Difference between revisions of "Anarchy 85/Josiah Warren: the incompleat anarchist"

From Anarchy
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Ivanhoe
imported>Ivanhoe
 
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 8: Line 8:
 
}}
 
}}
  
<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;"><font size="2"><div style="text-align:justify;">{{p|s1}}<font size="5">'''Josiah Warren:<br>the incompleat anarchist'''</font>
+
<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|s1}}<font size="5">'''Josiah Warren:<br>the incompleat anarchist'''</font>
  
 
<font size="4">'''[[Author:Harold Barclay|HAROLD BARCLAY]]'''</font>
 
<font size="4">'''[[Author:Harold Barclay|HAROLD BARCLAY]]'''</font>
  
  
{{sc|Josiah warren has been pre&shy;sen&shy;ted}} to the world by his various inter&shy;pre&shy;ters as an indi&shy;vidu&shy;alist anar&shy;chist and as the first Ame&shy;ri&shy;can anar&shy;chist. His bio&shy;graph&shy;er, {{popup|W. Bailie|William Bailie, Irish-American author (1867–1957)}}, en&shy;tit&shy;led his work, ''{{l|Josiah Warren: The First Ame&shy;ri&shy;can Anar&shy;chist|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/warren/bailie.html}}'' (1906). Two recent antho&shy;lo&shy;gies of anar&shy;chist wri&shy;tings, {{w|I. L. Horo&shy;wit{{q|z|r}}|Irving_Louis_Horowitz}} ''{{l|The Anar&shy;chists|http://www.worldcat.org/title/anarchists/oclc/577109715}}'' (1964) and {{popup|L. I. Krimerman|Leonard Isaiah Krimerman (born 1934)}} and {{popup|Lewis Perry|(born 1938)}}{{s}} ''{{l|Patterns of Anarchy|http://www.worldcat.org/title/patterns-of-anarchy-a-collection-of-writings-on-the-anarchist-tradition/oclc/266213}}'' (1966), each have selec&shy;tions from Warren. [[Author:George Woodcock|George Wood&shy;cock]] in his survey of anar&shy;chism devotes several para&shy;graphs to Warren and writes: {{qq|&hellip; he deve&shy;loped the theory of sove&shy;reign&shy;ty of the indi&shy;vidu&shy;al which has led to his being regar&shy;ded, rightly, I think, as the first Ame&shy;ri&shy;can anar&shy;chist}} ({{popup|1962, p. 456|Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements.}}).
+
<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|Josiah warren has been pre&shy;sen&shy;ted}} to the world by his various inter&shy;pre&shy;ters as an indi&shy;vidu&shy;alist anar&shy;chist and as the first Ame&shy;ri&shy;can anar&shy;chist. His bio&shy;graph&shy;er, {{popup|W. Bailie|William Bailie, Irish-American author (1867–1957)}}, en&shy;tit&shy;led his work, ''{{l|Josiah Warren: The First Ame&shy;ri&shy;can Anar&shy;chist|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/warren/bailie.html}}'' (1906). Two recent antho&shy;lo&shy;gies of anar&shy;chist wri&shy;tings, {{w|I. L. Horo&shy;wit{{q|z|r}}|Irving_Louis_Horowitz}} ''{{l|The Anar&shy;chists|http://www.worldcat.org/title/anarchists/oclc/577109715}}'' (1964) and {{popup|L. I. Krimerman|Leonard Isaiah Krimerman (born 1934)}} and {{popup|Lewis Perry|(born 1938)}}{{s}} ''{{l|Patterns of Anarchy|http://www.worldcat.org/title/patterns-of-anarchy-a-collection-of-writings-on-the-anarchist-tradition/oclc/266213}}'' (1966), each have selec&shy;tions from Warren. [[Author:George Woodcock|George Wood&shy;cock]] in his survey of anar&shy;chism devotes several para&shy;graphs to Warren and writes: {{qq|&hellip; he deve&shy;loped the theory of the sove&shy;reign&shy;ty of the indi&shy;vidu&shy;al which has led to his being regar&shy;ded, rightly, I think, as the first Ame&shy;ri&shy;can anar&shy;chist}} ({{popup|1962, p. 456|Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements.}}).
  
 
{{tab}}A recent reading of ''{{l|True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/warren/truecivtoc.html}}'' (1863) and ''{{l|Prac&shy;tical Details of Equitable Commerce|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/warren/equcom.pdf}}'' (1852) has led me to ques&shy;tion how far one should clas&shy;sify Warren as an anar&shy;chist and to suspect that cer&shy;tain&shy;ly as he grew older he assumed a posi&shy;tion like that of {{w|Thoreau|Henry_David_Thoreau}}, or even {{w|Jef&shy;fer&shy;son|Thomas_Jefferson}}, which is more accu&shy;rate&shy;ly des&shy;cribed as de&shy;cen&shy;tra&shy;list demo&shy;crat and, indeed, seems to form a sig&shy;ni&shy;fi&shy;cant link between various ele&shy;ments of the con&shy;tem&shy;po&shy;rary radical right (such as the {{w|Rampart College|Rampart_College}} group at {{w|Lark&shy;spur, Colo&shy;rado|Larkspur,_Colorado}}) and the anar&shy;chist left.
 
{{tab}}A recent reading of ''{{l|True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/warren/truecivtoc.html}}'' (1863) and ''{{l|Prac&shy;tical Details of Equitable Commerce|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/warren/equcom.pdf}}'' (1852) has led me to ques&shy;tion how far one should clas&shy;sify Warren as an anar&shy;chist and to suspect that cer&shy;tain&shy;ly as he grew older he assumed a posi&shy;tion like that of {{w|Thoreau|Henry_David_Thoreau}}, or even {{w|Jef&shy;fer&shy;son|Thomas_Jefferson}}, which is more accu&shy;rate&shy;ly des&shy;cribed as de&shy;cen&shy;tra&shy;list demo&shy;crat and, indeed, seems to form a sig&shy;ni&shy;fi&shy;cant link between various ele&shy;ments of the con&shy;tem&shy;po&shy;rary radical right (such as the {{w|Rampart College|Rampart_College}} group at {{w|Lark&shy;spur, Colo&shy;rado|Larkspur,_Colorado}}) and the anar&shy;chist left.
  
{{tab}}Josiah Warren (1798-1974) was born in New England and, after an early mar&shy;ri&shy;age, drifted west&shy;ward even&shy;tu&shy;ally sett&shy;ling in {{w|Ohio|Ohio}}. By pro&shy;fes&shy;sion an or&shy;ches&shy;tra leader and music teacher, he pursued these enter&shy;pri&shy;ses spo&shy;ra&shy;di&shy;cally through&shy;out much of his life. Warren early gave indi&shy;ca&shy;tion of a prac&shy;ti&shy;cal and in&shy;geni&shy;ous turn of mind with his inven&shy;tion of a {{w|lard|Lard}} fed lamp, much cheaper to operate than the usual oil type lamp. Later in his life he turned at dif&shy;fer&shy;ent times to produce other in&shy;ven&shy;tions. His desire to pro&shy;pa&shy;gate his social theo&shy;ries led to an inte&shy;rest in prin&shy;ting and the deve&shy;lop&shy;ment of a cylan&shy;der press which, however, waas not accep&shy;ted by printers until rein&shy;ven&shy;ted by another indi&shy;vidu&shy;al a gene&shy;ra&shy;tion later. He, also, deve&shy;loped a nota&shy;tio&shy;nal system for music and a ste&shy;reo&shy;ty&shy;ping process which brought him $7,000, a sum he in&shy;ves&shy;ted in his second expe&shy;ri&shy;men&shy;tal com&shy;mu&shy;nity of Utopia. All in all Warren appears to fit the ste&shy;reo&shy;type of the in&shy;geni&shy;ous Yankee tin&shy;ker&shy;ing among a variety of gadgets and pro&shy;du&shy;cing the most prac&shy;ti&shy;cal tech&shy;no&shy;logi&shy;cal inven&shy;tions. But Warren was more than a creator of new gadgets. {{p|91}}His main claim to fame, of course, is as an inno&shy;va&shy;tor and ex&shy;peri&shy;men&shy;ter with social systems. {{w|J. S. Mill|John_Stuart_Mill}} called Warren a {{qq|remar&shy;ka&shy;ble Ame&shy;ri&shy;can}} and it is a sad com&shy;men&shy;tary on the ''{{w|En&shy;cyc&shy;lo&shy;pae&shy;dia Bri&shy;tan&shy;nica|Encyclopædia_Britannica}}'' and not on Josiah Warren that the en&shy;cy&shy;clo&shy;pae&shy;dia con&shy;tains not a single refe&shy;rence to so crea&shy;tive and unique an indi&shy;vi&shy;dual.
+
{{tab}}Josiah Warren (1798-1874) was born in New England and, after an early mar&shy;ri&shy;age, drifted west&shy;ward even&shy;tu&shy;ally sett&shy;ling in {{w|Ohio|Ohio}}. By pro&shy;fes&shy;sion an or&shy;ches&shy;tra leader and music teacher, he pursued these enter&shy;pri&shy;ses spo&shy;ra&shy;di&shy;cally through&shy;out much of his life. Warren early gave indi&shy;ca&shy;tion of a prac&shy;ti&shy;cal and in&shy;geni&shy;ous turn of mind with his inven&shy;tion of a {{w|lard|Lard}} fed lamp, much cheaper to operate than the usual oil type lamp. Later in his life he turned at dif&shy;fer&shy;ent times to produce other in&shy;ven&shy;tions. His desire to pro&shy;pa&shy;gate his social theo&shy;ries led to an inte&shy;rest in prin&shy;ting and the deve&shy;lop&shy;ment of a cylan&shy;der press which, however, was not accep&shy;ted by printers until rein&shy;ven&shy;ted by another indi&shy;vidu&shy;al a gene&shy;ra&shy;tion later. He, also, deve&shy;loped a nota&shy;tio&shy;nal system for music and a ste&shy;reo&shy;ty&shy;ping process which brought him $7,000, a sum he in&shy;ves&shy;ted in his second expe&shy;ri&shy;men&shy;tal com&shy;mu&shy;nity of Utopia. All in all Warren appears to fit the ste&shy;reo&shy;type of the in&shy;geni&shy;ous Yankee tin&shy;ker&shy;ing among a variety of gadgets and pro&shy;du&shy;cing the most prac&shy;ti&shy;cal tech&shy;no&shy;logi&shy;cal inven&shy;tions. But Warren was more than a creator of new gadgets. {{p|91}}His main claim to fame, of course, is as an inno&shy;va&shy;tor and ex&shy;peri&shy;men&shy;ter with social systems. {{w|J. S. Mill|John_Stuart_Mill}} called Warren a {{qq|remar&shy;ka&shy;ble Ame&shy;ri&shy;can}} and it is a sad com&shy;men&shy;tary on the ''{{w|En&shy;cyc&shy;lo&shy;pae&shy;dia Bri&shy;tan&shy;nica|Encyclopædia_Britannica}}'' and not on Josiah Warren that the en&shy;cy&shy;clo&shy;pae&shy;dia con&shy;tains not a single refe&shy;rence to so crea&shy;tive and unique an indi&shy;vi&shy;dual.
  
