ABSTRACT

SUMMARY: The lecturer wishes to explain the doctrine developed by his father and himself with regard to the distribution of social wealth between men in society. In economics, there are at present two theories of value in exchange: one bases value on utility combined with limitation of quantity; the other bases it on the efforts and services of man. In social economics, there are likewise two theories of property: one bases property on the personality of man; the other bases it on the necessities of production and savings. These two theories of property are equally unsatisfactory: the first because it does not base property on considerations of justice, except on the condition of identifying the notion of value with that of labour, which is anti-scientific; the second because it recognizes the value of land only on the condition that property is based on considerations of economic advantageousness, which is anti-philosophic. In spite of everything, both of these theories give themselves the task of attributing all types of social wealth, without exception, to individual, noncommunal appropriation and enjoyment. In our newly proposed system, we will instead make an effort to find such a way of distributing wealth among men that, at one and the same time, the share of the individual will be based on property, and the State’s share will be based on community, according to social advantageousness and social justice. The six lectures that follow will be devoted to examining these two preliminary moral questions: the distinction and agreement between economic advantageousness and justice, and the separation and reconciliation of the individual and the State.