友情提示:如果本网页打开太慢或显示不完整,请尝试鼠标右键“刷新”本网页!阅读过程发现任何错误请告诉我们,谢谢!! 报告错误
飞读中文网 返回本书目录 我的书架 我的书签 TXT全本下载 进入书吧 加入书签

what is property-第114章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!
————未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!



onstantly talking nonsense; and the other designedly abandons the cause of property; in order to present under the same name the theory of individual possession。  Was I wrong in claiming that confusion reigned among legists; and ought I to be legally prosecuted for having said that their science henceforth stood convicted of falsehood; its glory eclipsed?

The ordinary resources of the law no longer sufficing; philosophy; political economy; and the framers of systems have been consulted。  All the oracles appealed to have been discouraging。

The philosophers are no clearer to…day than at the time of the eclectic efflorescence; nevertheless; through their mystical apothegms; we can distinguish the words PROGRESS; UNITY; ASSOCIATION; SOLIDARITY; FRATERNITY; which are certainly not reassuring to proprietors。  One of these philosophers; M。 Pierre Leroux; has written two large books; in which he claims to show by all religious; legislative; and philosophical systems that; since men are responsible to each other; equality of conditions is the final law of society。  It is true that this philosopher admits a kind of property; but as he leaves us to imagine what property would become in presence of equality; we may boldly class him with the opponents of the right of increase。

I must here declare freelyin order that I may not be suspected of secret connivance; which is foreign to my naturethat M。 Leroux has my full sympathy。  Not that I am a believer in his quasi…Pythagorean philosophy (upon this subject I should have more than one observation to submit to him; provided a veteran covered with stripes would not despise the remarks of a conscript); not that I feel bound to this author by any special consideration for his opposition to property。  In my opinion; M。 Leroux could; and even ought to; state his position more explicitly and logically。  But I like; I admire; in M。 Leroux; the antagonist of our philosophical demigods; the demolisher of usurped reputations; the pitiless critic of every thing that is respected because of its antiquity。  Such is the reason for my high esteem of M。 Leroux; such would be the principle of the only literary association which; in this century of coteries; I should care to form。  We need men who; like M。 Leroux; call in question social principles;not to diffuse doubt concerning them; but to make them doubly sure; men who excite the mind by bold negations; and make the conscience tremble by doctrines of annihilation。  Where is the man who does not shudder on hearing M。 Leroux exclaim; 〃There is neither a paradise nor a hell; the wicked will not be punished; nor the good rewarded。  Mortals! cease to hope and fear; you revolve in a circle of appearances; humanity is an immortal tree; whose branches; withering one after another; feed with their debris the root which is always young!〃  Where is the man who; on hearing this desolate confession of faith; does not demand with terror; 〃Is it then true that I am only an aggregate of elements organized by an unknown force; an idea realized for a few moments; a form which passes and disappears?  Is it true that my mind is only a harmony; and my soul a vortex?  What is the ego? what is God?  what is the sanction of society?〃

In former times; M。 Leroux would have been regarded as a great culprit; worthy only (like Vanini) of death and universal execration。  To…day; M。 Leroux is fulfilling a mission of salvation; for which; whatever he may say; he will be rewarded。  Like those gloomy invalids who are always talking of their approaching death; and who faint when the doctor's opinion confirms their pretence; our materialistic society is agitated and loses countenance while listening to this startling decree of the philosopher; 〃Thou shalt die!〃  Honor then to M。 Leroux; who has revealed to us the cowardice of the Epicureans; to M。 Leroux; who renders new philosophical solutions necessary!  Honor to the anti…eclectic; to the apostle of equality!

In his work on 〃Humanity;〃 M。 Leroux commences by positing the necessity of property:  〃You wish to abolish property; but do you not see that thereby you would annihilate man and even the name of man? 。 。 。  You wish to abolish property; but could you live without a body?  I will not tell you that it is necessary to support this body; 。 。 。 I will tell you that this body is itself a species of property。〃

In order clearly to understand the doctrine of M。 Leroux; it must be borne in mind that there are three necessary and primitive forms of society;communism; property; and that which to…day we properly call association。  M。 Leroux rejects in the first place communism; and combats it with all his might。  Man is a personal and free being; and therefore needs a sphere of independence and individual activity。  M。 Leroux emphasizes this in adding:  〃You wish neither family; nor country; nor property; therefore no more fathers; no more sons; no more brothers。  Here you are; related to no being in time; and therefore without a name; here you are; alone in the midst of a billion of men who to…day inhabit the earth。  How do you expect me to distinguish you in space in the midst of this multitude?〃

If man is indistinguishable; he is nothing。  Now; he can be distinguished; individualized; only through a devotion of certain things to his use;such as his body; his faculties; and the tools which he uses。  〃Hence;〃 says M。 Leroux; 〃the necessity of appropriation;〃 in short; property。

But property on what condition?  Here M。 Leroux; after having condemned communism; denounces in its turn the right of domain。  His whole doctrine can be summed up in this single proposition; _Man may be made by property a slave or a despot by turns_。

That posited; if we ask M。 Leroux to tell us under what system of property man will be neither a slave nor a despot; but free; just; and a citizen; M。 Leroux replies in the third volume of his work on 〃Humanity:〃


〃There are three ways of destroying man's communion with his fellows and with the universe: 。 。 。  1。 By separating man in time; 2。 by separating him in space; 3。 by dividing the land; or; in general terms; the instruments of production; by attaching men to things; by subordinating man to property; by making man a proprietor。〃


This language; it must be confessed; savors a little too strongly of the metaphysical heights which the author frequents; and of the school of M。 Cousin。  Nevertheless; it can be seen; clearly enough it seems to me; that M。 Leroux opposes the exclusive appropriation of the instruments of production; only he calls this non…appropriation of the instruments of production a NEW METHOD of establishing property; while I; in accordance with all precedent; call it a destruction of property。  In fact; without the appropriation of instruments; property is nothing。


〃Hitherto。  we have confined ourselves to pointing out and combating the despotic features of property; by considering property alone。  We have failed to see that the despotism of property is a correlative of the division of the human race; 。 。 。 that property; instead of being organized in such a way as to facilitate the unlimited communion of man with his fellows and with the universe; has been; on the con
返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0
未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!
温馨提示: 温看小说的同时发表评论,说出自己的看法和其它小伙伴们分享也不错哦!发表书评还可以获得积分和经验奖励,认真写原创书评 被采纳为精评可以获得大量金币、积分和经验奖励哦!