is already done away with for
nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due
to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us,
therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the
necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any
property for the immense majority of society.

In one word, you reproach us with intending to do away with your
property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend.

From the moment when labor can no longer be converted into capital,
money, or rent, into a social power capable of being monopolized, i.e.,
from the moment when individual property can no longer be transformed
into bourgeois property, into capital, from that moment, you say,
individuality vanishes.

You must, therefore, confess that by "individual" you mean no other
person than the bourgeois, than the middle-class owner of property. This
person must, indeed, be swept out of the way, and made impossible.

Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of
society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate
the labor of others by means of such appropriations.

It has been objected that upon the abolition of private property, all
work will cease, and universal laziness will

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]