Quest-ce que la propriété? ou Recherches sur le principe du droit et du gouvernement (French Edition)

The reviews highlight the book as a foundational and historically significant work in anarchist and socialist thought, praised for its powerful, passionate, and inspiring writing style. Readers commend its lucid and brilliant analysis of property, its origins, and effects, particularly its effective demolition of contemporary defenses of property. The author is seen as raising crucial questions about property, inequality, the economic order, and the role of the state that remain relevant today. Many appreciate the clear distinction drawn between property, often presented as an abuse, and possession, seen as legitimate use. The text is noted for prefiguring concepts like surplus value and for offering a critical perspective on both capitalism and statist communism, proposing a "third way" often linked to mutualism. It is considered essential for understanding the intellectual history of these movements and for challenging conventional perceptions of ownership.

Despite its strengths, the book is frequently described as lengthy, convoluted, and perplexing, with arguments that can be difficult to follow due to tangents, passionate diatribes, and a loss of fervor in its language. Reviewers note the author's loose and broad definitions of key terms, as well as an outdated and confused economic analysis that sometimes relies on faulty premises. A significant criticism points to problematic views, such as the suggested exclusion of women from society, and a reliance on abstract concepts of justice or reason without sufficient grounding. The book is also criticized for failing to offer practical, institutional solutions for its theories, often presenting purely destructive criticism. Some reviewers find the author's paradoxical assertions and intellectual style to be inconsistent or even disingenuous, leading to positions that appear contradictory or "all over the place." Its utopian solutions are deemed impractical, especially for large-scale societies, and its analysis of capitalism is seen as limited.

Ultimately, "What is Property?" is regarded as an important historical document that, despite its flaws, successfully provokes thought and challenges fundamental assumptions about society and ownership. It is not recommended as an accessible introduction to anarchism for beginners, nor for those seeking concrete, practical solutions. Instead, it is best suited for voracious readers, students of anarchism, and those interested in the intellectual history of capitalism and its critics. The book's value lies in its critical analysis and the profound questions it raises about the nature of property and inequality, rather than in its proposed answers or systematic coherence. It is considered a worthwhile read for anyone seeking to understand the origins of current economic challenges and to gain a deeper appreciation for the foundational ideas of anarchist thought, encouraging readers to question what they typically take for granted about being an owner.