ivided； the very next moment this division； if it allowed the right of property； would become illegitimate。 Should there be the slightest irregularity in the method of transfer； men； members of society； imprescriptible possessors of the land； might be deprived at one blow of property； possession； and the means of production。 In short； property in capital is indivisible； and consequently inalienable； not necessarily when the capital is UNCREATED； but when it is COMMON or COLLECTIVE。
I confirm this theory against M。 Considerant； by the third term of his syllogism：
Conclusion。〃The results of the labor performed by this generation are divisible into two classes； between which it is important clearly to distinguish。 The first class includes the products of the soil which belong to this first generation in its usufructuary capacity； augmented； improved and refined by its labor and industry。 These products consist either of objects of consumption or instruments of labor。 It is clear that these products are the legitimate property of those who have created them by their activity。 。 。 。 Second class。Not only has this generation created the products just mentioned （objects of consumption and instruments of labor）； but it has also added to the original value of the soil by cultivation； by the erection of buildings； by all the labor producing permanent results； which it has performed。 This additional value evidently constitutes a producta value created by the activity of the first generation； and if； BY ANY MEANS WHATEVER； the ownership of this value be distributed among the members of society equitably；that is； in proportion to the labor which each has performed；each will legitimately possess the portion which he receives。 He may then dispose of this legitimate and private property as he sees fit；exchange it； give it away； or transfer it； and no other individual； or collection of other individuals；that is； society；can lay any claim to these values。〃
Thus； by the distribution of collective capital； to the use of which each associate； either in his own right or in right of his authors； has an imprescriptible and undivided title； there will be in the phalanstery； as in the France of 1841； the poor and the rich； some men who； to live in luxury； have only； as Figaro says； to take the trouble to be born； and others for whom the fortune of life is but an opportunity for long…continued poverty； idlers with large incomes； and workers whose fortune is always in the future； some privileged by birth and caste； and others pariahs whose sole civil and political rights are THE RIGHT TO LABOR； AND THE RIGHT TO LAND。 For we must not be deceived； in the phalanstery every thing will be as it is to…day； an object of property；machines； inventions； thought； books； the products of art； of agriculture； and of industry； animals； houses； fences； vineyards； pastures； forests； fields；every thing； in short； except the UNCULTIVATED LAND。 Now； would you like to know what uncultivated land is worth； according to the advocates of property？ 〃A square league hardly suffices for the support of a savage；〃 says M。 Charles Comte。 Estimating the wretched subsistence of this savage at three hundred francs per year； we find that the square league necessary to his life is； relatively to him； faithfully represented by a rent of fifteen francs。 In France there are twenty…eight thousand square leagues； the total rent of which； by this estimate； would be four hundred and twenty thousand francs； which； when divided among nearly thirty…four millions of people； would give each an INCOME OF A CENTIME AND A QUARTER。 That is the new right which the great genius of Fourier has invented IN BEHALF OF THE FRENCH PEOPLE； and with which his first disciple hopes to reform the world。 I denounce M。 Considerant to the proletariat！
If the theory of M。 Considerant would at least really guarantee this property which he cherishes so jealously； I might pardon him the flaws in his syllogism； certainly the best one he ever made in his life。 But； no： that which M。 Considerant takes for property is only a privilege of extra pay。 In Fourier's system； neither the created capital nor the increased value of the soil are divided and appropriated in any effective manner： the instruments of labor； whether created or not； remain in the hands of the phalanx； the pretended proprietor can touch only the income。 He is permitted neither to realize his share of the stock； nor to possess it exclusively； nor to administer it； whatever it be。 The cashier throws him his dividend； and then； proprietor； eat the whole if you can！
The system of Fourier would not suit the proprietors； since it takes away the most delightful feature of property；the free disposition of one's goods。 It would please the communists no better； since it involves unequal conditions。 It is repugnant to the friends of free association and equality； in consequence of its tendency to wipe out human character and individuality by suppressing possession； family； and country；the threefold expression of the human personality。