{{tab}}{{w|Martin|James_J._Martin}} sug&shy;gests that had it not been for his asso&shy;cia&shy;tion with {{w|Owen|Robert_Owen}}, Warren might have devoted the rest of his life to busi&shy;ness under&shy;ta&shy;kings and {{qq|become one of the early men of wealth in the growing Midwest}} ({{l|{{popup|1957, p. 14|https://mises.org/system/tdf/Men%20Against%20the%20State%20The%20Expositers%20of%20Individualist%20Anarchism%20in%20America%2C%201827-1908_3.pdf?file=1&type=document|Men Against the State: The Expositors of Individualist Anarchism in America, 1827–1908. DeKalb, Ill.: Adrian Allen Associates (1953)}}}}). Between 1825 and 1827 Warren was asso&shy;cia&shy;ted with Owen at the {{w|New Harmony|New_Harmony,_Indiana}} colony. He saw its major defects as ex&shy;ces&shy;sive orga&shy;niza&shy;tion and cen&shy;tra&shy;liza&shy;tion and left the com&shy;mu&shy;nity intent upon testing Owen{{s}} idea of eco&shy;no&shy;mic ex&shy;change through {{w|pro&shy;mis&shy;sory notes|Promissory_note}} based upon labour time. Like Thoreau who em&shy;barked upon his {{l|Walden|https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Walden}} stay as an expe&shy;ri&shy;ment, Warren, too, opened a {{qq|time store}} in {{w|Cin&shy;cin&shy;nati|Cincinnati}} in 1827 to test the prac&shy;tica&shy;lity of Owen{{s}} labour note theory. After three years of opera&shy;tion Warren closed his store con&shy;vinced of its fea&shy;sibi&shy;lity and invited others to join him in foun&shy;ding a com&shy;mu&shy;nity based on what he called the prin&shy;ciple of equity, namely, that cost of an item was the labour time in&shy;volved in bring&shy;ing it to the con&shy;su&shy;mer. Ex&shy;change was to be in the form of notes indi&shy;ca&shy;ting a promise to give on demand so much labour time. In addi&shy;tion the com&shy;mu&shy;nity was to be {{qq|based on volun&shy;tary assent and lacking the for&shy;ma&shy;li&shy;ties of majo&shy;rity rule}} (Martin, 1957, p. 43). Thus, he founded Equity which lasted less than three years and was the shor&shy;test lived of his com&shy;mu&shy;ni&shy;ties. Actu&shy;ally Equity was forced to close not because of the failure of the ap&shy;pli&shy;ca&shy;tion of the social theo&shy;ries but because {{qq|Faulty judg&shy;ment had re&shy;sul&shy;ted in loca&shy;ting the set&shy;tle&shy;ment on land in a low-<wbr>lying area, which sub&shy;jec&shy;ted the resi&shy;dents to a variety of ill&shy;nes&shy;ses. The prin&shy;ci&shy;pal one &hellip; was {{w|malaria|Malaria}} (Martin, 1957, p. 42). Following the Equity expe&shy;ri&shy;ment Warren vari&shy;ous&shy;ly worked on a new prin&shy;ting press, ran a short&shy;lived manual trai&shy;ning school, edited a {{popup|peri&shy;odi&shy;cal|http://wiki.libertarian-labyrinth.org/index.php?title=The_Peaceful_Revolutionist}}, and opera&shy;ted for two years another time store. In 1847 he estab&shy;lished his second com&shy;mu&shy;nity of Utopia and in 1851 still a third called {{w|Modern Times|Socialist_Community_of_Modern_Times}}. Both were orga&shy;nized ac&shy;cor&shy;ding to the same prin&shy;ciples as those of Equity and even&shy;tu&shy;ally suf&shy;fered from the ill-<wbr>effects of the {{w|Civil War|American_Civil_War}} and the avai&shy;labi&shy;lity of cheap lands further west. Both, however, managed to con&shy;tinue on after Warren{{s}} death in 1874. Members gra&shy;du&shy;ally and quietly aban&shy;doned the prin&shy;ciples of equity and the com&shy;muni&shy;ties even&shy;tu&shy;ally wi&shy;thered away after a few secular Utopian ex&shy;peri&shy;ments of the nine&shy;teenth century. And this is a point worth bearing in mind, namely, that of all the secular ex&shy;peri&shy;ments of this nature the two which sur&shy;vived the longest were the ones which were the most liber&shy;ta&shy;rian.
+
{{tab}}{{w|Martin|James_J._Martin}} sug&shy;gests that had it not been for his asso&shy;cia&shy;tion with {{w|Owen|Robert_Owen}}, Warren might have devoted the rest of his life to busi&shy;ness under&shy;ta&shy;kings and {{qq|become one of the early men of wealth in the growing Midwest}} ({{special1}}). Between 1825 and 1827 Warren was asso&shy;cia&shy;ted with Owen at the {{w|New Harmony|New_Harmony,_Indiana}} colony. He saw its major defects as ex&shy;ces&shy;sive orga&shy;niza&shy;tion and cen&shy;tra&shy;liza&shy;tion and left the com&shy;mu&shy;nity intent upon testing Owen{{s}} idea of eco&shy;no&shy;mic ex&shy;change through {{w|pro&shy;mis&shy;sory notes|Promissory_note}} based upon labour time. Like Thoreau who em&shy;barked upon his {{l|Walden|https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Walden}} stay as an expe&shy;ri&shy;ment, Warren, too, opened a {{qq|time store}} in {{w|Cin&shy;cin&shy;nati|Cincinnati}} in 1827 to test the prac&shy;tica&shy;lity of Owen{{s}} labour note theory. After three years of opera&shy;tion Warren closed his store con&shy;vinced of its fea&shy;sibi&shy;lity and invited others to join him in foun&shy;ding a com&shy;mu&shy;nity based on what he called the prin&shy;ciple of equity, namely, that cost of an item was the labour time in&shy;volved in bring&shy;ing it to the con&shy;su&shy;mer. Ex&shy;change was to be in the form of notes indi&shy;ca&shy;ting a promise to give on demand so much labour time. In addi&shy;tion the com&shy;mu&shy;nity was to be {{qq|based on volun&shy;tary assent and lacking the for&shy;ma&shy;li&shy;ties of majo&shy;rity rule}} (Martin, 1957, p. 43). Thus, he founded Equity which lasted less than three years and was the shor&shy;test lived of his com&shy;mu&shy;ni&shy;ties. Actu&shy;ally Equity was forced to close not because of the failure of the ap&shy;pli&shy;ca&shy;tion of the social theo&shy;ries but because {{qq|Faulty judg&shy;ment had re&shy;sul&shy;ted in loca&shy;ting the set&shy;tle&shy;ment on land in a low-<wbr>lying area, which sub&shy;jec&shy;ted the resi&shy;dents to a variety of ill&shy;nes&shy;ses. The prin&shy;ci&shy;pal one &hellip; was {{w|malaria|Malaria}}}} (Martin, 1957, p. 42). Following the Equity expe&shy;ri&shy;ment Warren vari&shy;ous&shy;ly worked on a new prin&shy;ting press, ran a short&shy;lived manual trai&shy;ning school, edited a {{special2}}, and opera&shy;ted for two years another time store. In 1847 he estab&shy;lished his second com&shy;mu&shy;nity of Utopia and in 1851 still a third called {{w|Modern Times|Socialist_Community_of_Modern_Times}}. Both were orga&shy;nized ac&shy;cor&shy;ding to the same prin&shy;ciples as those of Equity and even&shy;tu&shy;ally suf&shy;fered from the ill-<wbr>effects of the {{w|Civil War|American_Civil_War}} and the avai&shy;labi&shy;lity of cheap lands further west. Both, however, managed to con&shy;tinue on after Warren{{s}} death in 1874. Members gra&shy;du&shy;ally and quietly aban&shy;doned the prin&shy;ciples of equity and the com&shy;muni&shy;ties even&shy;tu&shy;ally wi&shy;thered away after a few secular Utopian ex&shy;peri&shy;ments of the nine&shy;teenth century. And this is a point worth bearing in mind, namely, that of all the secular ex&shy;peri&shy;ments of this nature the two which sur&shy;vived the longest were the ones which were the most liber&shy;ta&shy;rian.
  
