18 days between posts counts as a week don't worry about it.

Okay so this weeks readings were Week 3

• Paine, Thomas, Agrarian Justice
• Calhoun, Craig. The Roots of Radicalism: Tradition, the Public Sphere, and Early Nineteenth-Century Social Movements. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012. Read Chapters 1 “Resituating Radicalism” or 2 “Social Movements and the Idea of Progress” (pp. 12-81)(69 pages) Read one or the other chapter, depending on interest.
• Claeys, Gregory. “The French Revolution Debate and British Political Thought.” History of Political Thought 11, no. 1 (1990): 59–80. [If you like, just read the introduction, pg. 59-62, and the summary of Paine, pg. 64-67, if you're very pressed for time. But it's useful to read the rest from 67 to the end. ]
• Claeys, Gregory. “The Origins of the Rights of Labor: Republicanism, Commerce, and the Construction of Modern Social Theory in Britain, 1796-1805.” The Journal of Modern History 66, no. 2 (1994): 249–90. [read at least the intro and the Paine segment (which is about Agrarian Justice), pg. 249-263. You may also want to read the Godwin segment, 277-9; he is often claimed as an ancestor by anarchists or left-libertarians; I strongly recommend reading the Charles Hall section (279-88)]
• Owen, Robert. A New View of Society and Other Writings. New York, NY: Penguin Classics, 1991.
• A New View of Society (1813), preface and parts 1, 3, 4 (1-18, 37-93) (74 pages) “Observations on the Effect of the Manufacturing System,” (93-104) (11 pages)
• Claeys, Gregory. Citizens and Saints: Politics and Anti-Politics in Early British Socialism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. ———. Machinery, Money and the Millennium: From Moral Economy to Socialism, 1815-1860. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1987.
• Jones, Gareth Stedman. “Malthus, Nineteenth Century Socialism, and Marx.” The Historical Journal, 2019, 1–16.

I just have a few words on Paine and Owen. Paine is interesting in that he got way more radical over his life, transitioning far beyond what Ben Franklin envisioned when he brought Paine to the United States, even going to France and participating in the revolutionary government. He would there increase his already large hate for George Washington, now for not doing anything to get him out of prison in France, thinking he conspired with Robespierre. He became disgusted with the US, believing John Adams betrayed revolutionary France. He was one of the few people who voted in parliament to keep the Jacobin constitution of 1793 over the reactionary 1795 constitution which abolished universal suffrage. He would return to the US ostracized, and die alone in poverty in 1809 in New Rochelle, New York.

Agrarian Justice is Paine at his most radical. He endorses a communal land reform such that all persons either be given land or be given a lump sum such that they can start a meaningful life, funded by a tax on the landed and prosperous. There would also be a pension system. Note that this does not envision any forced redistribution, nor does it take into account the nature of settler colonialism in the Americas. He envisioned a sort of agrarian republicanism. This idea of republican self sufficiency based in the individual ownership of land was heavily predominant in late 18 and early 19th century radicals.

Owen I covered in the first weeks post so I won't say much. His vision of a new society is interesting in that we can view Marx as a heterodox Owenist, in the sense that he approves of the commune but is opposed both to its political organization (Owen's is super gerontocratic) in the commune itself and in broader society. Owen was an evangelizer, he thought by preaching to the working class and poor, and setting up individual communes, the whole of society would just see he was right and change. This did change somewhat after he was laughed out of Parliament though. Marx's view of working class self organization goes far beyond Owen as well, who viewed the poor and working class as devoid of morals and sense (not unlike conservatives viewed them) but that they could be taught and have their human nature changed by reorganizing their society and teaching them. It's very paternalistic. There are parallels of this paternalism though and some 20th century movements that I think should not be overlooked. Overall Owen offers some compelling arguments for a new society, especially on mechanization, that are not too dissimilar to Marx (makes sense, he knew Owenists, and Engels saw Owen before he died preach in bar to workers in his 80s, and Owenists were the largest of the utopian movements) , but heavily criticizing it for overall lacking in political organization and other factors like it's paternalism over the working class. If you read any of the utopians, I think Owen is probably the one most worth reading. He's the best they have to offer and says some pretty interesting things, and is the strongest connection between that movement and what Marx developed. We have a bit of owen for next week, but I'll probably skip it.

That's all for this week (hopefully next will not be an 18 day week). Next week's readings are:

• Owen, Robert. A New View of Society and Other Writings. New York, NY: Penguin Classics, 1991. Sections “Further Development for the Plan for the Relief of the Poor and for the Emancipation of Mankind,” (136-158) (22 pages) [make sure you read the correct “Further Development”— there are two with very similar titles!] “Report to the County of Lanark” (1820) (250-309) (59 pages)
• Heighton, William, An Address to the Members of Trade Societies (1827)
• Skidmore, Thomas, The Rights of Man to Property! (1829), 1829) Preface, 5-16, 28-50, (skim 63-71 if interested in his comments on Paine), 77-80, 97-108, 113-122, 125-147, 150-160, 172-174, 192-197, 204-207, 226-228, 230-231, 238-243, 247-249, 264-276, 294-300, 316, 341-345, 355-361, 374-390.

And here's the link back to the syllabus.