Fourier and Fourierism

Charles Fourier (1772–1837) stemmed from an affluent Lyon merchant family, but by the late 1790s had come to react against the dullness of bourgeois life, the ‘anarchic’ competition of the commercial system, and the growing promise of equality popularized by the French Revolution. Aspiring to become the Newton of the social sciences, Fourier proclaimed his discovery of the law of ‘passionate attraction’ governing all nature, which, when fully understood and practically applied, would form the basis of a new society based upon the harmonization of the passions, rather than their mastery by reason. This ideal Fourier elevated into a grand, sometimes eccentric, metaphysical system, as well as

a comprehensive plan, often referred to as a ‘social science’, of an ideal form of small- scale communal organization that by 1800 he referred to as the ‘Phalanx’, whose hallmark was to be the harmonization or reconciliation of individual desires, as well as the abolition of poverty and the promotion of the communal good. Fourier’s first main work was the Theory of the Four Movements (1808); there followed the Traité de l’association domestique-agricole (2 vols., 1821), the most important of his writings published in his lifetime, and then Le Nouveau Monde industriel et sociétaire (1829) and La Fausse Industrie (1835–6). His very liberal views on sexuality and marriage or ‘enslaved monogamy’, which he wished to abolish, and his insistence on the value of universal, polymorphous sexual gratification, with a guaranteed ‘sexual minimum’ like a minimum wage, and a ‘Court of Love’ regulating sexual congresses, were regarded as too extreme by most of his followers, and were not published in full until the late twentieth century.

Like Owen, the chief focus of Fourier’s account of commerce was upon its deleterious effects on morality, and the promotion of lying, cheating, hoarding, usury, speculation and parasitism. Fourier also wished to reduce unproductive labour, such as that of monks, soldiers and lawyers, to a minimum, and saw as one of the principal advantages of community life the vast savings achieved by shared resources, compared to each isolated household. Though he condemned unpleasant and degrading factory labour, a central element in Fourier’s system is his essentially romantic, creative approach to work as central to life. If at least 800 persons associated together, work in the Phalanx could be based upon the principle of the ‘attractive association’ of ‘compound groups’ organized voluntarily in a ‘passional series’ linked by mutual likes, but also a sense of friendly rivalry. Instead of being merely ‘profitless boredom’, work would become ‘attractive labour’ by a system of rotation of up to eight tasks daily, with no more than two hours devoted to any one task, and each person contributing to as many as forty types of work. Manufacturing would be limited to no more than a quarter of working time, but is still essential; Fourier was no primitivist and disbelieved in ‘the virtues of the shepherds’. Labour was thus to become an essentially ‘free’ activity. A typical day, Fourier

Entries A-Z 187

suggested, might consist of five meals, a concert, reading in the library, hunting, fishing, gardening and agriculture, the main job in the Phalanx. For much larger projects industrial armies would be formed.

Unlike Owen, Fourier did not insist upon complete communism in the Phalanx. He did seek to instil ‘the spirit of societary or compound property’, but contended that the community’s profits should be divided between capital (receiving four-twelfths), labour (five-twelfths) and talent (three-twelfths). A minimum wage would prevent poverty amongst the less well-off, but drudgery would be better paid than normal work, even though the wealthy could avoid certain unpleasant tasks.

Social relations in the Phalanx were equally to be governed by the ‘law of passionate attraction’, the exact science of which involved for Fourier an intricate categorization of the forms and varieties of passions and their interrelationships, which Fourier thought resulted in some 810 basic personality types. These were dependent on the predominance of particular passions, of which anywhere from one to seven might prevail in any individual. Human happiness was contingent in particular on the free expression of three ‘distributive’ or ‘mechanising’ passions, which were the ‘Butterfly’ or variety, the ‘Cabalist’ or intriguing and the ‘Composite’ or mixture of physical and spiritual elements. Fourier has often been seen as anticipating Freud in his insistence that a healthy human life must avoid repression of the passions, and particularly those of a sexual nature.

Like Owen, Fourier anticipated that politics would play little role in the Phalanx. Everyday decisions would be taken by a ‘Regency’ consisting of the wealthiest and most learned members, and the chief task, the organization of production, would be supervised by the Areopagus, or Supreme Council of Industry, which was made up of the leaders of the main industrial series, plus a few shareholders and other respected persons. Its injunctions, however, would not be binding, though Fourier thought they would generally

be followed. Fourier did design a complex hierarchy of offices and honours in order to assuage the natural ‘lust for honour’ that would still exist. But such offices were to be largely ceremonial, and without responsibility. Some minor disciplinary measures are anticipated, with ostracism from particular series or groups the most severe; otherwise crime and disorder are largely anticipated to have disappeared.

The Fourierist movement resulted in the founding of a few experimental communities in France, and rather more in the USA. The most influential of Fourier’s French disciples was VICTOR CONSIDÉZRANT, a pacifist and advocate of direct democracy, while in the USA Albert Brisbane, author of The Social Destiny of Man (1840), was widely read. Important communes included Brook Farm and the North American Phalanx. Fourierism also made some impact in Russia and Eastern Europe.

Fourier and Fourierism