 
{{tab}}Warren{{s}} views may be broadly des&shy;cribed as indi&shy;vidu&shy;alist, ra&shy;tio&shy;na&shy;list and prag&shy;ma&shy;tic and his earlier writing, e.g., ''Equi&shy;table Commerce'', as more spe&shy;ci&shy;fi&shy;cally anar&shy;chist. There is a certain affi&shy;nity between Warren and [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]: Warren could well have au&shy;thored a ''{{w|Utopian Essays and Prac&shy;tical Pro&shy;po&shy;sals|Utopian_Essays_and_Practical_Proposals}}''. The central theme of Warren{{s}} wri&shy;tings is the {{qq|sove&shy;reign&shy;ty of the indi&shy;vi&shy;dual}}, by which he meant that the star&shy;ting {{p|92}}place of any philo&shy;sophy is with the indi&shy;vi&shy;dual who by im&shy;pli&shy;ca&shy;tion is above all a ratio&shy;nal being. The primi&shy;tive con&shy;di&shy;tion of man re&shy;qui&shy;ring self-<wbr>pre&shy;serva&shy;tion pro&shy;duced clan orga&shy;niza&shy;tion which stressed the su&shy;pre&shy;macy of the group over the indi&shy;vi&shy;dual, the dis&shy;solu&shy;tion of indi&shy;vi&shy;dua&shy;lity in the group, and dis&shy;cou&shy;raged all indi&shy;vi&shy;dual res&shy;pon&shy;sibi&shy;lity. The clan idea has been per&shy;petu&shy;ated in modern times in the concept of na&shy;tion&shy;hood, in the {{qq|Union of states}} and in com&shy;mu&shy;nism. True civi&shy;liza&shy;tion is based on the sove&shy;reign&shy;ty of the indi&shy;vi&shy;dual not of the group.
 
{{tab}}Warren{{s}} views may be broadly des&shy;cribed as indi&shy;vidu&shy;alist, ra&shy;tio&shy;na&shy;list and prag&shy;ma&shy;tic and his earlier writing, e.g., ''Equi&shy;table Commerce'', as more spe&shy;ci&shy;fi&shy;cally anar&shy;chist. There is a certain affi&shy;nity between Warren and [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]: Warren could well have au&shy;thored a ''{{w|Utopian Essays and Prac&shy;tical Pro&shy;po&shy;sals|Utopian_Essays_and_Practical_Proposals}}''. The central theme of Warren{{s}} wri&shy;tings is the {{qq|sove&shy;reign&shy;ty of the indi&shy;vi&shy;dual}}, by which he meant that the star&shy;ting {{p|92}}place of any philo&shy;sophy is with the indi&shy;vi&shy;dual who by im&shy;pli&shy;ca&shy;tion is above all a ratio&shy;nal being. The primi&shy;tive con&shy;di&shy;tion of man re&shy;qui&shy;ring self-<wbr>pre&shy;serva&shy;tion pro&shy;duced clan orga&shy;niza&shy;tion which stressed the su&shy;pre&shy;macy of the group over the indi&shy;vi&shy;dual, the dis&shy;solu&shy;tion of indi&shy;vi&shy;dua&shy;lity in the group, and dis&shy;cou&shy;raged all indi&shy;vi&shy;dual res&shy;pon&shy;sibi&shy;lity. The clan idea has been per&shy;petu&shy;ated in modern times in the concept of na&shy;tion&shy;hood, in the {{qq|Union of states}} and in com&shy;mu&shy;nism. True civi&shy;liza&shy;tion is based on the sove&shy;reign&shy;ty of the indi&shy;vi&shy;dual not of the group.
Line 25: Line 25:
 
{{tab}}Before des&shy;cri&shy;bing the doc&shy;trine of self-<wbr>sove&shy;reign&shy;ty further and its spe&shy;ci&shy;fic rela&shy;tion&shy;ship to the idea of go&shy;vern&shy;ment{{dash|which is the main burden of this paper}}it should be pointed out that Warren saw true civi&shy;liza&shy;tion as a pos&shy;sibi&shy;lity only when indi&shy;vi&shy;dua&shy;lity and self-<wbr>sove&shy;reign&shy;ty ope&shy;rated in concert with what he called the prin&shy;ciple of equi&shy;va&shy;lents and the prin&shy;ciple of equi&shy;table money. The prin&shy;ciple of equi&shy;va&shy;lents holds that the price of an item is go&shy;verned by its cost which in turn amounts to the labour of pro&shy;ces&shy;sing and deli&shy;ve&shy;ring the item to the con&shy;su&shy;mer. Cost should not be con&shy;fused with value; to base price on value is an ini&shy;quity. One cannot deter&shy;mine value, but one can deter&shy;mine cost by labour exerted. Skill or talent which cost nothing are natural wealth and should be ac&shy;ces&shy;sible to all without price. Warren, fol&shy;low&shy;ing Owen, advo&shy;cates the equa&shy;lity of labour: the labour time of the phy&shy;si&shy;cian is equal to that of the store clerk. This raises the ques&shy;tion that if cost of an item varies ac&shy;cor&shy;ding to labour time why doesn{{t}} the {{qq|cost}} of the labour time vary ac&shy;cor&shy;ding to the amount of energy and the in&shy;vest&shy;ment of past trai&shy;ning. In other words, should not past pre&shy;para&shy;tion and ex&shy;pen&shy;di&shy;ture of energy make the sur&shy;geon{{s}} hour more costly than the shop&shy;kee&shy;per{{s}}<!-- 'shopkeepers' in original -->?
 
{{tab}}Before des&shy;cri&shy;bing the doc&shy;trine of self-<wbr>sove&shy;reign&shy;ty further and its spe&shy;ci&shy;fic rela&shy;tion&shy;ship to the idea of go&shy;vern&shy;ment{{dash|which is the main burden of this paper}}it should be pointed out that Warren saw true civi&shy;liza&shy;tion as a pos&shy;sibi&shy;lity only when indi&shy;vi&shy;dua&shy;lity and self-<wbr>sove&shy;reign&shy;ty ope&shy;rated in concert with what he called the prin&shy;ciple of equi&shy;va&shy;lents and the prin&shy;ciple of equi&shy;table money. The prin&shy;ciple of equi&shy;va&shy;lents holds that the price of an item is go&shy;verned by its cost which in turn amounts to the labour of pro&shy;ces&shy;sing and deli&shy;ve&shy;ring the item to the con&shy;su&shy;mer. Cost should not be con&shy;fused with value; to base price on value is an ini&shy;quity. One cannot deter&shy;mine value, but one can deter&shy;mine cost by labour exerted. Skill or talent which cost nothing are natural wealth and should be ac&shy;ces&shy;sible to all without price. Warren, fol&shy;low&shy;ing Owen, advo&shy;cates the equa&shy;lity of labour: the labour time of the phy&shy;si&shy;cian is equal to that of the store clerk. This raises the ques&shy;tion that if cost of an item varies ac&shy;cor&shy;ding to labour time why doesn{{t}} the {{qq|cost}} of the labour time vary ac&shy;cor&shy;ding to the amount of energy and the in&shy;vest&shy;ment of past trai&shy;ning. In other words, should not past pre&shy;para&shy;tion and ex&shy;pen&shy;di&shy;ture of energy make the sur&shy;geon{{s}} hour more costly than the shop&shy;kee&shy;per{{s}}<!-- 'shopkeepers' in original -->?
  
