advocated for occupancy and use property rights and upheld the labour theory of value

    Two of the most important figures of this period were Joshua K. Ingalls and William Batchelder Greene, who were inspired by Proudhon's mutualist ideas as elaborated by Dana, synthesising it with American individualist traditions pioneered by Warren. Ingalls was a vocal proponent of the labour theory of value and an advocate of workers receiving the full product of their labor. He also argued against the concentration of land ownership, which he believed to be the principal source of social inequality, and instead called for the institution of occupancy-and-use property rights.

    Drawing from Esoteric Christianity, Greene presented Proudhonian mutualism as a successor to Christianity, describing it as "the religion of the coming age." Greene proposed the establishment of mutual banks, which would issue loans at a nominal interest rate. He believed these could outcompete the high interest rates charged by commercial banks and lead to wages rising to the "full value of the work done". Greene's model for a free price system, which he argued would trend towards labor-value as economic rents and social privileges were abolished, represented a break from Owen and Warren's "labor for labor" theory of exchange. Greene argued that the fruit of all human labors was a product, not only of individual effort, but also of social circumstances that aided them in that effort.

    In 1869, Ezra and Angela Heywood established the New England Labor Reform League (NELRL), which published the individualist anarchist magazine The Word and widely distributed the works of American mutualists such as Warren and Greene, who were also members of the organisation. From 1872 to 1876, the NELRL attempted to lobby the Massachusetts General Court to establish a mutual bank, but they were ultimately unsuccessful, convincing them that state legislatures had already undergone regulatory capture by capitalists.

    Anti-capitalist critique

    Portrait photograph of Benjamin Tucker
    Benjamin Tucker, whose critique of capitalism's tendency towards monopoly provided a foundation for the development of mutualist alternatives

    Inspired by the older mutualists within the NELRL, the young League member Benjamin Tucker quickly rose to prominence as one of the leading figures of individualist anarchism in the United States. Tucker integrated the earlier iterations of mutualism into a single ideological doctrine, adopting Greene's ideas on mutual banking and synthesising Proudhonian mutualism with the American individualist tradition of Warren and Spooner. Through his magazine Liberty, which he established in 1881, he contributed to the development of anarchist political thought.

    Drawing from the mutualism of Warren and Proudhon, he argued that the exploitation of labour derived from authority of the state, which collaborated with capitalists in order to extract labour value in the form of "interest, rent and profit". In order to combat coercive practices that allowed the proliferation of wealth and privilege, Tucker proposed the establishment of a "free market of anarchistic socialism", in which all forms of monopoly were abolished. Tucker derided profit as antithetical to free competition and criticised capitalism for "abolishing the free market", arguing that a truly free market was governed only by the cost of production. At the center of his anti-capitalist critique were what he called the "Four Monopolies": that of money, land, tariffs and patents.

    While Tucker was intensely critical of capitalism, he was uninterested in speculating on the makeup of a future mutualist society. This was eventually taken up by John Beverley Robinson, who built on Tucker's critique to advocate for cooperative economics and mutual aid. Tucker's followers dedicated themselves to elaborating mutualist projects, with Alfred B. Westrup, Herman Kuehn and Clarence Lee Swartz all writing extensively on the subject of mutual credit.

    Divisions and decline

    Portrait photograph of Dyer Lum
    Dyer Lum, a Tuckerite mutualist that attempted to bridge the divide between individualist and communist anarchists

    By the beginning of the Gilded Age, Proudhonian mutualism was firmly identified with American individualism, while Tucker's followers came to define themselves in opposition to anarchist communism. Although Tucker himself didn't make the distinction, anarchists such as Henry Seymour increasingly contrasted mutualism against communism, with mutualism eventually being used to refer to "non-communist anarchism". One of Tucker's disciples, Dyer Lum, attempted to bridge the divide between the American individualists and the growing labour movement, which was developing sympathies for social anarchism. In the 1880s, Lum joined the International Working People's Association (IWPA), in which he developed a laissez-faire analysis of "wage slavery" that proposed a form of occupation and use property rights and a mutual banking system.