Of all our active publicists； none seem to me more fertile in resources； richer in imagination； more luxuriant and varied in style； than M。 Considerant。 Nevertheless； I doubt if he will undertake to reestablish his theory of property。 If he has this courage； this is what I would say to him： 〃Before writing your reply； consider well your plan of action； do not scour the country； have recourse to none of your ordinary expedients； no complaints of civilization； no sarcasms upon equality； no glorification of the phalanstery。 Leave Fourier and the departed in peace； and endeavor only to re…adjust the pieces of your syllogism。 To this end； you ought； first； to analyze closely each proposition of your adversary； second； to show the error； either by a direct refutation； or by proving the converse； third； to oppose argument to argument； so that； objection and reply meeting face to face； the stronger may break down the weaker； and shiver it to atoms。 By that method only can you boast of having conquered； and compel me to regard you as an honest reasoner； and a good artillery…man。〃
I should have no excuse for tarrying longer with these phalansterian crotchets； if the obligation which I have imposed upon myself of making a clean sweep； and the necessity of vindicating my dignity as a writer； did not prevent me from passing in silence the reproach uttered against me by a correspondent of 〃La Phalange。〃 〃We have seen but lately；〃 says this journalist；＇1＇ 〃that M。 Proudhon； enthusiast as he has been for the science created by Fourier； is； or will be； an enthusiast for any thing else whatsoever。〃
＇1＇ 〃Impartial；〃 of Besancon。
If ever sectarians had the right to reproach another for changes in his beliefs； this right certainly does not belong to the disciples of Fourier； who are always so eager to administer the phalansterian baptism to the deserters of all parties。 But why regard it as a crime； if they are sincere？ Of what consequence is the constancy or inconstancy of an individual to the truth which is always the same？ It is better to enlighten men's minds than to teach them to be obstinate in their prejudices。 Do we not know that man is frail and fickle； that his heart is full of delusions； and that his lips are a distillery of falsehood？ _Omnis homo meudax_。 Whether we will or no； we all serve for a time as instruments of this truth； whose kingdom comes every day。
God alone is immutable； because he is eternal。
That is the reply which； as a general rule； an honest man is entitled always to make； and which I ought perhaps to be content to offer as an excuse； for I am no better than my fathers。 But； in a century of doubt and apostasy like ours； when it is of importance to set the small and the weak an example of strength and honesty of utterance； I must not suffer my character as a public assailant of property to be dishonored。 I must render an account of my old opinions。
Examining myself； therefore； upon this charge of Fourierism； and endeavoring to refresh my memory； I find that； having been connected with the Fourierists in my studies and my friendships； it is possible that； without knowing it； I have been one of Fourier's partisans。 Jerome Lalande placed Napoleon and Jesus Christ in his catalogue of atheists。 The Fourierists resemble this astronomer： if a man happens to find fault with the existing civilization； and to admit the truth of a few of their criticisms； they straightway enlist him； willy…nilly； in their school。 Nevertheless； I do not deny that I have been a Fourierist； for； since they say it； of course it may be so。 But； sir； that of which my ex…associates are ignorant； and which doubtless will astonish you； is that I have been many other things；in religion； by turns a Protestant； a Papist； an Arian and Semi…Arian； a Manichean； a Gnostic； an Adamite even and a Pre…Adamite； a Sceptic； a Pelagian； a Socinian； an Anti… Trinitarian； and a Neo…Christian；＇1＇ in philosophy and politics； an Idealist； a Pantheist； a Platonist； a Cartesian； an Eclectic （that is； a sort of _juste…milieu_）； a Monarchist； an Aristocrat； a Constitutionalist； a follower of Babeuf； and a Communist。 I have wandered through a whole encyclopaedia of systems。 Do you think it surprising； sir； that； among them all； I was for a short time a Fourierist？
＇1＇ The Arians deny the divinity of Christ。 The Semi…Arians differ from the Arians only by a few subtle distinctions。 M。 Pierre Leroux； who regards Jesus as a man； but claims that the Spirit of God was infused into him； is a true Semi…Arian。
The Manicheans admit two co…existent and eternal principles；God and matter； spirit and flesh； light and darkness； good and evil； but； unlike the Phalansterians； who pretend to reconcile the two； the Manicheans make war upon matter； and labor with all their might for the destruction of the flesh； by condemning marriage and forbidding reproduction；which does not prevent them； however； from indulging in all the carnal pleasures which the intensest lust can conceive of。 In this last particular； the tendency of the Fourieristic morality is quite Manichean。
The Gnostics do not differ from the early Christians。 As