Notes on Proudhon and Marx

History of France until 1848

History of Germany until 1848

Proudhon’s Biography – (January 15, 1809 – January 19, 1865)

Marx’s Biography – (May 5, 1818 – March 14, 1883)

Marxism in France

Proudhon’s Philosophy until 1848 when Marx published Poverty of Philosophy


  • Qu’est ce que la propriété? (What Is Property?, 1840)
  • Avertissement aux Propriétaires (Warning to Proprietors, 1842)
  • The Creation of Order in Humanity (1843):
  • Système des contradictions économiques ou Philosophie de la misère (The System of Economic Contradictions, or The Philosophy of Poverty, 1846)

Marx’s Philosophy until 1865 when Proudhon died

  • The Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature (doctoral thesis),[296] 1841
  • The Philosophical Manifesto of the Historical School of Law, 1842
  • Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, 1843
  • On the Jewish Question, 1843
  • Notes on James Mill, 1844
  • Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, 1844
  • The Holy Family, 1845
  • Theses on Feuerbach, 1845
  • The German Ideology, 1845
  • The Poverty of Philosophy, 1847
  • Wage Labour and Capital, 1847
  • Manifesto of the Communist Party, 1848
  • The Class Struggles in France, 1850
  • The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon, 1852
  • Grundrisse (Foundations of a Critique of Political Economy), 1857
  • A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, 1859
  • Writings on the U.S. Civil War, 1861
  • Theories of Surplus Value, (posthumously published by Kautsky) 3 volumes, 1862
  • Value, Price and Profit, 1865

Proudhon vs Marx

Proudhon Notes
“Proudhon’s relevance to modern society is an example of the way in which a writer’s signif- icance can seem to change with changing historical circumstances. He began, in Qu’est-ce que la propriété? as an advocate of the peasant and the small handcraftsman, the workers as he had known them in Besançon and in the workshop quarters of Lyons and Paris. Later, as railways developed and the industrial revolution spread in France, somewhat later than in Britain, he adapted his ideas to allow for the association of workers on a larger scale. But he did so with misgivings, since his heart was in a society where work relationships were on a more intimate scale, and in consequence he gained the reputation, among Marxists and even among anarchist communists and revolutionary syndicalists, of being a pre-industrialist thinker, speaking for a past age of small proprietors.

But history has turned on its axis, and now, in a post-industrial age, we are beginning to look again at our economic and social relationships, and to realize that the mass structures of the recent past have themselves become obsolete. In such a situation Proudhon seems to be transformed from a retrograde into a progressive thinker. I am not admitting that he was ever out of place, for I think that in their day both the Marxists and the revolutionary syndicalists were wrong in accepting so uncritically the phenomenon of largescale and centralized industrial organization. But I think that today, now that we know all the social, economic, and ecological evils of industrial gigantism (and of political gigantism as well), Proudhon, even more than the other great anarchists, is our man, his voice speaking as clearly to the problems of our day as it did to the problems of his own time.” – George Woodcock, A Personal Preface to the Third Edition of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon: A Biography