    Over the years, Lum worked to develop ties between different radical tendencies, hoping to create a "pluralistic anarchistic coalition" capable of advancing a social revolution. By the time of the Haymarket affair, Lum had aligned with the IWPA's view of labor unions as a means to both combat the exploitation of labour and to prefigure a future free association of producers. In the 1890s, Lum joined the American Federation of Labor (AFL), within which he introduced workers' to mutualist ideas on banking, land reform and cooperativism through his pamphlet The Economics of Anarchy. Lum was instrumental in synthesising mutualist economics with populist politics into a "uniquely American ideology", one which was taken up by the American individualist Voltairine De Cleyre.

    But factional divides also began to exacerbate at this time, as Tucker's individualist group in Boston and immigrant revolutionary socialists in Chicago split into opposing camps, while Lum attempting to mend relations between the two. Lum and Decleyre together developed a perspective of "anarchism without adjectives", in an attempt to overcome the ongoing feud between individualist and communist anarchists. But eventually the split drove many of Tucker's disciples away from the anarchist movement and towards right-wing politics, with some like Clarence Lee Swartz coming to embrace capitalism and setting the groundwork for modern American libertarianism.

    Contemporary developments

    Free-market anti-capitalist mural

    During the early 20th century, mutualist concepts were developed by the economists Ralph Borsodi and Silvio Gesell; while mutualist ideas were implemented within local exchange trading systems and by models of alternative currency. Gustav Landauer, who became a leading figure in the Bavarian Soviet Republic during the German Revolution of 1918–1919, adopted a mutualist programme of mutual credit, equal exchange and usufruct property rights. Some anarchist theorists of the late 20th century were also inspired by mutualism, including American social critic Paul Goodman, Italian essayist C. George Benello, British social historian Colin Ward, and American philosopher Peter Lamborn Wilson. In order to provide an alternative to the dominant anarchist schools of thought, Larry Gambone attempted to revive the mutualist movement; he established the Voluntary Cooperation Movement, which managed to recruit the British anarchist Jonathan Simcock and the American individualist Joe Peacott, but it was short-lived.

    By the end of the 20th century, mutualism had largely fallen out of the popular consciousness, only experiencing a revival in interest when the internet improved public access to old texts. American libertarian theorist Kevin Carson was central to the renewed interest in the subject, self-publishing a series of works on mutualism. Carson's Studies in Mutualist Political Economy proposed a synthesis of Austrian and Marxian economics, developing a form of "free-market anti-capitalism" based on Tucker's conception of mutualism. Interest in Proudhon's works was also renewed during the 21st century, with many of his texts being published by the Proudhon Library and compiled into the collection Property is Theft.

    Theory

    The primary aspects of mutualism are free association, free banking, reciprocity in the form of mutual aid, workplace democracy, workers' self-management, gradualism and dual power. Mutualism is often described by its proponents as advocating an anti-capitalist free market. Mutualists argue that most of the economic problems associated with capitalism each amount to a violation of the cost principle, or as Josiah Warren interchangeably said, cost the limit of price. It was inspired by the labour theory of value, which was popularized—although not invented—by Adam Smith in 1776 (Proudhon mentioned Smith as an inspiration). The labor theory of value holds that the actual price of a thing (or the true cost) is the amount of labor undertaken to produce it. In Warren's terms of his cost the limit of price theory, cost should be the limit of price, with cost referring to the amount of labour required to produce a good or service. Anyone who sells goods should charge no more than the cost to himself of acquiring these goods.

    Contract and federation

    Mutualism holds that producers should exchange their goods at cost-value using contract systems. While Proudhon's early definitions of cost-value were based on fixed assumptions about the value of labour hours, he later redefined cost-value to include other factors such as the labour intensity, the nature of the work involved, etc. He also expanded his notions of contract into expanded notions of federation.

    Free association

    Mutualists argue that association is only necessary where there is an organic combination of forces. An operation requires specialization and many different workers performing tasks to complete a unified product, i.e. a factory. In this situation, workers are inherently dependent on each other; without association, they are related as subordinate and superior, master and wage-slave. An operation that an individual can perform without the help of specialized workers does not require association. Proudhon argued that peasants do not require societal form and only feigned association for solidarity in abolishing rents, buying clubs, etc. He recognized that their work is inherently sovereign and free.

