arch/ive/ief (2000 - 2005)

THE ACTUALITY OF PROUDHON
Subjects of interest yesterday as today that they can be found in
http://www.franciscotrindade.com
Join in this site some of the works and articles, published and unknown, that the author of these pages had chance to write in these last sixteen years.
THE ACTUALITY OF PROUDHON

PROUDHON AND THE FEDERALISM AS SUSTENANCE OF DEMOCRACY DIRECT

THE ACTUALITY OF PROUDHON

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon is certainly the more eclectic social thinker and deepest than France and the world already he supplied. Adored for one, rejected for others, almost always recouped, its workmanship cannot cause indifference. It is truth that the Proudhon thought attacked all the aspects of the social life: politics, economics, sociological and legal. This propensity to the universality, amplified for one real analytical perspicacity, attributes a tone to it and a dimension of actuality of which it never was broken up. This actuality of the Proudhon thought places its force in its college to supply concrete and clear answers to the problems that devastate the unequal society. As ideas of Proudhon, cursed and malediction of the front, pushed of alive force, will filter each time more and will introduce it the bias in the society modern. Perhaps the practical idea, it has it. It will win one hundred years after its death.

PROUDHON AND THE FEDERALISM AS SUSTENANCE OF DEMOCRACY DIRECT

Proudhon is too much important to be forgotten, at least for the literary movement. Its proposals the level politician, social, economic, religious constitute some of the perspectives richest of the anarquism that even so today are generally unknown same to the level of the movement, later had been developed ece of fishes in practical for excessively known men for and had given to origin the crucial events that had wide exceeded the borders of the countries where they had taken place. Knowing we since it has much time of the bankruptcy of the capitalism (I ask for to excuse, liberalism as now more insistently the bourgeoisie it nicknames it) and having property in possession the changes that since 1985 if are to operate the East and that they cannot leave of to be significant to all the levels, and that it was predicted, said and argued for Proudhon, or either the bankruptcy of the communism of State of marxist-leninist type, is important to discover and to rediscover a form of life for beyond the capitalism and the communism.

Downloads gratuitous and integral of the texts
To have access all the text to go:
Briefly new texts will be added.
http://www.franciscotrindade.com
Presentation

Been born in Paris, in 1962, Francisco Trindade studied in the College of Letters of the Classic University of Lisbon, where if he permitted in Philosophy in 1985. He is professor of Philosophy of secondary education since 1986. He is partner of the Societé Proudhon of Paris and author of unknown workmanship on the thought philosophical politician and of Proudhon. Already he published six books, seventy articles along with having taken the cable a set of ten of conferences. Its hard personal inquiry already since 1984. Join in this site some of the works and articles, published and unknown, that the author of these pages had chance to write in these last dezasseis years. It has exception of some works of features more academical, the great part of these studies allusion turns direct or in the orbit of the systematic inquiry or the explicit influence of an only name: Pierre-Joseph Proudhon.
The direct contact with the workmanship of the French socialist thinker, happened for the first time in 1975 and already in this height it together exerted with other names of the anarchic universe a powerful attraction. The beginning of the systematic study of Proudhon and its complex, encyclopedic and multifaceted workmanship, was given in the final tip of the degree in Philosophy, in 1984. All the works taken the cable on Proudhon had been carried through to leave of this date and belong to the workmanship Investigations of Proudhon (I.P) in its smashing still unknown majority. One of the objectivos of this site is to decide this problem. If some time had the chance of the publishing publication of these inquiries, certainly that some of "the no-proudhon" works would not be published and would be relegated for the deep dusty of some drawer. As this still did not happen, a part of the works is presented, since the first ones, until the last ones already with date of 2000.
http://www.franciscotrindade.com

Unfortunately, Proudhon was one of the worst anti-Semites of the nineteenth century. He supported slavery for Black people and inequality for women. See URL

wow! next time please try to translate better :)
anyway, proudhon was indeed sexist and anti-semite, but that's a good thing about the anarchist movement. We don't follow one or two thinkers, but take the good stuff and reject the bad stuff. Any anarchist with a little background should know Proudhon was sexist, but he/she should and probably all will aknowledge that.
This does have a reason though. A lot of capitalists in the 19th century were rich capitalists ie the owners. Anti-capitalism often went together with anti-semitism. Of course, we know better now. Proudhon, Fourier, even Marx didn't like the jews all that much. Note that later, a quite some famous anarchists were jews or had jewish roots: Emma Goldman, Alexander Berkman, and I think even Peter Kropotkin.

Absolutely right, Bakunin said some very antisemite things as well. Marx, though being a jew himself, has some strange quotes about jews and 'negroes', especially if you don't put them in the context. So this is not an argument against Proudhon. But Kropotkin was not a jew but a Russian prince.

In general, all 'anarchists' or 'marxists' should take the good stuff and reject the bad stuff from ALL these thinkers instead of treating them like heroes, geniusses or the Holy Bible (or Quran for that matter...) Don't trust ANY authority.

Proudhon himself said he was "mutualist", not anarchist; so why should anarchists defend him at all? Proudhon called for "extermination" of Jews, which Marx never did of course. With Marx, it was more like someone from a Catholic family trying to break free from family traditions, very unlike Proudhon. Proudhon backed the slave plantation owners of the South in the US Civil War, also unlike Marx (by which I of course do not want to suggest that Marx might not be wrong on anything).
Jan D., of course the use of the word "extermination" is an argument against Proudhon; and then it does not matter what Marx or anyone else says.

Extermination? Can you quote exactly please? Concerning the cicil war: you're right there if I remember well.

But Squirrel ;-), Marx was from a protestant family (his father was a converted jew), and in fact he spoke of 'the jew' as a metaphor for the banker, the financer etc.