{{tab}}With the prin&shy;ciple of equi&shy;va&shy;lents usury dis&shy;ap&shy;pears and a bor&shy;row&shy;er is charged as Warren charged his bor&shy;row&shy;ers, for the labour time it takes the lender to arrange for an ulti&shy;mate&shy;ly collect the loan. The capi&shy;ta&shy;list obtains, under Warren{{s}} scheme, only payment for the time in&shy;ves&shy;ted in over&shy;see&shy;ing and other similar duties. Warren men&shy;tions two factors which will prepare the way for the estab&shy;lish&shy;ment of this prin&shy;ciple. First, stres&shy;sing the ra&shy;tio&shy;nal nature of man, is the ob&shy;ser&shy;va&shy;tion that men, capi&shy;ta&shy;list and non-<wbr>capi&shy;ta&shy;list alike, will see that this ap&shy;proach is most rea&shy;so&shy;nable. Those who do not will, by the opera&shy;tion of {{qq|equi&shy;table com&shy;peti&shy;tion}}, even&shy;tu&shy;ally be forced to engage in {{qq|equi&shy;table com&shy;merce}}. Another es&shy;sen&shy;tial ingre&shy;dient of true civi&shy;liza&shy;tion is equi&shy;table money where notes indi&shy;ca&shy;ting a promise to pro&shy;vide a stated amount of labour time on demand are used for all com&shy;mer&shy;cial trans&shy;ac&shy;tions. Such a system was ap&shy;plied by Warren in his time stores and in his com&shy;muni&shy;ties where it appa&shy;rent&shy;ly met with some success, suf&shy;fe&shy;ring little from what one might con&shy;sider its most obvious draw&shy;backs, namely, an ina&shy;bi&shy;lity to redeem the notes and depre&shy;cia&shy;tion as a result of over-<wbr>issue.
+
{{tab}}With the prin&shy;ciple of equi&shy;va&shy;lents usury dis&shy;ap&shy;pears and a bor&shy;row&shy;er is charged, as Warren charged his bor&shy;row&shy;ers, for the labour time it takes the lender to arrange for and ulti&shy;mate&shy;ly collect the loan. The capi&shy;ta&shy;list obtains, under Warren{{s}} scheme, only payment for the time in&shy;ves&shy;ted in over&shy;see&shy;ing and other similar duties. Warren men&shy;tions two factors which will prepare the way for the estab&shy;lish&shy;ment of this prin&shy;ciple. First, stres&shy;sing the ra&shy;tio&shy;nal nature of man, is the ob&shy;ser&shy;va&shy;tion that men, capi&shy;ta&shy;list and non-<wbr>capi&shy;ta&shy;list alike, will see that this ap&shy;proach is most rea&shy;so&shy;nable. Those who do not will, by the opera&shy;tion of {{qq|equi&shy;table com&shy;peti&shy;tion}}, even&shy;tu&shy;ally be forced to engage in {{qq|equi&shy;table com&shy;merce}}. Another es&shy;sen&shy;tial ingre&shy;dient of true civi&shy;liza&shy;tion is equi&shy;table money where notes indi&shy;ca&shy;ting a promise to pro&shy;vide a stated amount of labour time on demand are used for all com&shy;mer&shy;cial trans&shy;ac&shy;tions. Such a system was ap&shy;plied by Warren in his time stores and in his com&shy;muni&shy;ties where it appa&shy;rent&shy;ly met with some success, suf&shy;fe&shy;ring little from what one might con&shy;sider its most obvious draw&shy;backs, namely, an ina&shy;bi&shy;lity to redeem the notes and depre&shy;cia&shy;tion as a result of over-<wbr>issue.
  
 
{{tab}}Warren uses the model of equi&shy;table com&shy;merce as the basis for his ap&shy;proach to edu&shy;ca&shy;tion and all social rela&shy;tions. At one point in his work such eco&shy;nomic empha&shy;sis is ex&shy;pressed in a naive eco&shy;no&shy;mic deter&shy;mi&shy;nism.
 
{{tab}}Warren uses the model of equi&shy;table com&shy;merce as the basis for his ap&shy;proach to edu&shy;ca&shy;tion and all social rela&shy;tions. At one point in his work such eco&shy;nomic empha&shy;sis is ex&shy;pressed in a naive eco&shy;no&shy;mic deter&shy;mi&shy;nism.
Line 31: Line 31:
 
<blockquote>{{qq|Pecu&shy;ni&shy;ary affairs are the very basis of society. When we change {{p|93}}these we change all insti&shy;tu&shy;tions, for all are built, di&shy;rect&shy;ly or indi&shy;rect&shy;ly upon pro&shy;per&shy;ty consi&shy;dera&shy;tions. &hellip; The great excuse for laws and go&shy;vern&shy;ment is, the pro&shy;tec&shy;tion of persons and pro&shy;per&shy;ty, but were it not for pro&shy;per&shy;ty, persons would not be in danger.}} (''Prac&shy;tical Details'', p. 71.)</blockquote>
 
<blockquote>{{qq|Pecu&shy;ni&shy;ary affairs are the very basis of society. When we change {{p|93}}these we change all insti&shy;tu&shy;tions, for all are built, di&shy;rect&shy;ly or indi&shy;rect&shy;ly upon pro&shy;per&shy;ty consi&shy;dera&shy;tions. &hellip; The great excuse for laws and go&shy;vern&shy;ment is, the pro&shy;tec&shy;tion of persons and pro&shy;per&shy;ty, but were it not for pro&shy;per&shy;ty, persons would not be in danger.}} (''Prac&shy;tical Details'', p. 71.)</blockquote>
  
When methods of ac&shy;qui&shy;ring pro&shy;per&shy;ty are so altered that each may share in an abun&shy;dance {{qq|with less trouble than it will cost him to invade his heigh&shy;bour}}, we shall be able to dis&shy;pense with rules (''Prac&shy;tical Details'', p. 71). Warren makes, then, in this one in&shy;stance what today would be consi&shy;dered a vulgar Marxist ex&shy;pla&shy;na&shy;tion, but both ''Prac&shy;tical Details'' and ''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'' are per&shy;mea&shy;ted with an intel&shy;lec&shy;tua&shy;lis&shy;tic causal theory inti&shy;ma&shy;ting that the real dynamic force in society is the ra&shy;tio&shy;nal man who comes to realize his own self-<wbr>inte&shy;rest.
+
When methods of ac&shy;qui&shy;ring pro&shy;per&shy;ty are so altered that each may share in an abun&shy;dance {{qq|with less trouble than it will cost him to invade his neigh&shy;bour}}, we shall be able to dis&shy;pense with rules (''Prac&shy;tical Details'', p. 71). Warren makes, then, in this one in&shy;stance what today would be consi&shy;dered a vulgar Marxist ex&shy;pla&shy;na&shy;tion, but both ''Prac&shy;tical Details'' and ''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'' are per&shy;mea&shy;ted with an intel&shy;lec&shy;tua&shy;lis&shy;tic causal theory inti&shy;ma&shy;ting that the real dynamic force in society is the ra&shy;tio&shy;nal man who comes to realize his own self-<wbr>inte&shy;rest.
  
 
{{tab}}While Warren conti&shy;nued through&shy;out his life a faith in the prin&shy;ciples of equi&shy;table com&shy;merce, he appa&shy;rent&shy;ly modi&shy;fied his views con&shy;cer&shy;ning the prin&shy;ciples of indi&shy;vi&shy;dua&shy;lity and self-<wbr>sove&shy;reign&shy;ty as they relate to the role of go&shy;vern&shy;ment. Thus, Martin writes:
 
{{tab}}While Warren conti&shy;nued through&shy;out his life a faith in the prin&shy;ciples of equi&shy;table com&shy;merce, he appa&shy;rent&shy;ly modi&shy;fied his views con&shy;cer&shy;ning the prin&shy;ciples of indi&shy;vi&shy;dua&shy;lity and self-<wbr>sove&shy;reign&shy;ty as they relate to the role of go&shy;vern&shy;ment. Thus, Martin writes:
Line 37: Line 37:
 
<blockquote>{{qq|Agita&shy;ted by the violence and dis&shy;rup&shy;tion which was beco&shy;ming a part of the exis&shy;tence of many in all parts of the land, Warren pub&shy;lished a curious tract, ''Modern Go&shy;vern&shy;ment and Its True Mission, A Few Words for the Ame&shy;ri&shy;can Crisis'' which advo&shy;cates expe&shy;di&shy;ents greatly at vari&shy;ance with prin&shy;ciples which have un&shy;alter&shy;able status among anar&shy;chists. A study of the work reveals a re&shy;gres&shy;sion to func&shy;tio&shy;nal aspects long taught by Robert Owen}} (Martin, p. 82).</blockquote>
 
<blockquote>{{qq|Agita&shy;ted by the violence and dis&shy;rup&shy;tion which was beco&shy;ming a part of the exis&shy;tence of many in all parts of the land, Warren pub&shy;lished a curious tract, ''Modern Go&shy;vern&shy;ment and Its True Mission, A Few Words for the Ame&shy;ri&shy;can Crisis'' which advo&shy;cates expe&shy;di&shy;ents greatly at vari&shy;ance with prin&shy;ciples which have un&shy;alter&shy;able status among anar&shy;chists. A study of the work reveals a re&shy;gres&shy;sion to func&shy;tio&shy;nal aspects long taught by Robert Owen}} (Martin, p. 82).</blockquote>
  
Martin does not elabo&shy;rate further, but when one ex&shy;plores ''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'', written a year after (1863), his meaning becomes more appa&shy;rent. Warren here has become the advo&shy;cate for a limited go&shy;vern&shy;ment much in the tra&shy;di&shy;tion of Thomas Jef&shy;fer&shy;son.
+
Martin does not elabo&shy;rate further, but when one ex&shy;plores ''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'', written a year after (1863), his meaning becomes more appa&shy;rent. Warren here has become the advo&shy;cate of a form of limited go&shy;vern&shy;ment much in the tra&shy;di&shy;tion of Thomas Jef&shy;fer&shy;son.
  