    For Proudhon, mutualism involved creating industrial democracy. In this system, workplaces would be "handed over to democratically organised workers' associations. ... We want these associations to be models for agriculture, industry and trade, the pioneering core of that vast federation of companies and societies woven into the common cloth of the democratic social Republic".

    K. Steven Vincent notes in his in-depth analysis of this aspect of Proudhon's ideas that "Proudhon consistently advanced a program of industrial democracy which would return control and direction of the economy to the workers". For Proudhon, "strong workers' associations ... would enable the workers to determine jointly by election how the enterprise was to be directed and operated on a day-to-day basis".

    Mutual credit

    Mutualists support mutual credit and argue that free banking should be taken back by the people to establish systems of free credit. They contend that banks have a monopoly on credit, just as capitalists have a monopoly on the means of production and landlords have a land monopoly. Banks create money by lending out deposits that do not belong to them and then charging interest on the difference. Mutualists argue that by establishing a democratically run mutual savings bank or credit union, it would be possible to issue free credit so that money could be created for the participants' benefit rather than the bankers' benefit. Individualist anarchists noted for their detailed views on mutualist banking include Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and William Batchelder Greene.

    Property

    Pierre-Joseph Proudhon was an anarchist and socialist philosopher who articulated thoughts on the nature of property. He claimed that "property is theft", "property is liberty", and "property is impossible". According to Colin Ward, Proudhon did not see a contradiction between these slogans. This was because Proudhon distinguished between what he considered to be two distinct forms of property often bound up in a single label. To the mutualist, this is the distinction between property created by coercion and property created by labour. Property is theft "when it is related to a landowner or capitalist whose ownership is derived from conquest or exploitation and only maintained through the state, property laws, police, and an army". Property is freedom for "the peasant or artisan family a natural right to a home, land cultivate, ... to tools of a trade" and the fruits of that cultivation—but not to ownership or control of the lands and lives of others. The former is considered illegitimate property, while the latter is legitimate property.

    In What Is Mutualism?, Clarence Lee Swartz wrote:

    It is, therefore, one of the purposes of Mutualists, not only to awaken in the people the appreciation of and desire for freedom, but also to arouse in them a determination to abolish the legal restrictions now placed upon non-invasive human activities and to institute, through purely voluntary associations, such measures as will liberate all of us from the exactions of privilege and the power of concentrated capital.

    Swartz also argued that mutualism differs from anarcho-communism and other collectivist philosophies by its support of private property, writing: "One of the tests of any reform movement with regard to personal liberty is this: Will the movement prohibit or abolish private property? If it does, it is an enemy of liberty. For one of the most important criteria of freedom is the right to private property in the products of ones labor. State Socialists, Communists, Syndicalists and Communist-Anarchists deny private property." However, Proudhon warned that a society with private property would lead to statist relations between people. Unlike capitalist private-property supporters, Proudhon stressed equality. He thought that all workers should own property and have access to capital, stressing that in every cooperative, "every worker employed in the association an undivided share in the property of the company".

    Usufruct

    Mutualists believe that land should not be a commodity to be bought and sold, advocating for conditional titles to land based on occupancy and use norms. Mutualists argue whether an individual has a legitimate claim to land ownership if he is not currently using it but has already incorporated his labour into it. All mutualists agree that everything produced by human labour and machines can be owned as personal property. Mutualists reject the idea of non-personal property and non-proviso Lockean sticky property. Any property obtained through violence, bought with money gained through exploitation, or bought with money that was gained violating usufruct property norms is considered illegitimate.

    Criticism

    In Europe, a contemporary critic of Proudhon was the early libertarian communist Joseph Déjacque. Unlike and against Proudhon, he argued that "it is not the product of his or her labor that the worker has a right to, but to the satisfaction of his or her needs, whatever may be their nature".

