Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's "What is Property? An Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government" is a thought-provoking and controversial exploration of the concept of property and its implications for society. Proudhon challenges traditional notions of property ownership and advocates for a more equitable and just distribution of wealth and resources.

Throughout the book, Proudhon raises important questions about the origins of property, the role of government in regulating property rights, and the impact of private ownership on social and economic inequality. He argues that the current system of property ownership favors the wealthy and powerful at the expense of the poor and marginalized, and calls for a radical rethinking of property rights to create a more just and equitable society.

Although Proudhon's ideas may be challenging for some readers, his passionate advocacy for social justice and his critique of capitalist systems make "What is Property?" a compelling and important read for anyone interested in political philosophy, economics, or social justice. Proudhon's insights and arguments continue to have relevance in today's world, where debates over property rights, wealth inequality, and economic justice remain central issues in society.

Book Description:
What Is Property?: or, An Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government (French: Qu'est-ce que la propriété ? ou Recherche sur le principe du Droit et du Gouvernment) is an influential work of nonfiction on the concept of property and its relation to anarchist philosophy by the French anarchist and mutualist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, first published in 1840. In the book, Proudhon most famously declared that “property is theft”. Proudhon believed that the common conception of property conflated two distinct components which, once identified, demonstrated the difference between property used to further tyranny and property used to protect liberty. He argued that the result of an individual's labor which is currently occupied or used is a legitimate form of property. Thus, he opposed unused land being regarded as property, believing that land can only be rightfully possessed by use or occupation (which he called "possession"). As an extension of his belief that legitimate property (possession) was the result of labor and occupation, he argued against such institutions as interest on loans and rent.