 
<blockquote>{{qq|The true func&shy;tion of go&shy;vern&shy;ment deals only with the of&shy;fen&shy;sive en&shy;croach&shy;ments upon persons or pro&shy;per&shy;ty{{dash|an expe&shy;di&shy;ent choice of evils where there is nothing but evil to choose from}}to prevent un&shy;neces&shy;sary des&shy;truc&shy;tion of life or pro&shy;per&shy;ty}} (''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'', p. 28).</blockquote>
 
<blockquote>{{qq|The true func&shy;tion of go&shy;vern&shy;ment deals only with the of&shy;fen&shy;sive en&shy;croach&shy;ments upon persons or pro&shy;per&shy;ty{{dash|an expe&shy;di&shy;ent choice of evils where there is nothing but evil to choose from}}to prevent un&shy;neces&shy;sary des&shy;truc&shy;tion of life or pro&shy;per&shy;ty}} (''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'', p. 28).</blockquote>
Line 53: Line 53:
 
{{p|94}}<blockquote>{{qq|There are some cir&shy;cum&shy;stan&shy;ces ''under'' which orga&shy;niza&shy;tion and laws seem to be jus&shy;tifi&shy;able which ought to be a tem&shy;po&shy;rary expe&shy;di&shy;ent, has been created into a uni&shy;ver&shy;sal rule, to which even the objects aimed at have become sub&shy;ordi&shy;nate!}} (''Prac&shy;ti&shy;cal Details'', p. 54).</blockquote>
 
{{p|94}}<blockquote>{{qq|There are some cir&shy;cum&shy;stan&shy;ces ''under'' which orga&shy;niza&shy;tion and laws seem to be jus&shy;tifi&shy;able which ought to be a tem&shy;po&shy;rary expe&shy;di&shy;ent, has been created into a uni&shy;ver&shy;sal rule, to which even the objects aimed at have become sub&shy;ordi&shy;nate!}} (''Prac&shy;ti&shy;cal Details'', p. 54).</blockquote>
  
Warren holds this condi&shy;tion is wrong, since, again stres&shy;sing his prag&shy;ma&shy;tism, he<!-- 'be' in original --> be&shy;lieves each case must be exa&shy;mined on its own. Later in this short book, he dis&shy;cus&shy;ses his ex&shy;peri&shy;ences in opera&shy;ting a manual trai&shy;ning school. He pre&shy;sents views on edu&shy;ca&shy;tion which are a nine&shy;teenth century pre&shy;vi&shy;sio&shy;ning of the phi&shy;loso&shy;phy of [[Author:A. S. Neill|A. S. Neill]] as well as a further appli&shy;ca&shy;tion of his prac&shy;tical, liber&shy;ta&shy;rian and ra&shy;tio&shy;nalis&shy;tic ap&shy;proach. In brief, he be&shy;lieves chil&shy;dren should be moti&shy;va&shy;ted to obey not by com&shy;mand, threats, or pu&shy;nish&shy;ment, but by the prin&shy;ciple of labour for labour,, love for love, i.e., the mutua&shy;list ideal. Children {{qq|have their own sove&shy;reign&shy;ty as much as adults and it should be exer&shy;cised in the same limits ''at their own cost''}} (''Prac&shy;tical Details'', p. 64). On the other hand, and this point is rele&shy;vant to his remarks on go&shy;vern&shy;ment, {{qq|I cannot allow my child to exer&shy;cise his sove&shy;reign will in all things, until, in ''all'' things, he can take the conse&shy;quen&shy;ces on himself}} (p. 68). In other words, I would submit that even in ''Prac&shy;tical Details'' written by Warren in 1852 there are indi&shy;ca&shy;tions of a trend that finally cul&shy;mina&shy;ted in ''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'' and appa&shy;rent&shy;ly also in his essay ''Modern Go&shy;vern&shy;ment and Its True Mission''.
+
Warren holds this condi&shy;tion is wrong, since, again stres&shy;sing his prag&shy;ma&shy;tism, he<!-- 'be' in original --> be&shy;lieves each case must be exa&shy;mined on its own. Later in this short book, he dis&shy;cus&shy;ses his ex&shy;peri&shy;ences in opera&shy;ting a manual trai&shy;ning school. He pre&shy;sents views on edu&shy;ca&shy;tion which are a nine&shy;teenth century pre&shy;vi&shy;sio&shy;ning of the phi&shy;loso&shy;phy of [[Author:A. S. Neill|A. S. Neill]]<!-- 'Niell' in original --> as well as a further appli&shy;ca&shy;tion of his prac&shy;tical, liber&shy;ta&shy;rian and ra&shy;tio&shy;nalis&shy;tic ap&shy;proach. In brief, he be&shy;lieves chil&shy;dren should be moti&shy;va&shy;ted to obey not by com&shy;mand, threats, or pu&shy;nish&shy;ment, but by the prin&shy;ciple of labour for labour, love for love, i.e., the mutua&shy;list ideal. Children {{qq|have their own sove&shy;reign&shy;ty as much as adults and it should be exer&shy;cised in the same limits ''at their own cost''}} (''Prac&shy;tical Details'', p. 64). On the other hand, and this point is rele&shy;vant to his remarks on go&shy;vern&shy;ment, {{qq|I cannot allow my child to exer&shy;cise his sove&shy;reign will in all things, until, in ''all'' things, he can take the conse&shy;quen&shy;ces on himself}} (p. 68). In other words, I would submit that even in ''Prac&shy;tical Details'' written by Warren in 1852 there are indi&shy;ca&shy;tions of a trend that finally cul&shy;mina&shy;ted in ''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'' and appa&shy;rent&shy;ly also in his essay ''Modern Go&shy;vern&shy;ment and Its True Mission''.
  
 
{{tab}}It is inte&shy;res&shy;ting to look for a moment at the type of go&shy;vern&shy;ment Warren envi&shy;saged. If indi&shy;vidu&shy;als are unable to settle their affairs by mutual and volun&shy;tary contract Warren advo&shy;cates appeal to deli&shy;bera&shy;tive coun&shy;cils com&shy;posed of members who volun&shy;teer their servi&shy;ces and are, of course, recog&shy;nized in their role by the various sove&shy;reign indi&shy;vidu&shy;als. These councils are to act as medi&shy;a&shy;tors, but
 
{{tab}}It is inte&shy;res&shy;ting to look for a moment at the type of go&shy;vern&shy;ment Warren envi&shy;saged. If indi&shy;vidu&shy;als are unable to settle their affairs by mutual and volun&shy;tary contract Warren advo&shy;cates appeal to deli&shy;bera&shy;tive coun&shy;cils com&shy;posed of members who volun&shy;teer their servi&shy;ces and are, of course, recog&shy;nized in their role by the various sove&shy;reign indi&shy;vidu&shy;als. These councils are to act as medi&shy;a&shy;tors, but
Line 67: Line 67:
 
{{tab}}When the {{qq|coun&shy;sel&shy;lors}} have re&shy;ferred an issue to this mili&shy;tary {{p|95}} orga&shy;niza&shy;tion of sove&shy;reign indi&shy;vidu&shy;als {{qq|&hellip; of course members of the mili&shy;tary may them&shy;selves assert their ina&shy;lie&shy;nable right to decline to act!}} (''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'', p. 23).
 
{{tab}}When the {{qq|coun&shy;sel&shy;lors}} have re&shy;ferred an issue to this mili&shy;tary {{p|95}} orga&shy;niza&shy;tion of sove&shy;reign indi&shy;vidu&shy;als {{qq|&hellip; of course members of the mili&shy;tary may them&shy;selves assert their ina&shy;lie&shy;nable right to decline to act!}} (''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'', p. 23).
  
<blockquote>{{qq|The most intel&shy;li&shy;gent people always make the best sub&shy;ordi&shy;nates in a good cause, and in our ''modern mili&shy;tary'', it will require more true manhood to make a good sub&shy;ordi&shy;nate than it will to be a leader: for the leader may very easily give orders, but they take the res&shy;pon&shy;sibi&shy;lity of that ''only'', while the sub&shy;ordi&shy;nate take the res&shy;pon&shy;sibi&shy;lity of exe&shy;cu&shy;ting them, and it will require the great&shy;est and highest degree of manhood, of self-<wbr>go&shy;vern&shy;ment, pre&shy;sence of mind, and real heroism to ''dis&shy;crimi&shy;nate'' on the instant and to stand up indi&shy;vidu&shy;ally before all the corps and future criti&shy;cism, and assume, alone, the res&shy;pon&shy;sibi&shy;lity of dissent or diso&shy;bedi&shy;ence. His only support and strength would be in his cons&shy;cious&shy;ness of being more true to his pro&shy;fessed mission than the order was, and in the assu&shy;rance that he would be sus&shy;tained by public opinion and sym&shy;pathy as far as that mission was under&shy;stood}} (''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'', p. 23).</blockquote>
+
<blockquote>{{qq|The most intel&shy;li&shy;gent people always make the best sub&shy;ordi&shy;nates in a good cause, and in our ''modern mili&shy;tary'', it will require more true manhood to make a good sub&shy;ordi&shy;nate than it will to be a leader: for the leader may very easily give orders, but they take the res&shy;pon&shy;sibi&shy;lity of that ''only'', while the sub&shy;ordi&shy;nate takes the res&shy;pon&shy;sibi&shy;lity of exe&shy;cu&shy;ting them, and it will require the great&shy;est and highest degree of manhood, of self-<wbr>go&shy;vern&shy;ment, pre&shy;sence of mind, and real heroism to ''dis&shy;crimi&shy;nate'' on the instant and to stand up indi&shy;vidu&shy;ally before all the corps and future criti&shy;cism, and assume, alone, the res&shy;pon&shy;sibi&shy;lity of dissent or diso&shy;bedi&shy;ence. His only support and strength would be in his cons&shy;cious&shy;ness of being more true to his pro&shy;fessed mission than the order was, and in the assu&shy;rance that he would be sus&shy;tained by public opinion and sym&shy;pathy as far as that mission was under&shy;stood}} (''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'', p. 23).</blockquote>
  
<blockquote>{{qq|When a high degree of intel&shy;li&shy;gence, great mahhood, self-<wbr>go&shy;vern&shy;ment, close dis&shy;crimi&shy;na&shy;ting ''real'' heroism and gentle huma&shy;nity are known to be neces&shy;sary to mem&shy;ber&shy;ship in our mili&shy;tary corps (or go&shy;vern&shy;ment), these quali&shy;ties will come into fashion, and become the cha&shy;rac&shy;teris&shy;tics of the people; and to be thought desti&shy;tute of them, and un&shy;wor&shy;thy of mem&shy;ber&shy;ship in the mili&shy;tary would cause the great&shy;est morti&shy;fica&shy;tion: while to be known as a member in good stan&shy;ding would be an object sought in the highest honour}} (''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'', p. 24).</blockquote>
+
<blockquote>{{qq|When a high degree of intel&shy;li&shy;gence, great manhood, self-<wbr>go&shy;vern&shy;ment, close dis&shy;crimi&shy;na&shy;ting ''real'' heroism and gentle huma&shy;nity are known to be neces&shy;sary to mem&shy;ber&shy;ship in our mili&shy;tary corps (or go&shy;vern&shy;ment), these quali&shy;ties will come into fashion, and become the cha&shy;rac&shy;teris&shy;tics of the people; and to be thought desti&shy;tute of them, and un&shy;wor&shy;thy of mem&shy;ber&shy;ship in the mili&shy;tary would cause the great&shy;est morti&shy;fica&shy;tion: while to be known as a member in good stan&shy;ding would be an object sought in the highest honour}} (''True Civi&shy;liza&shy;tion'', p. 24).</blockquote>
  
 
If this rea&shy;so&shy;ning is correct Warren be&shy;lieves we have the clue to the
 
If this rea&shy;so&shy;ning is correct Warren be&shy;lieves we have the clue to the
Line 84: Line 84:
  
 
</div>
 
</div>
 +
[[Category:Anarchist history]]
 
[[Category:Anarchist philosophy]]
 
[[Category:Anarchist philosophy]]
 
[[Category:Collectivism and individualism]]
 
[[Category:Collectivism and individualism]]
[[Categry:Economics]]
+
[[Category:Economics]]
 
[[Category:Government]]
 
[[Category:Government]]
 
[[Category:War and militarism]]
 
[[Category:War and militarism]]

Latest revision as of 13:25, 4 April 2017

s1
Josiah Warren:
the incompleat anarchist

HAROLD BARCLAY


Josiah warren has been pre­sen­ted to the world by his various inter­pre­ters as an indi­vidu­alist anar­chist and as the first Ame­ri­can anar­chist. His bio­graph­er, W. Bailie, en­tit­led his work, Josiah Warren: The First Ame­ri­can Anar­chist (1906). Two recent antho­lo­gies of anar­chist wri­tings, I. L. Horo­witz’ The Anar­chists (1964) and L. I. Krimerman and Lewis Perry’s Patterns of Anarchy (1966), each have selec­tions from Warren. George Wood­cock in his survey of anar­chism devotes several para­graphs to Warren and writes: “… he deve­loped the theory of the sove­reign­ty of the indi­vidu­al which has led to his being regar­ded, rightly, I think, as the first Ame­ri­can anar­chist” (1962, p. 456).

  A recent reading of True Civi­liza­tion (1863) and Prac­tical Details of Equitable Commerce (1852) has led me to ques­tion how far one should clas­sify Warren as an anar­chist and to suspect that cer­tain­ly as he grew older he assumed a posi­tion like that of Thoreau, or even Jef­fer­son, which is more accu­rate­ly des­cribed as de­cen­tra­list demo­crat and, indeed, seems to form a sig­ni­fi­cant link between various ele­ments of the con­tem­po­rary radical right (such as the Rampart College group at Lark­spur, Colo­rado) and the anar­chist left.

  Josiah Warren (1798-1874) was born in New England and, after an early mar­ri­age, drifted west­ward even­tu­ally sett­ling in Ohio. By pro­fes­sion an or­ches­tra leader and music teacher, he pursued these enter­pri­ses spo­ra­di­cally through­out much of his life. Warren early gave indi­ca­tion of a prac­ti­cal and in­geni­ous turn of mind with his inven­tion of a lard fed lamp, much cheaper to operate than the usual oil type lamp. Later in his life he turned at dif­fer­ent times to produce other in­ven­tions. His desire to pro­pa­gate his social theo­ries led to an inte­rest in prin­ting and the deve­lop­ment of a cylan­der press which, however, was not accep­ted by printers until rein­ven­ted by another indi­vidu­al a gene­ra­tion later. He, also, deve­loped a nota­tio­nal system for music and a ste­reo­ty­ping process which brought him $7,000, a sum he in­ves­ted in his second expe­ri­men­tal com­mu­nity of Utopia. All in all Warren appears to fit the ste­reo­type of the in­geni­ous Yankee tin­ker­ing among a variety of gadgets and pro­du­cing the most prac­ti­cal tech­no­logi­cal inven­tions. But Warren was more than a creator of new gadgets.
91
His main claim to fame, of course, is as an inno­va­tor and ex­peri­men­ter with social systems. J. S. Mill called Warren a “remar­ka­ble Ame­ri­can” and it is a sad com­men­tary on the En­cyc­lo­pae­dia Bri­tan­nica and not on Josiah Warren that the en­cy­clo­pae­dia con­tains not a single refe­rence to so crea­tive and unique an indi­vi­dual.

  Martin sug­gests that had it not been for his asso­cia­tion with Owen, Warren might have devoted the rest of his life to busi­ness under­ta­kings and “become one of the early men of wealth in the growing Midwest” (1957, p. 14). Between 1825 and 1827 Warren was asso­cia­ted with Owen at the New Harmony colony. He saw its major defects as ex­ces­sive orga­niza­tion and cen­tra­liza­tion and left the com­mu­nity intent upon testing Owen’s idea of eco­no­mic ex­change through pro­mis­sory notes based upon labour time. Like Thoreau who em­barked upon his Walden stay as an expe­ri­ment, Warren, too, opened a “time store” in Cin­cin­nati in 1827 to test the prac­tica­lity of Owen’s labour note theory. After three years of opera­tion Warren closed his store con­vinced of its fea­sibi­lity and invited others to join him in foun­ding a com­mu­nity based on what he called the prin­ciple of equity, namely, that cost of an item was the labour time in­volved in bring­ing it to the con­su­mer. Ex­change was to be in the form of notes indi­ca­ting a promise to give on demand so much labour time. In addi­tion the com­mu­nity was to be “based on volun­tary assent and lacking the for­ma­li­ties of majo­rity rule” (Martin, 1957, p. 43). Thus, he founded Equity which lasted less than three years and was the shor­test lived of his com­mu­ni­ties. Actu­ally Equity was forced to close not because of the failure of the ap­pli­ca­tion of the social theo­ries but because “Faulty judg­ment had re­sul­ted in loca­ting the set­tle­ment on land in a low-lying area, which sub­jec­ted the resi­dents to a variety of ill­nes­ses. The prin­ci­pal one … was malaria” (Martin, 1957, p. 42). Following the Equity expe­ri­ment Warren vari­ous­ly worked on a new prin­ting press, ran a short­lived manual trai­ning school, edited a peri­odi­cal, and opera­ted for two years another time store. In 1847 he estab­lished his second com­mu­nity of Utopia and in 1851 still a third called Modern Times. Both were orga­nized ac­cor­ding to the same prin­ciples as those of Equity and even­tu­ally suf­fered from the ill-effects of the Civil War and the avai­labi­lity of cheap lands further west. Both, however, managed to con­tinue on after Warren’s death in 1874. Members gra­du­ally and quietly aban­doned the prin­ciples of equity and the com­muni­ties even­tu­ally wi­thered away after a few secular Utopian ex­peri­ments of the nine­teenth century. And this is a point worth bearing in mind, namely, that of all the secular ex­peri­ments of this nature the two which sur­vived the longest were the ones which were the most liber­ta­rian.

  Warren’s views may be broadly des­cribed as indi­vidu­alist, ra­tio­na­list and prag­ma­tic and his earlier writing, e.g., Equi­table Commerce, as more spe­ci­fi­cally anar­chist. There is a certain affi­nity between Warren and Paul Goodman: Warren could well have au­thored a Utopian Essays and Prac­tical Pro­po­sals. The central theme of Warren’s wri­tings is the “sove­reign­ty of the indi­vi­dual”, by which he meant that the star­ting
92
place of any philo­sophy is with the indi­vi­dual who by im­pli­ca­tion is above all a ratio­nal being. The primi­tive con­di­tion of man re­qui­ring self-pre­serva­tion pro­duced clan orga­niza­tion which stressed the su­pre­macy of the group over the indi­vi­dual, the dis­solu­tion of indi­vi­dua­lity in the group, and dis­cou­raged all indi­vi­dual res­pon­sibi­lity. The clan idea has been per­petu­ated in modern times in the concept of na­tion­hood, in the “Union of states” and in com­mu­nism. True civi­liza­tion is based on the sove­reign­ty of the indi­vi­dual not of the group.

  Before des­cri­bing the doc­trine of self-sove­reign­ty further and its spe­ci­fic rela­tion­ship to the idea of go­vern­ment—which is the main burden of this paper—it should be pointed out that Warren saw true civi­liza­tion as a pos­sibi­lity only when indi­vi­dua­lity and self-sove­reign­ty ope­rated in concert with what he called the prin­ciple of equi­va­lents and the prin­ciple of equi­table money. The prin­ciple of equi­va­lents holds that the price of an item is go­verned by its cost which in turn amounts to the labour of pro­ces­sing and deli­ve­ring the item to the con­su­mer. Cost should not be con­fused with value; to base price on value is an ini­quity. One cannot deter­mine value, but one can deter­mine cost by labour exerted. Skill or talent which cost nothing are natural wealth and should be ac­ces­sible to all without price. Warren, fol­low­ing Owen, advo­cates the equa­lity of labour: the labour time of the phy­si­cian is equal to that of the store clerk. This raises the ques­tion that if cost of an item varies ac­cor­ding to labour time why doesn’t the “cost” of the labour time vary ac­cor­ding to the amount of energy and the in­vest­ment of past trai­ning. In other words, should not past pre­para­tion and ex­pen­di­ture of energy make the sur­geon’s hour more costly than the shop­kee­per’s?

  With the prin­ciple of equi­va­lents usury dis­ap­pears and a bor­row­er is charged, as Warren charged his bor­row­ers, for the labour time it takes the lender to arrange for and ulti­mate­ly collect the loan. The capi­ta­list obtains, under Warren’s scheme, only payment for the time in­ves­ted in over­see­ing and other similar duties. Warren men­tions two factors which will prepare the way for the estab­lish­ment of this prin­ciple. First, stres­sing the ra­tio­nal nature of man, is the ob­ser­va­tion that men, capi­ta­list and non-capi­ta­list alike, will see that this ap­proach is most rea­so­nable. Those who do not will, by the opera­tion of “equi­table com­peti­tion”, even­tu­ally be forced to engage in “equi­table com­merce”. Another es­sen­tial ingre­dient of true civi­liza­tion is equi­table money where notes indi­ca­ting a promise to pro­vide a stated amount of labour time on demand are used for all com­mer­cial trans­ac­tions. Such a system was ap­plied by Warren in his time stores and in his com­muni­ties where it appa­rent­ly met with some success, suf­fe­ring little from what one might con­sider its most obvious draw­backs, namely, an ina­bi­lity to redeem the notes and depre­cia­tion as a result of over-issue.

  Warren uses the model of equi­table com­merce as the basis for his ap­proach to edu­ca­tion and all social rela­tions. At one point in his work such eco­nomic empha­sis is ex­pressed in a naive eco­no­mic deter­mi­nism.

“Pecu­ni­ary affairs are the very basis of society. When we change

93

these we change all insti­tu­tions, for all are built, di­rect­ly or indi­rect­ly upon pro­per­ty consi­dera­tions. … The great excuse for laws and go­vern­ment is, the pro­tec­tion of persons and pro­per­ty, but were it not for pro­per­ty, persons would not be in danger.” (Prac­tical Details, p. 71.)

When methods of ac­qui­ring pro­per­ty are so altered that each may share in an abun­dance “with less trouble than it will cost him to invade his neigh­bour”, we shall be able to dis­pense with rules (Prac­tical Details, p. 71). Warren makes, then, in this one in­stance what today would be consi­dered a vulgar Marxist ex­pla­na­tion, but both Prac­tical Details and True Civi­liza­tion are per­mea­ted with an intel­lec­tua­lis­tic causal theory inti­ma­ting that the real dynamic force in society is the ra­tio­nal man who comes to realize his own self-inte­rest.

  While Warren conti­nued through­out his life a faith in the prin­ciples of equi­table com­merce, he appa­rent­ly modi­fied his views con­cer­ning the prin­ciples of indi­vi­dua­lity and self-sove­reign­ty as they relate to the role of go­vern­ment. Thus, Martin writes:

“Agita­ted by the violence and dis­rup­tion which was beco­ming a part of the exis­tence of many in all parts of the land, Warren pub­lished a curious tract, Modern Go­vern­ment and Its True Mission, A Few Words for the Ame­ri­can Crisis which advo­cates expe­di­ents greatly at vari­ance with prin­ciples which have un­alter­able status among anar­chists. A study of the work reveals a re­gres­sion to func­tio­nal aspects long taught by Robert Owen” (Martin, p. 82).

Martin does not elabo­rate further, but when one ex­plores True Civi­liza­tion, written a year after (1863), his meaning becomes more appa­rent. Warren here has become the advo­cate of a form of limited go­vern­ment much in the tra­di­tion of Thomas Jef­fer­son.

“The true func­tion of go­vern­ment deals only with the of­fen­sive en­croach­ments upon persons or pro­per­ty—

an expe­di­ent choice of evils where there is nothing but evil to choose from—

to prevent un­neces­sary des­truc­tion of life or pro­per­ty” (True Civi­liza­tion, p. 28).

True civi­liza­tion never uses vio­lence “un­neces­sa­rily” ac­cor­ding to Warren. At other places in True Civi­liza­tion he states:

“The Modern Mili­tary, as a Go­vern­ment, will be neces­sary only in the tran­si­tio­nary stage of society from confu­sion and wanton vio­lence to true order and mature civi­liza­tion” (p. 33).

And in the con­clu­ding pages of the same volume he is appa­rent­ly not ob­jec­ting to go­vern­ment so much as he is oppo­sing “Ag­gres­sive Go­vern­ment”.

“And when­ever a Go­vern­ment governs an iota more than is abso­lute­ly neces­sary to res­train or repair un­neces­sary en­croach­ments on ag­gres­sion, it then becomes ag­gres­sive, and should itself be go­verned and res­trained” (p. 179).

  Some hints of this inter­pre­ta­tion of the role of go­vern­ment appear in Prac­tical Details which Warren pub­lished more than ten years before True Civi­liza­tion. Thus,

94

“There are some cir­cum­stan­ces under which orga­niza­tion and laws seem to be jus­tifi­able which ought to be a tem­po­rary expe­di­ent, has been created into a uni­ver­sal rule, to which even the objects aimed at have become sub­ordi­nate!” (Prac­ti­cal Details, p. 54).

Warren holds this condi­tion is wrong, since, again stres­sing his prag­ma­tism, he be­lieves each case must be exa­mined on its own. Later in this short book, he dis­cus­ses his ex­peri­ences in opera­ting a manual trai­ning school. He pre­sents views on edu­ca­tion which are a nine­teenth century pre­vi­sio­ning of the phi­loso­phy of A. S. Neill as well as a further appli­ca­tion of his prac­tical, liber­ta­rian and ra­tio­nalis­tic ap­proach. In brief, he be­lieves chil­dren should be moti­va­ted to obey not by com­mand, threats, or pu­nish­ment, but by the prin­ciple of labour for labour, love for love, i.e., the mutua­list ideal. Children “have their own sove­reign­ty as much as adults and it should be exer­cised in the same limits at their own cost” (Prac­tical Details, p. 64). On the other hand, and this point is rele­vant to his remarks on go­vern­ment, “I cannot allow my child to exer­cise his sove­reign will in all things, until, in all things, he can take the conse­quen­ces on himself” (p. 68). In other words, I would submit that even in Prac­tical Details written by Warren in 1852 there are indi­ca­tions of a trend that finally cul­mina­ted in True Civi­liza­tion and appa­rent­ly also in his essay Modern Go­vern­ment and Its True Mission.

  It is inte­res­ting to look for a moment at the type of go­vern­ment Warren envi­saged. If indi­vidu­als are unable to settle their affairs by mutual and volun­tary contract Warren advo­cates appeal to deli­bera­tive coun­cils com­posed of members who volun­teer their servi­ces and are, of course, recog­nized in their role by the various sove­reign indi­vidu­als. These councils are to act as medi­a­tors, but

“when an issue has already been raised and no one of these deci­sions is ac­cep­table to both parties, the deci­sion may be laid before the mili­tary (or go­vern­ment) to act at its dis­cre­tion, selec­ting that course which pro­mi­ses the least vio­lence” (True Civi­liza­tion, p. 30).

  Warren tends to iden­tify go­vern­ment with the mili­tary estab­lish­ment and, hence, in line with his thin­king, it is neces­sary to create a mili­tary or “home guard” com­posed of sove­reign indi­vidu­als. Thus, he sug­gests that the idea of com­man­ding or go­ver­ning be re­placed by the prin­ciple of gui­dance or direc­tion. “Men may lead and men must execute but intel­li­gence, prin­ciple, must regu­late” (True Civi­liza­tion, p. 22). An essen­tial part of the trai­ning of the mili­tary is in instil­ling the idea of indi­vi­dual sove­reign­ty and the pro­tec­tion of the person and pro­per­ty.

“Part of the drill for such a force would be to give orders to do some un­neces­sary harm on purpose to be diso­beyed in order to accus­tom the sub­ordi­nate to ‘look before they leap’ or strike!” (True Civi­liza­tion, p. 27).

Such a home guard would be “within but not under disci­pline”, or, in other words the Sab­bath is made for man and not man for the Sab­bath.

  When the “coun­sel­lors” have re­ferred an issue to this mili­tary
95
orga­niza­tion of sove­reign indi­vidu­als “… of course members of the mili­tary may them­selves assert their ina­lie­nable right to decline to act!” (True Civi­liza­tion, p. 23).

“The most intel­li­gent people always make the best sub­ordi­nates in a good cause, and in our modern mili­tary, it will require more true manhood to make a good sub­ordi­nate than it will to be a leader: for the leader may very easily give orders, but they take the res­pon­sibi­lity of that only, while the sub­ordi­nate takes the res­pon­sibi­lity of exe­cu­ting them, and it will require the great­est and highest degree of manhood, of self-

go­vern­ment, pre­sence of mind, and real heroism to dis­crimi­nate on the instant and to stand up indi­vidu­ally before all the corps and future criti­cism, and assume, alone, the res­pon­sibi­lity of dissent or diso­bedi­ence. His only support and strength would be in his cons­cious­ness of being more true to his pro­fessed mission than the order was, and in the assu­rance that he would be sus­tained by public opinion and sym­pathy as far as that mission was under­stood” (True Civi­liza­tion, p. 23).

“When a high degree of intel­li­gence, great manhood, self-

go­vern­ment, close dis­crimi­na­ting real heroism and gentle huma­nity are known to be neces­sary to mem­ber­ship in our mili­tary corps (or go­vern­ment), these quali­ties will come into fashion, and become the cha­rac­teris­tics of the people; and to be thought desti­tute of them, and un­wor­thy of mem­ber­ship in the mili­tary would cause the great­est morti­fica­tion: while to be known as a member in good stan­ding would be an object sought in the highest honour” (True Civi­liza­tion, p. 24).

If this rea­so­ning is correct Warren be­lieves we have the clue to the

“true mission and form of Go­vern­ment—

to the most perfect, yet harm­less sub­ordi­na­tion—

the recon­cili­ation of obe­di­ence with FREEDOM—

to the ces­sa­tion of all hos­tili­ties between parties and Nations—

to uni­ver­sal co-

opera­tion for uni­ver­sal pre­serva­tion and secu­rity of person and Pro­per­ty” (True Civi­liza­tion, p. 24).

Warren’s views about the trans­for­ma­tion of the mili­tary into a body of sove­reign and ratio­nal indi­vidu­als appear almost fan­tas­tic, parti­cu­larly in our day when we have been made so much more aware of the nature of mili­tary orga­niza­tion—as the epitome of auto­cracy and autho­rita­rian struc­ture. Indeed, such ideas appear more the despe­rate efforts of a man fran­ti­cally sear­ching for means to salvage his liber­ta­rian phi­loso­phy in the face of a hither­to harmo­ni­ous world now shat­tered by the vio­lence of the Civil War period.

  In descri­bing Warren’s later views as only peri­phe­rally anar­chis­tic, I do not wish thereby to imply some doc­tri­naire defi­ni­tion of anar­chism. I con­ceive of anar­chism essen­tial­ly as being at one end of a pole oppo­site to abso­lute des­po­tism, or, to put it diffe­rent­ly, at one end of a con­tinu­um is a condi­tion in which all power is equally dif­fused among all members of society and at the other end is a condi­tion under which all power is vested in a single person. There are “ideal types” and it is hardly con­cei­vable that either has ever existed or ever will exist, al­though certain systems ap­proach one or the other poles and various pres­sures produce in a social system a dia­lec­tic process pushing society in one direc­tion or the other. Obvi­ously, Warren’s thoughts fit on the anar­chis­tic side of con­tinu­um. If Warren was an anar­chist in the first half of his life as is evi­denced by the nature of his expe­rimen­tal com­muni­ties, his cri­tique of the Owenite expe­ri­ments, and by the writings of this period, he had taken towards the close of his life a position which does not appear to fall within that minimal defi­ni­tion of anarchy as the absence of go­vern­ment. Cer­tain­ly, the anar­chist society is to be free of the coer­cive forces of go­vern­men­tal insti­tu­tions even though nume­rous other coercive forces will inevi­tably persist. (And as some have pointed out these latter can become more of a threat to indi­vi­dual sove­reign­ty than go­vern­ment.) By placing the mili­tary as the ulti­mate aribter and per­mit­ting indi­vidu­als within that body to refuse to act, Warren per­petu­ates autho­rita­rian elements of the present social order and, in addi­tion, enhan­ces the pos­sibi­li­ties of “civil war” between rival fac­tions of the mili­tary. Warren, of course, neg­lec­ted or at least totally under­esti­mated the role of the irra­tio­nal in man and the effect of cul­tural forces in moul­ding men.

  Warren was not the only anar­chist who did not con­sis­tent­ly follow an anar­chist posi­tion. Proudhon, who in so many ways is similar to Warren and made many keen in­sights into the nature of go­vern­ment, at various points in his life was elected to the Chamber of Depu­ties, saw Louis Napoleon as a vehicle for ini­tia­ting the Revo­lu­tion, and sought to legis­late a society of free con­tract. Such diffi­cul­ties or contra­dic­tions as pre­sen­ted by Warren and Proud­hon—namely, their inci­sive cri­tiques of go­vern­ment, their plea for freedom and the indi­vi­dual coupled with what is pro­bably best des­cribed as a naivete about the essen­tial nature of power, of go­vern­ment and of the mili­tary, espe­cial­ly—suggest the source of their problem. Neither, I suspect, had the ana­lytic and theo­retic turn of mind—more cha­rac­teris­tic in a Marxto dig down to the roots of these insti­tu­tions and clearly per­ceive their full im­pli­ca­tions. Obvi­ously, the Civil War dis­tur­bance caused Warren to re­consi­der and re­for­mu­late his earlier posi­tion. Yet had he more fully com­pre­hen­ded the nature of go­vern­ment and the mili­tary, as well as the limits of the ratio­nal in man, even in the new light of this crisis, it is dif­fi­cult to see his rea­ching the ambi­gu­ous and naive con­clu­sions ex­pressed in True Civi­liza­tion.

  If any­thing Warren’s and, one can include here as well, Proud­hon’s strug­gle to for­mu­late a con­cep­tion of the free society is only a review of the basic problem facing all liber­tari­ans: How can a free society recog­nize the use of vio­lence as a legi­ti­mate tech­nique for resol­ving issues? Cer­tain­ly, if anar­chists are to have an army in their society it would have to be the kind por­trayed by Warren, but as I have sug­ges­ted above, in light of what we know today of human psy­cho­logy and of the nature of the mili­tary struc­ture, the pos­sibi­li­ties of such an army appear sheer fantasy. The problem in effect comes down to the ques­tion can anar­chists hold that the threat or use of vio­lence is in any case legi­ti­mate? Con­verse­ly can those who call them­selves paci­fists sub­scribe to the poli­ti­cal theory of the legi­ti­macy of the state?