    One area of disagreement between anarcho-communists and mutualists stems from Proudhon's alleged advocacy of labour vouchers to compensate individuals for their labour and markets or artificial markets for goods and services. However, the persistent claim that Proudhon proposed a labour currency has been challenged as a misunderstanding or misrepresentation. Like other anarcho-communists, Peter Kropotkin advocated the abolition of labour remuneration and questioned, "how can this new form of wages, the labor note, be sanctioned by those who admit that houses, fields, mills are no longer private property, that they belong to the commune or the nation?" According to George Woodcock, Kropotkin believed that a wage system, whether "administered by Banks of the People or by workers' associations through labor cheques", is a form of compulsion.

    Collectivist anarchist Mikhail Bakunin was an adamant critic of Proudhonian mutualism as well, stating: "How ridiculous are the ideas of the individualists of the Jean Jacques Rousseau school and of the Proudhonian mutualists who conceive society as the result of the free contract of individuals absolutely independent of one another and entering into mutual relations only because of the convention drawn up among men. As if these men had dropped from the skies, bringing with them speech, will, original thought, and as if they were alien to anything of the earth, that is, anything having social origin".

    See also

    References

    1. Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles W. (2011). Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty. Brooklyn: Minor Compositions/Autonomedia. pp 5. “…’mutualism’ is now retrospectively used, in the twenty-first century, to refer to most anti-capitalist market anarchists…”
    2. Fraser, Elizabeth. Selected Writings of P. J. Proudhon. Anchor Books: USA. 1969. pp 23. “Proudhon’s ’mutualism’ is a socialism of credit and exchange.”
    3. Marshall 1993, pp. 431–432.
    4. Carson 2018, p. 83.
    5. Wilbur 2019, p. 213.
    6. ^ Wilbur 2019, pp. 214–215.
    7. Carson 2018, pp. 83–84.
    8. Marshall 1993, pp. 385, 497–498; Martin 1970, pp. 15–16; Wilbur 2019, p. 215.
    9. Marshall 1993, p. 385; Wilbur 2019, p. 220.
    10. Martin 1970, p. 20.
    11. Martin 1970, p. 16.
    12. ^ North 2007, p. 50.
    13. Martin 1970, p. 22.
    14. Martin 1970, pp. 24–26.
    15. Martin 1970, p. 31.
    16. Martin 1970, pp. 35–36.
    17. Marshall 1993, pp. 385–386; Martin 1970, pp. 36–37.
    18. Martin 1970, pp. 43–44.
    19. Martin 1970, pp. 44–45.
    20. Marshall 1993, pp. 385–386; Martin 1970, pp. 57–58.
    21. Martin 1970, pp. 59–62.
    22. Martin 1970, pp. 62–63.
    23. Marshall 1993, p. 386; Martin 1970, p. 63.
    24. Martin 1970, p. 63.
    25. Marshall 1993, p. 386.
    26. Wilbur 2019, p. 215.
    27. Wilbur 2019, pp. 213–214.
    28. Carson 2018, p. 91; Wilbur 2019, pp. 215–216.
    29. Carson 2018, p. 91.
    30. Carson 2018, pp. 91–92; Wilbur 2019, pp. 215–216.
    31. Carson 2018, pp. 91–92.
