Property is eternal, like every negation,--"Of all social and civil institutions."
For that reason, every institution and every law based on property will perish.
"It is a boon as precious as liberty."
For the rich proprietor.
"In fact, the cause of the cultivation of the habitable earth."If the cultivator ceased to be a tenant, would the land be worse cared for?
"The guarantee and the morality of labor."Under the regime of property, labor is not a condition, but a privilege.
"The application of justice."
What is justice without equality of fortunes? A balance with false weights.
"All morality,--"
A famished stomach knows no morality,--
"All public order,--"
Certainly, the preservation of property,--"Rest on the right of property."
title.But this precarious condition is an injustice, for it implies an inequality in the bargain.The laborer's wages exceed but little his running expenses, and do not assure him wages for to-morrow;while the capitalist finds in the instrument produced by the laborer a pledge of independence and security for the future.
Precarious, from precor, "I pray;" because the act of concession expressly signified that the lord, in answer to the prayers of his men or slaves, had granted them permission to labor.
Now, this reproductive leaven--this eternal germ of life, this preparation of the land and manufacture of implements for production--constitutes the debt of the capitalist to the producer, which he never pays; and it is this fraudulent denial which causes the poverty of the laborer, the luxury of idleness, and the inequality of conditions.This it is, above all other things, which has been so fitly named the exploitation of man by man.
One of three things must be done.Either the laborer must be given a portion of the product in addition to his wages; or the employer must render the laborer an equivalent in productive service; or else he must pledge himself to employ him for ever.
Division of the product, reciprocity of service, or guarantee of perpetual labor,--from the adoption of one of these courses the capitalist cannot escape.But it is evident that he cannot satisfy the second and third of these conditions--he can neither put himself at the service of the thousands of working-men, who, directly or indirectly, have aided him in establishing himself, nor employ them all for ever.He has no other course left him, then, but a division of the property.But if the property is divided, all conditions will be equal--there will be no more large capitalists or large proprietors.
Consequently, when M.Ch.Comte--following out his hypothesis--shows us his capitalist acquiring one after another the products of his employees' labor, he sinks deeper and deeper into the mire; and, as his argument does not change, our reply of course remains the same.
"Other laborers are employed in building: some quarry the stone, others transport it, others cut it, and still others put it in place.Each of them adds a certain value to the material which passes through his hands; and this value, the product of his labor, is his property.He sells it, as fast as he creates it, to the proprietor of the building, who pays him for it in food and wages."_Divide et impera_--divide, and you shall command; divide, and you shall grow rich; divide, and you shall deceive men, you shall daze their minds, you shall mock at justice! Separate laborers from each other, perhaps each one's daily wage exceeds the value of each individual's product; but that is not the question under consideration.A force of one thousand men working twenty days has been paid the same wages that one would be paid for working fifty-five years; but this force of one thousand has done in twenty days what a single man could not have accomplished, though he had labored for a million centuries.Is the exchange an equitable one? Once more, no; when you have paid all the individual forces, the collective force still remains to be paid.
Consequently, there remains always a right of collective property which you have not acquired, and which you enjoy unjustly.
Admit that twenty days' wages suffice to feed, lodge, and clothe this multitude for twenty days: thrown out of employment at the end of that time, what will become of them, if, as fast as they create, they abandon their creations to the proprietors who will soon discharge them? While the proprietor, firm in his position (thanks to the aid of all the laborers), dwells in security, and fears no lack of labor or bread, the laborer's only dependence is upon the benevolence of this same proprietor, to whom he has sold and surrendered his liberty.If, then, the proprietor, shielding himself behind his comfort and his rights, refuses to employ the laborer, how can the laborer live? He has ploughed an excellent field, and cannot sow it; he has built an elegant and commodious house, and cannot live in it; he has produced all, and can enjoy nothingLabor leads us to equality.Every step that we take brings us nearer to it; and if laborers had equal strength, diligence, and industry, clearly their fortunes would be equal also.Indeed, if, as is pretended,--and as we have admitted,--the laborer is proprietor of the value which he creates, it follows:--1.That the laborer acquires at the expense of the idle proprietor;2.That all production being necessarily collective, the laborer is entitled to a share of the products and profits commensurate with his labor;3.That all accumulated capital being social property, no one can be its exclusive proprietor.
These inferences are unavoidable; these alone would suffice to revolutionize our whole economical system, and change our institutions and our laws.Why do the very persons, who laid down this principle, now refuse to be guided by it? Why do the Says, the Comtes, the Hennequins, and others--after having said that property is born of labor--seek to fix it by occupation and prescription?
