I haven’t read Pierre-Joseph Proudhon nearly as much as I’ve read Benjamin Tucker, and at this point, I probably haven’t read as much Tucker as I’ve read Rothbard. There are those who would trace the 3 thinkers in a straight line, adding some Lysander Spooner at the Tucker stage and some Gustave de Molinari (and Ludwig von Mises, of course) at the Rothbard stage.

The problem with this A-B-C line is that so many would perceive A and C as opposite poles. Proudhon is most famous for the dictum “Property is Theft!” and is happily claimed by the socialists as a spiritual ancestor. Frédéric Bastiat, who should certainly be considered an ancestor in the Misesian line, debated Proudhon and endorsed Molinari. But then, Proudhon and Marx debated each other, too. (Proudhon titled his attack on Marx, “The Philosophy of Poverty”; Marx’s reply had the clever title, “The Poverty of Philosophy.”)

Murray Rothbard, who was called “Mr. Libertarian” could as easily have been called “Mr. Propertarian” — certainly the antithesis of “Property is Theft!”

Tucker and Molinari were obviously market anarchists. Was Proudhon?

Brad Spangler says yes:

Proudhon and Market Anarchism

Some have ventured that Proudhon’s anarchism supposedly never specified “private courts” and “private police”. While he certainly didn’t appear to go into the detail that Molinari and Rothbard did on such matters, it seems clear that he in fact did so specify.

[keep reading]