    32. Carson 2018, p. 92.
    33. Carson 2018, pp. 92–93.
    34. Carson 2018, p. 93; Vest 2020, pp. 113–114.
    35. Carson 2018, pp. 93–94; Vest 2020, pp. 113–114.
    36. Carson 2018, pp. 93–94.
    37. Carson 2018, p. 94.
    38. Carson 2018, pp. 95–96.
    39. Carson 2018, p. 96.
    40. North 2007, p. 50; Wilbur 2019, p. 216.
    41. Carson 2018, pp. 94–95; North 2007, p. 50; Wilbur 2019, p. 216.
    42. North 2007, pp. 50–51.
    43. ^ Wilbur 2019, p. 216.
    44. ^ Marshall 1993, p. 435.
    45. Marshall 1993, p. 434.
    46. ^ Shantz 2009, p. 2.
    47. Marshall 1993, p. 431; Shantz 2009, p. 2; Wilbur 2019, p. 216.
    48. Shantz 2009, p. 2; Wilbur 2019, p. 216.
    49. North 2007, p. 51; Shantz 2009, p. 2.
    50. Marshall 1993, p. 434; Wilbur 2019, p. 217.
    51. Marshall 1993, p. 275.
    52. Wilbur 2019, p. 217.
    53. Marshall 1993, p. 435; Shantz 2009, p. 2.
    54. Wilbur 2019, pp. 217–218.
    55. ^ Wilbur 2019, p. 214.
    56. Marshall 1993, p. 327.
    57. Marshall 1993, p. 327; Wilbur 2019, p. 218.
    58. ^ Wilbur 2019, p. 218.
    59. Carson 2018, p. 91; Marshall 1993, p. 387.
    60. Marshall 1993, p. 387.
    61. ^ Wilbur 2019, p. 220.
    62. Wilbur 2019, pp. 218–219.
    63. ^ Wilbur 2019, p. 219.
    64. Carson 2018, p. 102; Wilbur 2019, p. 219.
    65. Carson 2018, p. 103; Marshall 1993, p. 236; Vest 2020, p. 114.
    66. Marshall 1993, pp. 387, 497–498; Vest 2020, p. 115.
    67. Carson 2018, p. 103; Martin 1970, pp. 139–140.
    68. Carson 2018, p. 103; Martin 1970, pp. 140–142.
    69. Carson 2018, p. 103; Martin 1970, pp. 144, 148–149.
    70. Carson 2018, p. 102; Wilbur 2019, p. 219; Vest 2020, p. 114.
    71. ^ Carson 2018, p. 102.
    72. ^ Carson 2018, pp. 102–103.
    73. Vest 2020, p. 115.
    74. Carson 2018, p. 102; Vest 2020, p. 114.
    75. Carson 2018, p. 104.
    76. Carson 2018, p. 104; Vest 2020, pp. 114–115; Wilbur 2019, p. 220.
    77. Carson 2018, pp. 104–105; Vest 2020, p. 115; Wilbur 2019, p. 220.
    78. Carson 2018, p. 105; Wilbur 2019, pp. 220–221.
    79. Carson 2018, p. 105.
    80. Carson 2018, pp. 105–106.
    81. Carson 2018, pp. 106–107.
    82. Carson 2018, pp. 107–108.
    83. Carson 2018, pp. 107–108; Vest 2020, p. 115.
    84. Carson 2018, p. 108.
    85. ^ Wilbur 2019, p. 221.
    86. Vest 2020, pp. 114–115; Wilbur 2019, p. 221.
    87. Carson 2018, pp. 108–109.
    88. Carson 2018, p. 109.
    89. Carson 2018, pp. 109–110.
    90. ^ Carson 2018, p. 110.
    91. Carson 2018, pp. 110–111.
    92. Carson 2018, p. 111.
    93. Carson 2018, pp. 111–112.
    94. Carson 2018, p. 112.
    95. Marshall 1993, pp. 413–414.
    96. Marshall 1993, p. 682; Shantz 2009, p. 2.
    97. Carson 2018, p. 116.
    98. Wilbur 2019, p. 222.
    99. ^ Wilbur, Shawn P. (2018). "Mutualism". In Adams, Matthew S.; Levy, Carl. The Palgrave Handbook of Anarchism. Springer. pp. 213–224. ISBN 9783319756202.
    100. Guerin, Daniel, ed. (2006) No Gods, No Masters. 1. Oakland: AK Press. p. 62. ISBN 9781904859253.
    101. Vincent, K. Steven (1984). Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and the Rise of French Republican Socialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 156, 230. ISBN 9780195034134.
    102. Ward, Colin (2004). Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction.
    103. ^ Bojicic, Savo (2010). America America or Is It? Bloomington: AuthorHouse. p. 369. ISBN 9781452034355.
    104. Weisbord, Albert (1937). The Conquest of Power: Liberalism, Anarchism, Syndicalism, Socialism, Fascism, and Communism. I. New York: Covici-Friede. p. 235.
    105. Quoted by James J. Martin. Men Against the State. p. 223.
    106. Martin, James J. (1970). Men Against the State. Colorado Springs: Ralph Myles Publisher. pp. viii, ix, 209. ISBN 9780879260064
    107. Graham, Robert (2005). Anarchism: A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas. Black Rose Books. ISBN 978-1-55164-251-2.
    108. Pengam, Alain. "Anarchist-Communism". According to Pengam, Déjacque criticized Proudhon as far as "the Proudhonist version of Ricardian socialism, centred on the reward of labour power and the problem of exchange value. In his polemic with Proudhon on women's emancipation, Déjacque urged Proudhon to push on 'as far as the abolition of the contract, the abolition not only of the sword and of capital, but of property and authority in all their forms,' and refuted the commercial and wages logic of the demand for a 'fair reward' for 'labour' (labour power). Déjacque asked: 'Am I thus right to want, as with the system of contracts, to measure out to each—according to their accidental capacity to produce—what they are entitled to?' The answer given by Déjacque to this question is unambiguous: 'it is not the product of his or her labour that the worker has a right to, but to the satisfaction of his or her needs, whatever may be their nature.' For Déjacque, on the other hand, the communal state of affairs—the phalanstery 'without any hierarchy, without any authority' except that of the 'statistics book'—corresponded to 'natural exchange,' i.e. to the 'unlimited freedom of all production and consumption; the abolition of any sign of agricultural, individual, artistic or scientific property; the destruction of any individual holding of the products of work; the demonarchisation and the demonetarisation of manual and intellectual capital as well as capital in instruments, commerce and buildings."
    109. McKay, Iain (Spring 2017). "Proudhon's Constituted Value and the Myth of Labour Notes". Anarchist Studies. Retrieved 28 August 2020.
    110. Kropotkin, Peter (1920). "The Wage System". Freedom Pamphlets (1). Retrieved 28 August 2020.
    111. Woodcock, George (2004). Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements. Broadview Press. p. 168.
    112. Bookchin, Murray (1998). The Spanish Anarchists: The Heroic Years, 1868-1936 (illustrated revised ed.). Oakland: AK Press. p. 25. ISBN 9781873176047.
    113. Maximoff, G. P. (1953). Political Philosophy of Bakunin. New York: Free Press. p. 167. ISBN 9780029012000.

    Bibliography

    Further reading

    External links

    Anarchism
    Concepts
    Issues
  • Animal rights
  • Capitalism
  • Education
  • Love and sex
  • Nationalism
  • Religion
  • Violence
  • Schools of thought
    Classical
  • Individualist
  • Mutualist
  • Social
  • Post-classical
    Contemporary
    Types of federation
    Economics
    Culture
  • A las Barricadas
  • Anarchist bookfair
  • Anarcho-punk
  • Arts
  • DIY ethic
  • Escuela Moderna
  • Films
  • Freeganism
  • Infoshop
  • Independent Media Center
  • The Internationale
  • Jewish anarchism
  • Lifestylism
  • May Day
  • "No gods, no masters"
  • Popular education
  • "Property is theft!"
  • Radical cheerleading
  • Radical environmentalism
  • Self-managed social center
  • Symbolism
  • History
  • French Revolution
  • Revolutions of 1848
  • Spanish Regional Federation of the IWA
  • Paris Commune
  • Hague Congress
  • Cantonal rebellion
  • Haymarket affair
  • International Conference of Rome
  • Trial of the Thirty
  • International Conference of Rome
  • Ferrer movement
  • Strandzha Commune
  • Congress of Amsterdam
  • Tragic Week
  • High Treason Incident
  • Manifesto of the Sixteen
  • German Revolution of 1918–1919
  • Bavarian Soviet Republic
  • 1919 United States bombings
  • Biennio Rosso
  • Kronstadt rebellion
  • Makhnovshchina
  • Amakasu Incident
  • Alt Llobregat insurrection
  • Anarchist insurrection of January 1933
  • Anarchist insurrection of December 1933
  • Spanish Revolution of 1936
  • Barcelona May Days
  • Red inverted triangle
  • Labadie Collection
  • Provo
  • May 1968
  • Kate Sharpley Library
  • Carnival Against Capital
  • 1999 Seattle WTO protests
  • Really Really Free Market
  • Occupy movement
  • People
  • Alston
  • Armand
  • Ba
  • Bakunin
  • Berkman
  • Bonanno
  • Bookchin
  • Bourdin
  • Chomsky
  • Cleyre
  • Day
  • Durruti
  • Ellul
  • Ervin
  • Faure
  • Fauset MacDonald
  • Ferrer
  • Feyerabend
  • Giovanni
  • Godwin
  • Goldman
  • González Prada
  • Graeber
  • Guillaume
  • He-Yin
  • Kanno
  • Kōtoku
  • Kropotkin
  • Landauer
  • Liu
  • Magón
  • Makhno
  • Maksimov
  • Malatesta
  • Mett
  • Michel
  • Most
  • Parsons
  • Pi i Margall
  • Pouget
  • Proudhon
  • Raichō
  • Reclus
  • Rocker
  • Santillán
  • Spooner
  • Stirner
  • Thoreau
  • Tolstoy
  • Tucker
  • Volin
  • Ward
  • Warren
  • Yarchuk
  • Zerzan
  • Lists
  • Anarcho-punk bands
  • Books
  • Fictional characters
  • Films
  • Jewish anarchists
  • Musicians
  • Periodicals
  • By region
  • Africa
  • Albania
  • Algeria
  • Andorra
  • Argentina
  • Armenia
  • Australia
  • Austria
  • Azerbaijan
  • Bangladesh
  • Belarus
  • Belgium
  • Bolivia
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Brazil
  • Bulgaria
  • Canada
  • Chile
  • China
  • Colombia
  • Costa Rica
  • Croatia
  • Cuba
  • Cyprus
  • Czech Republic
  • Denmark
  • Dominican Republic
  • East Timor
  • Ecuador
  • Egypt
  • El Salvador
  • Estonia
  • Finland
  • France
  • French Guiana
  • Georgia
  • Germany
  • Greece
  • Guatemala
  • Hong Kong
  • Hungary
  • Iceland
  • India
  • Indonesia
  • Iran
  • Ireland
  • Israel
  • Italy
  • Japan
  • Korea
  • Latvia
  • Malaysia
  • Mexico
  • Monaco
  • Mongolia
  • Morocco
  • Netherlands
  • New Zealand
  • Nicaragua
  • Nigeria
  • Norway
  • Panama
  • Paraguay
  • Peru
  • Philippines
  • Poland
  • Portugal
  • Puerto Rico
  • Romania
  • Russia
  • Serbia
  • Singapore
  • South Africa
  • Spain
  • Sweden
  • Switzerland
  • Syria
  • Taiwan
  • Tunisia
  • Turkey
  • Ukraine
  • United Kingdom
  • United States
  • Uruguay
  • Venezuela
  • Vietnam
  • Related topics
  • Anti-corporatism
  • Anti-consumerism
  • Anti-fascism
  • Anti-globalization
  • Anti-statism
  • Anti-war movement
  • Autarchism
  • Autonomism
  • Communism
  • Definition of anarchism and libertarianism
  • Dual Power
  • Labour movement
  • Left communism
  • Left-libertarianism
  • Libertarianism
  • Libertarian socialism
  • Marxism
  • Relationship between Friedrich
    Nietzsche and Max Stirner
  • Situationist International
  • Socialism
  • Spontaneous order
  • flag Anarchism portal
  • Category
  • Outline
  • Libertarianism
    Origins
    Schools
    Libertarian capitalism
    (Right-libertarianism)
    Libertarian socialism
    (Left-libertarianism)
    Concepts
    Philosophers
    Left-wing
    Right-wing
    Other
    Politicians
    Issues
    Works
    Related
    Libertarian socialism
    Schools
    of thought
    Concepts
    Models
    People
    19th c.
    20th c.
    Significant
    events
    Related
    Schools of economic thought
    Pre-modern
    Modern era
    Early modern
    Late modern
    Contemporary
    (20th and
    21st centuries)
    Related
    Socialism
    History - Outline
    Schools of
    thought
    Libertarian
    (from below)
    Authoritarian
    (from above)
    Religious
    Regional variants
    Key topics
    and issues
    Concepts
    People
    16th c.
    18th c.
    19th c.
    20th c.
    21st c.
    Organizations
    See also
    Categories: