[Created: 10 December, 2019]
[Revised: 8 July, 2024] |
Frédéric Bastiat published the first and incomplete part of his treatise on economics, Harmonies économiques (Economic Harmonies) in early 1850. He would be dead by the end of the year with his project still unfinished, so his friends put together from his papers a second enlarged edition which was published in mid-1851. With the completion of my near final draft of a new translation and scholarly edition of the Harmonies Économiques in early 2019, I thought it presented an excellent opportunity for scholars to reassess Bastiat’s contributions to economic theory 170 years after its first appearance. The first attempt at a reassessment came in May 2019 with a Liberty Matters online discussion between a number of economists familiar with his work.
In my opinion the reputation of Bastiat as an economic theorist has suffered from being misunderstood (even by his colleagues and contemporaries), neglected and forgotten (by most economists since his death), being subjected to abusive or dismissive criticism (Marx and Schumpeter), and being damned with faint praise (Hayek and Dean Russell). Nevertheless he has always had a small group of admirers who taught his ideas in the universities (such as Amasa Walker (1799-1875), Arthur Latham Perry (1830-1905), and William Graham Sumner (1840-1910)) in the United States, and even in Australia by William Edward Hearn (1826-1888) at the newly formed University of Melbourne. Others republished his journalism on free trade and protection in the late 19th century, such as the Cobden Club in England, and free trade groups in Chicago and New York City in the U.S.
Closer to our own time, Bastiat's standing was highly regarded by the group of economists and historians who were part of Rothbard’s “Circle Bastiat” at NYU in the 1950s, and Leonard Read and Dean Russell at the Foundation for Economic Education in the 1950s and 1960s who translated nearly half of Bastiat’s writings and thus brought him to the attention of free market conservatives and libertarians in the second half of the 20th century (including myself). To the latter two groups we owe a considerable intellectual debt, but as the Bastiat translation project hopes to show there is much more to know about the life and work of Bastiat, especially his important and innovative contributions to economic theory (the "harmonies" brought about by cooperation and free markets), a broader social theory about the state, plunder, and class (the "disharmonies" brought about by coercion and government privileges), and a unique and very specific vocabulary he developed to express his new ideas.
With the completion of my final draft [1] of a new translation and scholarly edition of the Harmonies Économiques (Economic Harmonies), I thought it presented an excellent opportunity for scholars to reassess Bastiat’s contributions to economic theory 170 years after its first appearance [2] . The first attempt at this reassessment came in May 2019 with a Liberty Matters online discussion [3] between a number of economists familiar with his work. In my opinion Bastiat as an economic theorist has suffered from being misunderstood (even by his colleagues and contemporaries), neglected and forgotten (by most economists since his death), being subjected to abusive or dismissive criticism (Marx and Schumpeter), and being damned with faint praise (Hayek and Dean Russell). Nevertheless he has always had a small group of admirers who taught his ideas in the universities (such as Amasa Walker (1799-1875), Arthur Latham Perry (1830-1905), and William Graham Sumner (1840-1910)) in the United States, [4] and even in Australia by William Edward Hearn (1826-1888) at the newly formed University of Melbourne. [5] Others republished his journalism on free trade and protection, such as the Cobden club in England, and free trade groups in Chicago and New York city in the U.S. Closer to our own time, the group of economists and historians who were part of Rothbard’s “Circle Bastiat” at NYU in the 1950s, and Leonard Read and Dean Russell at the Foundation for Economic Education in the 1950s and 1960s who translated nearly half of Bastiat’s writings and thus brought him to the attention of free market conservatives and libertarians in the second half of the 20th century (including myself). To the latter two groups we owe a considerable intellectual debt but as the Bastiat translation project hopes to show there is much more to know about the life and work of Bastiat, especially his contributions to economic theory and a broader social theory about the state, plunder, and class.
One hundred and seventy years ago this month (Jan., 2020) the French political economist Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850) published the first part of what was a planned multi-volume work of economic and social theory on social and economic “harmonies” and “disharmonies.” Sadly he died from what I suspect was throat cancer before he had finished even the first volume on “economic harmonies”, [6] leaving only a few unfinished chapters, fragments of chapters, and notes, which two of his friends cobbled together into an enlarged second edition which they published a few months after his death. [7] I have scoured through his correspondence and other writings to find additional scattered thoughts he had had about this project and attempted to reconstruct what this ambitious project might have looked like had Bastiat been able to complete it. [8] I have also summarized this research in the Liberty Matters online discussion of his work and in several papers which I have written on his life and work.
In addition, in order to assist scholars I have edited and put online in "enhanced HTML" the version of his Oeuvres complètes (Collected Works) which was edited by Paillottet in the 1850s and 1850s (in the individual volumes as they appeared in print), [9] as well as an edition of his works in chronological order in one very large file (1 million words), [10] and finally a list of his works in the form of sortable tables (sortable by date, title, location) - with one table for articles, pamphlets, and books; and another for his correspondence. [11] There are links from the tables to the individual works.
Over the many years I have worked on Bastiat and the other political economists who were part of the “Paris School” [12] my regard for him as an important thinker has grown to the point where I now think that his never finished magnum opus might well have become the classical liberal equivalent of Karl Marx’s also never finished multi-volume work on Das Kapital (the first volume of which appeared in 1859) [13] which had such a profound impact on the socialist and communist movements of the late 19th and 20th centuries and which continues to have up to this day (last year (2018) was the bicentennial of his birth and was commemorated extensively in the press). I would also add that his planned volumes on the Social Harmonies and The History of Plunder should be added to Gertrude Himmelfarb’s list of the “greatest liberal books never written.” [14]
Be that as it may, we do have the very significant though unfinished volume on Economic Harmonies to read and learn from. My hope was that my editorial and translating work on Liberty Fund’s edition would be a) the definitive scholarly edition of that work, and b) part of the rediscovery and rehabilitation of Bastiat as a significant economic and social theorist. [15] I would also urge you to read some of his other major essays and pamphlets to get a sense of his work. I have done my own revised and annotated translations of two of the these key works, The State (1848, 1849) and The Law (1850). One day I would like to publish my own anthology of “The Best of Bastiat” which will show the great diversity of his activities and the originality and richness of his social and economic thought.
In this paper I would like to discuss his importance in a general sense as a classical liberal activist, politician, and thinker, as a person of great courage when facing adversity, and then, more specifically, his importance as an economic and political theorist and the place that Economic Harmonies should have in the history of economic thought. These reflections are a summary of several papers I have written where I have explored these matters in much more detail. They can be found in the Bibliography.
My first encounter with the work of Bastiat, like most people I expect, came from reading his witty and clever economic journalism, the Economic Sophisms in the translation done by the Foundation for Economic Education in the mid-1960s. [16] I was a high-school student in the early 1970s and it was from the FEE editions mailed to me from New York to Sydney, Australia that I was introduced to his ideas. His widely acknowledged skill as an economic journalist and populariser of free market ideas was and still is justified, and the accolade grudgingly acknowledged by Joseph Schumpeter, that he is probably the greatest economic journalist who has ever lived, is basically correct. [17] However, first encounters can be misleading, as they certainly were in my case.
I find the following things quite admirable about Bastiat’s person and character: the impressive number and variety of his activities, the courage he showed in facing a terminal disease while he continued to work, and the radicalism of his thinking and his behaviour in the pubs and salons of his day..
It wasn’t until I began reading his correspondence and other articles which had not been translated into English, some 30 years later, did I realize that there was much more to Bastiat’s accomplishments than just outstanding journalism. (One of the the things I was able to confirm in working on LF’s edition of the complete “economic sophisms” (by the way, there was a third set of "sophisms" FEE was not aware of) was how accurate he was in use use of economic data). [18] He was very unusual in being able to combine journalism, to work as a theorist, to engage in political activism of various kinds, and to become a driving force within the Paris group of political economists around the Guillaumin publishing firm, which the following list of his activities will show:
There is another aspect to Bastiat's life to which I should refer, and that is his personal courage and fortitude in living with a very painful and incurable disease which would end his life at the age of 49 years when he was at the peak of his powers. Several times he complained about the “lump” in his throat to his friends in his correspondence. My hunch is that it was throat or oesophageal cancer and not TB which most writers on Bastiat have assumed. [22] One explanation for his frenzy of activity in his last years, as free trade activist, elected politician, economic theorist, and anti-socialist pamphleteer, could be that he he knew he did not have long to live and wanted to make the most of the time he had left. I think that when he left Mugron at the age of 44 to start a new life in Paris he thought he had at least one, perhaps two, very important books he wanted to write before he died. Since he kept getting distracted by other things in Paris during the Revolution he didn’t even manage to finish the one on economics, let alone the others he had planned on social theory and the history of plunder. But in spite of the constant pain (he probably took laudanum (tincture of opium) constantly) and his coughing fits, he rarely complained and continued to think, work, and write until his death.
In one paper I refer to Bastiat as the “unseen” radical (a pun on one of his best known works, What is Seen and What is Unseen) [23] because there are several radical and unseen “sides” to Bastiat that modern readers are unaware but should take note of. These aspects of Bastiat relate to his geographic location (his isolation for 44 years in a small town in the south west of France), his personal and literary style, as well as the nature of his political and economic ideas. I was particularly struck by how radical a libertarian or classical liberal he was with his idea of self-ownership, [24] his view of victimless crimes, [25] his desire to abolish the standing army and replace it with American style militias, [26] his hatred of war and colonialism, [27] and how late in life he turned to writing material of a theoretical nature (he was in his forties).
In particular I think the following are important in understanding Bastiat the radical liberal:
In this section I would like to mention some of the many provocative, interesting, and original insights he had in the areas of economic, political, and social theory. I will begin with some general observations about his social theory, then some of his more general economic insights, those insights which are of particular interest to modern day Austrian school economists since Bastiat in many way was a precursor or even a “proto-Austrian” in his approach to economic theory, those that show his “public choice” perspective on the behavior of politicians and bureaucrats, and then his thinking about social theory such as his theory of the state, his theory and history of plunder, and his contributions to the classical liberal theory of class.
Most of Bastiat's ideas were welcomed by his colleagues in the Political Economy Society, who recognized the power of his writing and his skill as a popularizer of economic ideas (free trade), but in many instances his originality was either rejected or not recognized at the time. The former was quickly recognized by the Institute which made him a “corresponding member” for his book on Cobden and the League (July 1845) and the first collection of Economic Sophisms (Jan. 1846). In the latter case, only a few people understood what he was saying about the nature of exchange (service for service), or his rejection of Malthusian orthodoxy, or the subjective nature of value. He would be recognized for these things only 100 years later by economists like Murray Rothbard who recognized his contributions and incorporated some of his ideas into his own work on exchange for example (“Crusoe economics”). [32]
I have listed what I consider to be Bastiat's most important contributions to economic theory in a couple of papers [33] , and also in my Liberty Matters Lead Essay from May 2019. [34] A summary of these are listed here.
A number of modern Austrian economists have recognized that Bastiat was very close to being “an Austrian” himself in the way he approached economic theory. Pete Boettke calls him a “nascent Austrian”. [45] Others like Mark Thornton, Jörg Guido Hülsmann, and Thomas J. DiLorenzo also believe that he was too. I prefer to call him a “proto-Austrian” because he was very close on some issues but not yet there on others. [46]
Bastiat has many “public choice” like notions about the self-interested behavior of politicians and bureaucrats but these are largely scattered and not well developed. [51]
Concerning the size of the state and its permitted functions Bastiat was an advocate of what I call "ultra-limited government", [53] with much fewer permitted functions than Adam Smith who might be regarded as having set the benchmark of the classical liberal notion of "limited government." For Bastiat on the other hand, there were far fewer "public goods" which he thought only the state could and should provide. For example, he was an advocate of free banking and the private provision of education. He also wanted to dismantle the state's large standing army and replace it with much smaller local militias based upon those in the United States. [54]
Bastiat’s thinking about politics, the nature of state power, and his theory of class and plunder [55] (especially his notion of "la spoliation légale" (legal plunder)), [56] is one of his most original and important theoretical contributions. Here is not the place to go into them in any depth as I have dealt with them in other places. In this paper I want to focus on his economic thinking which he developed in his treatise Economic Harmonies., although obviously there is some overlap given the fact that he was a "political economist." What follows below is a brief outline of this dimension of Bastiat's thinking.
Bastiat's theory of plunder has a close connection in his mind to his book on Economic Harmonies. His proposed “history of plunder” was meant to be the third volume of a three volume set on "Economic Harmonies, "Social Harmonies, and "Disharmonies" (i.e. "disturbing factors, organised coercion, and plunder). [57] Throughout his corpus of writing he provides several short discussions of his theory and history of plunder which presumably he wanted to expand into a separate volume at some future date. In these scattered pieces he provides glimpses of his theory of plunder and in the posthumous second edition of Economic Harmonies the editor Paillottet inserts an outline of several planned chapters in which Bastiat would develop his history of plunder through stages. These stages included War, Slavery, Theocracy, Monopoly, “Exploitation gouvernementale” (Exploitation by Government), and “Fausse fraternité ou communisme” (False fraternity or Communism). The last two stages reflected Bastiat’s growing concern during the Second Republic about the rapid growth of the regulatory or bureaucratic state or “functionaryism” as he termed it. [58]
His broader social theory is a form of sociology or historical analysis of institutions (most notably the State) which has a significant economic dimension. In summary this broader social theory includes the following important insights:
In the course of translating and editing the work of Bastiat I noticed that he used repeatedly a number of key words to describe his economic, social, and political theory. Once I had digitised his corpus (just over 1 million words) I was able to identify these key words and phrases, to note when a key term was first used, to track its use over time, and to note the other terms which he associated with it, often closely related terms or opposite terms. I called them "word or vocabulary clusters".
I observed that Bastiat developed a rich vocabulary of terms which was unique to him, which appeared in an advanced state for the first time in early 1845 in two articles he wrote before he entered the orbit of the Parisian economists, [59] and which evolved gradually over the course of the final six years of his life. I have identified 14 such terms which I list below. For 6 of these key terms I have drawn up a graphical depiction of them and their related terms and their various, sometimes complex interrelations. [60] These 6 terms are:
See the Appendix below for the images of these "vocabulary clusters."
The full list of these important terms and their related vocabulary "clusters" is the following (in alphabetical order):
I listed above some of Bastiat’s most important and original economic insights. Below are some quotations from his treatise Economic Harmonies to illustrate this with specific examples. References are to my online edition of the 1851 French edition.
Bastiat was very aware how the various parts of the economy were interconnected and thereby made dependent upon each other in a very fundamental and deep manner. He made this clear in a number of ways in his typical style. A good example is his version of Leonard Read's story of "I, Pencil" (1958) [62] which is partly a story designed to show the Hayekian problem of knowledge (no one person has enough knowledge about all the industrial and organisation processes which go into making a simple lead pencil) and partly a story about the greater productiveness made possible by an international division of labour and international trade (the various components of the pencils such as wood, lead, paint, and rubber come from different parts of the world).
Bastiat has his own story, [63] which we might call "I, Carpenter" in deference to Read, in the opening chapter of Economic Harmonies (so 100 years before Read) about the village carpenter and the student living and studying Paris. [64] In both stories Bastiat stresses the complex co-operation ("a natural and wise order") which has already occurred in the past and which is ongoing in the present which goes into making simple everyday things which we take for granted, as well as "the chain of endless transactions" which binds together all participants in the modern economy. (Part of his purpose here is to argue that because of all the economic activity that has gone on before, the village carpenter receives far more from "the services of others" in the past than he offers for exchange in the present. This was part of his ongoing intellectual battle against the socialists of his day who were arguing that workers like the carpenter were being exploited by their participation in the free market. Bastiat argues the opposite, that they benefit far more than they can ever imagine.)
Prenons un homme appartenant à une classe modeste de la société, un menuisier de village, par exemple, et observons tous les services qu'il rend à la société et tous ceux qu'il en reçoit; nous ne tarderons pas à être frappés de l'énorme disproportion apparente. |
Let us take a man who belongs to a modest class in society, a village carpenter, for example, and let us observe all the services he provides to society and all those he receives from it; it will not take us long to be struck by the enormous apparent disproportion. |
Cet homme passe sa journée à raboter des planches, à fabriquer des tables et des armoires; il se plaint de sa condition, et cependant que reçoit-il en réalité de cette société, en échange de son travail? |
This man spends his day sanding planks and making tables and wardrobes; he complains about his situation and yet what does he receive from this same society in return for his work? |
D"abord, tous les jours, en se levant, il s"habille, et il n'a personnellement fait aucune des nombreuses pièces de son vêtement. Or, pour que ces vêtements, tout simples qu'ils sont, soient à sa disposition, il faut qu'une énorme quantité de travail, d'industrie, de transports, d'inventions ingénieuses, ait été accomplie. Il faut que des Américains aient produit du coton, des Indiens de l'indigo, des Français de la laine et du lin, des Brésiliens du cuir; que tous ces matériaux aient été transportés en des villes diverses, qu'ils y aient été ouvrés, filés, tissés, teints, etc. |
First of all, each day when he gets up he dresses, and he has not personally made any of the many items of his outfit. However, for these garments, however simple, to be at his disposal, an enormous amount of work, production, transport and ingenious invention needs to have been accomplished. Americans need to have produced cotton, Indians indigo, Frenchmen wool and linen and Brazilians leather. All these materials need to have been transported to a variety of towns, worked, spun, woven, dyed, etc. |
Ensuite, il déjeune. Pour que le pain qu'il mange lui arrive tous les matins, il faut que des terres aient été défrichées, closes, labourées, fumées, ensemencées ; il faut que les récoltes aient été préservées avec soin du pillage; il faut qu'une certaine sécurité ait régné au milieu d'une innombrable multitude; il faut que le froment ait été récolté, broyé, pétri et préparé ; il faut que le fer, l'acier, le bois, la pierre, aient été convertis par le travail en instruments de travail; que certains hommes se soient emparés de la force des animaux, d'autres du poids d'une chute d'eau, etc.: toutes choses dont chacune, prise isolément, suppose une masse incalculable de travail mise en jeu, non-seulement dans l'espace, mais dans le temps. |
He then has breakfast. In order for the bread he eats to arrive each morning, land had to be cleared, fenced, ploughed, fertilized and sown. Harvests had to be stored and protected from pillage. A degree of security had to reign in the context of an immense multitude of souls. Wheat had to be harvested, ground, kneaded and prepared. Iron, steel, wood and stone had to be changed by human labor into tools. Some men had to make use of the strength of animals, others the weight of a waterfall, etc.; all things each of which, taken singly, implies an incalculable mass of labor put to work , not only in space but also in time. |
Cet homme ne passera pas sa journée sans employer un peu de sucre, un peu d'huile, sans se servir de quelques ustensiles. |
This man will not spend his day without using a little sugar, a little oil or a few utensils. |
Il enverra son fils à l'école, pour y recevoir une instruction qui, quoique bornée, n'en suppose pas moins des recherches, des études antérieures, des connaissances dont l'imagination est effrayée. [18] |
He will send his son to school to receive instruction, which although limited, nonetheless implies research, previous studies and knowledge such as to affright the imagination. |
Il sort : il trouve une rue pavée et éclairée. |
He goes out and finds a road that is paved and lit. |
On lui conteste une propriété : il trouvera des avocats pour défendre ses droits, des juges pour l'y maintenir, des officiers de justice pour faire exécuter la sentence; toutes choses qui supposent encore des connaissances acquises, par conséquent des lumières et des moyens d'existence. |
His ownership of a piece of property is contested; he will find lawyers to defend his rights, judges to maintain them, officers of the court to carry out the judgment, all of which once again imply acquired knowledge and consequently understanding and proper means of existence. |
Il va à l'église: elle est un monument prodigieux, et le livre qu'il y porte est un monument peut-être plus prodigieux encore de l'intelligence humaine. On lui enseigne la morale, on éclaire son esprit, on élève son âme; et, pour que tout cela se fasse, il faut qu'un autre homme ait pu fréquenter les bibliothèques, les séminaires, puiser à toutes les sources de la tradition humaine, qu'il ait pu vivre sans s"occuper directement des besoins de son corps. |
He goes to church; it is a prodigious monument and the book he carries is a monument to human intelligence perhaps more prodigious still. He is taught morality, his mind is enlightened, his soul elevated, and in order for all this to happen, another man had to be able to go to libraries and seminaries and draw on all the sources of human tradition; he had to have been able to live without taking direct care of his bodily needs. |
Si notre artisan entreprend un voyage, il trouve que, pour lui épargner du temps et diminuer sa peine, d'autres hommes ont aplani, nivelé le sol, comblé des vallées, abaissé des montagnes, joint les rives des fleuves, amoindri tous les frottements, placé des véhicules à roues sur des blocs de grès ou des bandes de fer, dompté les chevaux ou la vapeur, etc. |
If our craftsman sets out on a journey, he finds that, to save him time and increase his comfort, other men have flattened and leveled the ground, filled in the valleys, lowered the mountains, joined the banks of rivers, increased the smooth passage on the route, set wheeled vehicles on paving stones or iron rails, and mastered the use of horses, steam, etc. |
Il est impossible de ne pas être frappé de la disproportion véritablement incommensurable qui existe entre les satisfactions que cet homme puise dans la société et celles qu'il pourrait se donner s"il était réduit à ses propres forces. J"ose dire que, dans une seule journée, il consomme des choses qu'il ne pourrait produire lui-même dans dix siècles. |
It is impossible not to be struck by the truly immeasurable disproportion that exists between the satisfactions drawn by this man from society and those he would be able to provide for himself if he were to be limited to his own resources. I make so bold as to say that in a single day, he consumes things he would not be able to produce by himself in ten centuries. |
Cependant, l'Echange est un si grand bienfait pour la société (et n'est-il pas la société elle-même ?), qu'elle ne s"est pas bornée, pour le faciliter, pour le multiplier, à l'introduction de la [91] monnaie. Dans l'ordre logique, après le Besoin et la Satisfaction unis dans le même individu par l'effort isolé, — après le troc simple, — après le troc à deux facteurs, ou l'Échange composé de vente et achat, — apparaissent encore les transactions étendues dans le temps et l'espace par le moyen du crédit, titres hypothécaires, lettres de change, billets de banque, etc. Grâce à ces merveilleux mécanismes, éclos de la civilisation, la perfectionnant et se perfectionnant eux-mêmes avec elle, un effort exécuté aujourd"hui à Paris ira satisfaire un inconnu par delà les océans et par delà les siècles, et celui qui s"y livre n'en reçoit pas moins sa récompense actuelle, par l'intermédiaire de personnes qui font l'avance de cette rémunération et se soumettent à en aller demander la compensation à des pays lointains ou à l'attendre d'un avenir reculé. Complication étonnante autant que merveilleuse, qui, soumise à une exacte analyse, nous montre, en définitive, l'intégrité du phénomène économique, besoin, effort, satisfaction, s"accomplissant dans chaque individualité selon la loi de justice. |
However, exchange is such a great benefit to society (and is it not exchange, society itself?) that for purposes of facilitating and increasing exchange, society has not been confined to the introduction of money. In logical order, after need and satisfaction united in the same person through isolated effort, after simple barter, after barter with two factors or compound exchange made up of sale and purchase, there is yet another form of transaction (which is) extended through time and space by means of credit, mortgage titles, letters of exchange, bank notes, etc. Thanks to these marvelous mechanisms, born of civilization, which advance it and are themselves advanced by it, an effort undertaken today in Paris will go to satisfy an unknown person beyond the seas and across the centuries, and he who carries it out receives his compensation now, (since) there are people who make loans to cover this payment and are prepared to subject themselves to asking for their payment in far-off countries or to waiting for it in the remote future. This complication, as astonishing as it is marvelous, when analyzed in detail, in the end shows us the unity of the economic phenomena of “need, effort and satisfaction,” taking place within each individual according to the law of justice. |
Bornes de l'Échange. Le caractère général de l'Échange est de diminuer le rapport de l'effort à la satisfaction. Entre nos besoins et nos satisfactions s"interposent des obstacles que nous parvenons à amoindrir par l'union des forces ou par la séparation des occupations, c"est-à-dire par l' Echange. Mais l'Échange lui-même rencontre des obstacles, exige des efforts. La preuve en est dans l'immense masse de travail humain qu'il met en mouvement. Les métaux précieux, les routes, les canaux, les chemins de fer, les voitures, les navires, toutes ces choses absorbent une part considérable de l'activité humaine. Voyez, d'ailleurs, que d'hommes uniquement occupés à faciliter des échanges, que de banquiers, négociants, marchands, courtiers, voituriers, marins! Ce vaste et coûteux appareil prouve mieux que tous les raisonnements ce qu'il y a de puissance dans la faculté d'échanger; sans cela comment l'humanité aurait-elle consenti à se l'imposer? |
The Limits to Exchange The general characteristic of all exchange is that it decreases the ratio of effort to satisfaction. Between our needs and satisfactions there are obstacles that we succeed in reducing by the joint use of our strength or the division of labor, that is to say through exchange. However, exchange itself encounters obstacles and requires effort. The proof of this lies in the immense amount of human labor it generates. Precious metals, roads, canals, railways, carriages, or ships: all these things absorb a considerable amount of human activity. What is more, look at the number of men whose sole occupation lies in facilitating exchange, how many bankers, traders, merchants, brokers, coachmen, or sailors there are! This huge and costly apparatus is better proof than all forms of reasoning of the power that lies in our ability to exchange. Without it this why would the human race have agreed to impose such an apparatus on itself? |
L"homme est jeté sur cette terre. Il porte invinciblement en lui-même l'attrait vers le bonheur, l'aversion de la douleur.— Puisqu"il agit en vertu de cette impulsion, on ne peut nier que l'Intérêt personnel ne soit le grand mobile de l'individu, de tous les individus, et par conséquent de la société. — Puisque l'intérêt personnel, dans la sphère économique, est le mobile des actions humaines et le grand ressort de la société, le Mal doit en provenir comme le Bien ; c"est en lui qu'il faut chercher l'harmonie et ce qui la trouble. |
Man has been cast upon the earth. He is irresistibly attracted to happiness and averse to pain. Since he acts in line with these impulses, it cannot be denied that self-interest is not the great driving force within individuals, (that is in) all individuals, and consequently in society. Since in the sphere of economics, self-interest is the driving force of human action and the mainspring of society, harm can come from it just as good can. It is in self-interest that both harmony and what disrupts it have to be sought. |
L"éternelle aspiration de l'intérêt personnel est de faire taire le besoin, ou plus généralement le désir, par la satisfaction. |
The eternal goal of self-interest is to silence (the voice of) need, or in more general terms, (silence the voice of) desire through satisfaction. |
Entre ces deux termes, essentiellement intimes et intransmissibles, le besoin et la satisfaction, s"interpose le moyen transmissible, échangeable; l'effort. |
Between these two extremes, need and satisfaction, which are deeply private and incapable of being transferred (to another), can be found the way in which they can be made transferrable and exchangeable: (namely through) effort. |
Et au-dessus de l'appareil, plane la faculté de comparer, de juger: l'intelligence. Mais l'intelligence humaine est faillible. [496] Nous pouvons nous tromper. Cela n'est pas contestable; car si quelqu"un nous disait: l'homme ne peut se tromper, nous lui répondrions : ce n'est pas à vous qu'il faut démontrer l'harmonie. |
And above the entire apparatus (of exchange) hovers the ability to compare and judge: that is our mind. However, the human mind is fallible. We can make mistakes. This cannot be denied, for if someone said to us: “Human beings cannot make mistakes,” our answer to him would be: “You are not the person to whom harmony needs to be demonstrated. |
Nous pouvons nous tromper de plusieurs manières ; nous pouvons mal apprécier l'importance relative de nos besoins. En ce cas, dans l'isolement, nous donnons à nos efforts une direction qui n'est pas conforme à nos intérêts bien entendus. Dans l'ordre social, et sous la loi de l'échange, l'effet est le même; nous faisons porter la demande et la rémunération vers un genre de services futiles ou nuisibles, et déterminons de ce côté le courant du travail humain. |
We can make several types of mistake: we can fail to assess correctly the relative importance of our needs. In the case (of living) in isolation, we direct our efforts toward a goal that is not in our best interests. In the social order and subject to the law of exchange, the effect is the same: we focus (our) demand (on) and (are willing to pay for) a type of service that is unimportant or harmful, (thus) causing the current of human work to flow in this direction. |
Nous pouvons nous tromper encore, en ignorant qu'une satisfaction ardemment cherchée ne fera cesser une souffrance qu'en ouvrant la source de souffrances plus grandes. Il n'y a guère d'effet qui ne devienne cause. La prévoyance nous a été donnée pour embrasser l'enchaînement des effets, pour que nous ne fassions pas au présent le sacrifice de l'avenir; mais nous manquons souvent de prévoyance. |
We can make a different type of mistake by failing to realize that a (too) fervently sought satisfaction will remedy suffering only by opening the door to even greater suffering. There is scarcely any effect that does not become (in its turn) a cause. Foresight has been given to us to grasp the relationship between cause and effect so that we may avoid sacrificing the future to the present; however, we often lack (this) foresight. |
L"erreur déterminée par la faiblesse de notre jugement ou par la force de nos passions, voilà la première source du mal. Elle appartient principalement au domaine de la morale. Ici, comme l'erreur et la passion sont individuelles, le mal est, dans une certaine mesure, individuel aussi. La réflexion, l'expérience, l'action de la responsabilité en sont les correctifs efficaces. |
Error which has sprung from a weakness of judgment or the force of feeling is the leading source of harm. It relates principally to the sphere of morals. Here, since error and passion are individual, (this type of) harm is to a certain extent also individual. Reflection, experience, and responsible behaviour are effective corrections for this. |
An example of Robinson Crusoe creating capital goods for himself and then by extrapolation to the social realm, the justice of exchanging capital or charging for its use:
Plus tard, toutes les facilités s"accroîtront de concert. La réflexion et l'expérience auront appris à notre insulaire à mieux opérer; le premier instrument lui-même lui fournira les moyens d'en fabriquer d'autres et d'accumuler des provisions avec plus de promptitude. |
Later on, all (his) faculties will improve together. Reflection and experience will have taught our island dweller how to do things better. The initial tool itself will supply him with the means to make others and to amass a stock of provisions more quickly. |
Instruments, matériaux, provisions, voilà sans doute ce que Robinson appellera son capital, et il reconnaîtra aisément que plus ce capital sera considérable, plus il asservira de forces naturelles, plus il les fera concourir à ses travaux, plus enfin il augmentera le rapport de ses satisfactions à ses efforts. |
Tools, materials, and provisions are what Robinson Crusoe will doubtless call his capital, and he will readily acknowledge that the more of this capital he has, the more use he will make of the forces of nature, the more these forces will assist his work, and in the end the greater will be the relationship between his satisfaction and his effort. |
Plaçons-nous maintenant au sein de l'ordre social. Le Capital se composera aussi des instruments de travail, des matériaux et des provisions sans lesquels, ni dans l'isolement ni dans la société, il ne se peut rien entreprendre de longue haleine. Ceux qui se trouveront pourvus de ce capital ne Tauront que parce qu'ils l'auront créé par leurs efforts ou par leurs privations, et ils n'auront fait ces efforts (étrangers aux besoins actuels), ils ne se seront imposé ces privations qu'en vue d'avantages ultérieurs, en vue, par exemple, de faire concourir désormais une [191] grande proportion de forces naturelles. De leur part, céder ce capital, ce sera se priver de l'avantage cherché, ce sera céder cet avantage à d'autres, ce sera rendre service. Dès lors, ou il faut renoncer aux plus simples éléments de la justice, il faut même renoncer à raisonner, ou il faut reconnaître qu'ils auront parfaitement le droit de ne faire cette cession qu'en échange d'un service librement débattu, volontairement consenti. Je ne crois pas qu'il se rencontre un seul homme sur la terre qui conteste l'équité de la mutualité des services, car mutualité des services signifie, en d'autres termes, équité. Dira-t-on que la transaction ne devra pas se faire librement, parce que celui qui a des capitaux est en mesure de faire la loi à celui qui n'en a pas? Mais comment devra-t-elle se faire? A quoi reconnaître l'équivalence des services, si ce n'est quand de part et d'autre l'échange est volontairement accepté? Ne voit-on pas d'ailleurs que l'emprunteur, libre de le faire, refusera, s"il n'a pas avantage à accepter, et que l'emprunt ne peut jamais empirer sa condition? Il est clair que la question qu'il se posera sera celle-ci : L"emploi de ce capital me donnera-t-il des avantages qui fassent plus que compenser les conditions qui me sont demandées? ou bien: L"effort que je suis maintenant obligé de faire pour obtenir une satisfaction donnée, est-il supérieur ou moindre que la somme des efforts auxquels je serai contraint par l'emprunt, d'abord pour rendre les services qui me sont demandés, ensuite pour poursuivre cette satisfaction à l'aide du capital emprunté? |
Let us now move into the social realm. Here too, capital will be made up of tools, materials, and provisions without which, neither in isolation nor in society, can anything be done over a long period. Those who have this capital will have it only because they have created it through their (own) efforts or privations and they will not have made these efforts (reaching beyond their current needs) nor imposed these privations on themselves, without having future benefits in sight, for example, with a view to harnessing a significant proportion of the forces of nature from now on. From their point of view, to give up this capital would be to deprive themselves of the benefit sought and hand it over to someone else; it would be to provide a service. In this case, either we would have to renounce the most elementary principles of justice and even renounce reasoning (itself), or we would have to acknowledge that they have a perfect right to make this transaction only in exchange for a service that has been freely negotiated and voluntarily agreed to. I do not think there is a single person on earth who disputes the justice of the mutuality of services, since the mutuality of services is another way of expressing justice. Will people say that transactions should not be made freely because the person who has the capital is in a position to dictate to the one who does not? But how should they be carried out? How can we recognize the equivalence of services if not by the fact that each party has voluntarily agreed to the exchange? What is more, do we not see that the borrower who is free to do so will refuse if there is no advantage to him in accepting, and that the loan can never make his situation worse? It is clear that the question he will ask himself is this: Will the use of this capital provide me with benefits that will more than compensate the conditions asked of me? Or else: Is the effort I am currently obliged to devote to obtaining a given satisfaction greater or less than the sum of the efforts the loan will oblige me to make, first of all to provide the services asked of me and then to seek this satisfaction using the capital I have borrowed? |
L"air, l'eau, la lumière sont gratuits, dites-vous. C"est vrai, et [183] si nous n'en jouissions que sous leur forme primitive, si nous ne les faisions concourir à aucun de nos travaux, nous pourrions les exclure de l'économie politique, comme nous en excluons l'utilité possible et probable des comètes. Mais observez l'homme au point d'où il est parti et au point où il est arrivé. D"abord il ue savait faire concourir que très—imparfaitement l'eau, l'air, la lumière et les autres agents naturels. Chacune de ses satisfactions était achetée par de grands efforts personnels, exigeait une très-grande proportion de travail, ne pouvait être cédée que comme un grand service, représentait en un mot beaucoup de valeur. Peu à peu cette eau, cet air, cette lumière, la gravitation, l'élasticité, le calorique, l'électricité, la vie végétale sont sortis de cette inertie relative. Ils se sont de plus en plus mêlés à notre industrie. Ils s"y sont substitués au travail humain. Ils ont fait gratuitement ce qu'il faisait à titre onéreux. Ils ont, sans nuire aux satisfactions, anéanti de la valeur. Pour parler en langue vulgaire, ce qui coûtait cent francs n'en coûte que dix, ce qui exigeait dix jours de labeur n'en demande qu'un. Toute celle valeur anéantie est passée du domaine de la Propriété dans celui de la Communauté. Une proportion considérable d'efforts humains ont été dégagés et rendus disponibles pour d'autres entreprises; c"est ainsi, qu'à peine égale, à services égaux, à valeurs égales, l'humanité a prodigieusement élargi le cercle de ses jouissances, et vous dites que je dois éliminer de la science cette utilité gratuite, commune, qui seule explique le progrès tant en hauteur qu'en surface, si je puis m"exprimer ainsi, tant en bien-être qu'en égalité! |
You say that air, water, and sunlight are free of charge. That is true, and if we enjoy them merely in their primitive form, if we do not use them in any of our labors, we might exclude them from political economy just as we exclude the possible and probable utility of comets. But take a look at man when he started and where he is now. At the beginning, he was able to make use of water, air, light, and the other natural resources only in a very limited way. Each of his satisfactions came at the cost of great personal effort, required great labor, and could be passed on to others only as a great service, in a word, each one represented a great deal of value. Little by little, this water, air, and light, gravity, the compressibility of air, heat, electricity, and plant life emerged from this relative inertia. They became increasingly involved in our industry. They took the place of human labor. They did free of charge what we used to do for a cost. Without undermining satisfaction, they destroyed (some) value. In common parlance, what used to cost one hundred francs now costs only ten and what required ten days of hard work now requires only one. All this destroyed value has moved from the domain of (private) property into that of the Commons. A considerable proportion of human effort has been freed up and made available for other activities. This is how, for equal amounts of trouble, services, and values the human race has vastly widened the range of its enjoyments and still you say that I ought to remove from the study of economic science the gratuitous utility that is common to all and that, on its own, explains both the height and breadth of progress if I may put it this way, both in terms of well-being and equality! |
An example of his consumer-centric analysis; producers don’t like competition but it is for the benefit of consumers; competition draws them together in solidarity:
... Forces naturelles, procédés expéditifs, instruments de production, tout est commun entre les hommes, ou tend à le devenir, tout, hors la peine, le travail, l'effort individuel. Il n'y a, il ne peut y avoir entre eux qu'une inégalité, que les communistes les plus absolus admettent, celle qui résulte de l'inégalité des efforts. Ce sont ces efforts qui s"échangent les uns contre les autres à prix débattu. Tout ce que la nature, le génie des siècles et la prévoyance humaine ont mis d'utilité dans les produits échangés, est donné par-dessus le marché. Les rémunérations réciproques ne s"adressent qu'aux efforts respectifs, soit actuels sous le nom de travail, soit préparatoires sous le nom de capital; c"est donc la communauté dans le sens le plus rigoureux du mot, à moins qu'on ne veuille prétendre que le contingent personnel de la satisfaction doit être égal, encore que le contingent de la peine ne le soit pas, ce qui serait, certes, la plus inique et la plus monstrueuse des inégalités ; j"ajoute et la plus funeste, car elle ne tuerait pas la Concurrence; seulement elle lui donnerait une action inverse; on lutterait encore, mais on lutterait de paresse, d'inintelligence et d'imprévoyance. |
… Natural forces, more efficient industrial processes, and tools of production, all these are commonly available to man or are tending to become so. This is true for everything, except for the trouble people incur, and the labor and individual effort put in. Between men there is only one and there can be only one inequality, one that the most dyed in the wool communists acknowledge, and that is the inequality that results from the inequality of effort. These are the efforts exchanged between people for a freely negotiated price. All the utility that nature, the genius of past centuries, and human foresight have imparted to the products being exchanged is therefore available into the bargain. Reciprocal payment relates only to their respective efforts, either present effort in the form of labor or preparatory effort in the shape of capital. (This) is therefore a community in the strictest sense of the word, unless you wish to claim that each person’s share in the satisfaction has to be equal, while the share of effort exerted is not. This would indeed be the most unjust and monstrous of inequalities and, I would add, the most disastrous, for it would not kill competition but merely cause its action to be inverted. People would still fight, but they would fight to excel in laziness, lack of intelligence, and lack of foresight. |
Enfin la doctrine si simple, et, selon notre conviction, si vraie que nous venons de développer, fait sortir du domaine de la déclamation, pour le faire entrer dans celui de la démonstration rigoureuse, le grand principe de la perfectibilité humaine. — De ce mobile interne qui ne se repose jamais dans le sein de l'individualité, et qui la porte à améliorer sa condition, naît le le progrès des arts, qui n'est autre chose que le concours progressif de forces étrangères par leur nature à toute rémunération. — De la Concurrence naît l'attribution à la communauté des avantages d'abord individuellement obtenus. L"intensité [323] de la peine requise pour chaque résultat donné va se restreignant sans cesse, au profil du genre humain qui voit ainsi s"élargir, de génération en génération, le cercle de ses satisfactions, de ses loisirs, et s"élever le niveau de son perfectionnement physique, intellectuel et moral; et par cet arrangement, si digne de notre étude et de notre éternelle admiration, on voit clairement l'humanité se relever de sa déchéance. |
Finally, the doctrine that we have developed, so simple and, we are convinced, so true, forces the emergence of the great principle of human perfectibility out of the domain of oratory and into that of rigorous proof. From this internal motive, which never rests in a person’s breast and which leads that person to improve his or her situation, is born the advance of technology, an advance that is nothing other than the gradual cooperation of forces, which by their very nature are unconcerned with any remuneration. Competition gives rise to the granting to the community those benefits which were originally acquired by individuals. The intensity of the effort required for any given result is constantly reduced for the benefit of the human race, which sees its range of satisfactions and leisure increase from one generation to another and the level of its physical, intellectual, and moral progress advance, and through this arrangement, so worthy of our study and eternal admiration, we clearly see the human race rising up out of its degradation. |
Qu"on ne se méprenne pas à mes paroles. Je ne dis point que toute fraternité, toute communauté, toute perfectibilité sont renfermées dans la Concurrence. Je dis qu'elle s"allie, qu'elle se combine à ces trois grands dogmes sociaux, qu'elle en fait partie, qu'elle les manifeste, qu'elle est un des plus puissants agents de leur sublime réalisation. |
I hope my words will not be misunderstood. I am not saying that all brotherhood, all community, and all human perfectibility are contained in competition itself. What I am saying is that it is linked and allied to these three great social social concepts, that it is part of them, that it makes them manifest, and that it is one of the most powerful agents of their sublime realization. |
Je me suis attaché à décrire les effets généraux et, par conséquent, bienfaisants de la Concurrence; car il serait impie de supposer qu'aucune grande loi de la nature pût en produire qui fussent à la fois nuisibles et permanents; mais je suis loin de nier que son action ne soit accompagnée de beaucoup de froissements et de souffrances. Il me semble même que la théorie qui vient d'être exposée explique et ces souffrances et les plaintes inévitables qu'elles excitent. Puisque l'œuvre de la Concurrence consiste à niveler, nécessairement elle doit contrarier quiconque élève au-dessus du niveau sa tète orgueilleuse. On comprend que chaque producteur, afin de mettre son travail à plus haut prix, s"efforce de retenir le plus longtemps possible l'usage exclusif d'un agent, d'un procédé, ou d'un instrument de production. Or, la Concurrence ayant justement pour mission et pour résultat d'enlever cet usage exclusif à l'individualité pour en faire une propriété commune, il est fatal que tous les hommes, en tant que producteurs, s"unissent dans un concert de malédictions contre la Concurrence. Ils ne se peuvent réconcilier avec elle qu'en appréciant leurs rapports avec la consommation ; en se considérant non point en tant que membres d'une coterie, d'une corporation, mais en tant qu'hommes. |
I have concentrated on describing the general and consequently beneficial effects of competition, for it would be sacrilege to suppose that any great law of nature could produce effects that were both harmful and permanent, but I am far from denying that its action can be accompanied by a great deal of hardship and suffering. I even consider that the theory that has just been set out, explains both these sufferings and the inevitable complaints they generate. Since the work of competition is to level out, of necessity it is bound to upset anyone who raises his proud head above this level. We can understand that each producer strives to retain the exclusive use of a resource, an industrial process, or a tool of production for as long as possible in order to keep the highest price for his work. Well, since the purpose as well as the result of competition is precisely to remove this exclusive use from individuals in order to make it common property, it is inevitable that men, insofar as they are producers, will unite in a chorus of curses against competition. They can become reconciled to it, only by appreciating their relationship to consumption, by thinking of themselves not as members of a clique or a privileged corporation, but as individual men. |
L"économie politique, il faut le dire, n'a pas encore assez fait pour dissiper cette funeste illusion, source de tant de haines, de calamités, d'irritations et de guerres; elle s"est épuisée, par [324] une préférence peu scientifique, à analyser les phénomènes de la production ; sa nomenclature même, toute commode qu'elle est, n'est pas en harmonie avec son objet. Agriculture, manufacture, commerce, c"est là une classification excellente peut-être, quand il s"agit de décrire les procédés des arts; mais celle description, capitale en technologie, est à peine accessoire en économie sociale: j"ajoute qu'elle y est essentiellement dangereuse. Quand on a classé les hommes en agriculteurs, fabricants et négociants, de quoi peut-on leur parler, si ce n'est de leurs intérêts de classe, de ces intérêts spéciaux que heurte la Concurrence et qui sont mis en opposition avec le bien général? Ce n'est pas pour les agriculteurs qu'il y a une agriculture, pour les manufacturiers qu'il y a des manufactures, pour les négociants qu'il se fail des échanges, mais afin que les hommes aient h leur disposition le plus possible de produits de toute espèce. Les lois de la consommation, ce qui la favorise, l'égalise et la moralise, voilà l'intérêt vraiment social, vraiment humanitaire; voilà l'objet réel de la science; voilà sur quoi elle doit concentrer ses vives clartés: car c"est là qu'est le lien des classes, des nations, des races, le principe et l'explication de la fraternité humaine. C"est donc avec regret que nous voyons les économistes vouer des facultés puissantes, dépenser une somme prodigieuse de sagacité à l'anatomie de la production, rejetant au fond de leurs livres, dans des. chapitres complémentaires, quelques brefs lieux communs sur les phénomènes de la consommation. Que dis-je ? on a vu naguère un professeur, célèbre à juste titre, supprimer entièrement cette partie de la science, s"occuper des moyens sans jamais parler du résultat, et bannir de son cours tout ce qui concerne la consommation des richesses, comme appartenant, disait-il, à la morale, et non à l'économie politique. Faut-il être surpris que le public soit plus frappé des inconvénients de la Concurrence que de ses avantages, puisque les premiers l'affectent au point de vue spécial de la production dont on l'entretient sans cesse, et les seconds au point de vue général de la consommation dont on ne lui dit jamais rien? |
It has to be said that political economy has not done enough to dispel this disastrous illusion, which is the source of so much hatred and resentment, and so many disasters and wars. It has worn itself out, given its very unscientific orientation, analyzing the phenomena of production; even its nomenclature, as convenient as it is, is not in harmony with its subject-matter. Farming, manufacturing, or commerce are perhaps excellent headings when it is a question of describing the processes involved in these technical arts, but such description, though of vital significance in technology, is scarcely relevant in social economy, and I would actually say that it is essentially dangerous in this context. When people have been classified as farmers, manufacturers, and merchants, what can you talk to them about, other than their class interests, those special interests that conflict with competition and oppose the general good? It is not for farmers that farming exists, for manufacturers that there are factories, or for merchants that exchanges take place, but in order for people to have access to the greatest possible number of products of all kinds. The laws of consumption, and what promotes it, equalizes it, and makes it moral: that is the true social and humanitarian interest; that is the real focus of economic science; that is on what it should focus its sharpest thinking. For this is where the bond between classes, nations, and races is - the principle and the explanation of human brotherhood. It is therefore with regret that we see economists devoting their powerful minds and dispensing a prodigious wealth of wisdom, in pursuit of the anatomy of production, relegating to appendices at the ends of their books a few brief commonplaces on the phenomena of consumption. What is that I am saying? Not long ago, we saw a justifiably famous professor suppressing this part of economic science totally and devoting himself to the means without ever mentioning the ends, and banishing from his lectures anything relating to the consumption of wealth as belonging, so he said, to the realm of moral philosophy and not to political economy. Should we be surprised that the general public are more struck by the disadvantages of competition than its advantages, since the disadvantages affect it from the particular point of view of production, about which they are constantly being informed, and the advantages from the general point of view of consumption, about which they are never told anything? |
The “means of existence” is constantly expanding and is thus a refutation of Malthusianism pessimism:
Nous disons donc : la population tend à se mettre au niveau des moyens d'existence. |
Therefore, we say: population tends to adjust to the level of the means of existence. |
Mais ces moyens sont-ils une chose fixe, absolue, uniforme? Von certainement : à mesure que l'homme se civilise, le cercle de ses besoins s"étend, on peut le dire même de la simple subsistance. Considérés au point de vue de l'être perfectible, les moyens d'existence, en quoi il faut comprendre la satisfaction les besoins physiques, intellectuels et moraux, admettent auant de degrés qu'il y en a dans la civilisation elle-même, c"est [442] à-dire dans l'infini. Sans doute, il y a une limite inférieure: apaiser sa faim, se garantir d'un certain degré de froid, c"est une condition de la vie, et cette limite, nous pouvons l'apercevoir dans l'état des sauvages d'Amérique et des pauvres d'Europe; mais une limite supérieure, je n'en connais pas, il n'j en a pas. Les besoins naturels satisfaits, il en naît d'autres, qui sont factices d'abord, si l'on veut, mais que l'habitude rend naturels à leur tour, et, après ceux-ci, d'autres encore, et encore sans terme assignable. |
Are these means, however, set in stone, absolute, and uniform? Certainly not: as man becomes more civilized, the circle of his needs expands and this can even be said of simple subsistence. Considered from the point of view of a perfectible being, the means of existence, which have to be understood to include the satisfaction of physical, intellectual, and moral needs, have as many gradations as there are in civilization itself, that is to say that they are infinite. Doubtless there is a lower limit: to assuage hunger and protect yourself from a certain degree of cold is a condition of life, and we can glimpse this limit in the condition of the primitive peoples of America and the poor in Europe. I do not know, however, of an upper limit: there is none. Once natural needs have been met, they give rise to others, artificial at first, if you like, but which habit makes second nature in turn, and these are followed by others and still more, without assignable limits. |
Donc, à chaque pas de l'homme dans la voie de la civilisation, ses besoins embrassent un cercle plus étendu, et les moyens d'existence, ce point où se rencontrent les deux grandes lois de multiplication et de limitation, se déplace pour s"exhausser. — Car, quoique l'homme soit susceptible de détérioration aussi bien que de perfectionnement, il répugne à l'une et aspire à l'autre: ses efforts tendent à le maintenir au rang qu'il a conquis, à l'élever encore; et l'habitude, qu'on a si bien nommée une seconde nature, faisant les fonctions des valvules de notre système artériel, met obstacle à tout pas rétrograde. Il est donc tout simple que l'action intelligente et morale qu'il exerce sur sa propre multiplication se ressente, s"imprègne, s"inspire de ces efforts et se combine avec ces habitudes progressives. |
Thus at each step that man takes along the path of civilization his needs encompass a circle that is ever-wider, and the means of existence, that meeting point of the two great laws of population growthand population limits, shift position in order to rise. This is because man, while as much subject to regression as to perfection, rejects the former and aspires to the latter. His efforts tend to keep him at the social rank he has achieved and advance him further, while habit, which we have so aptly called second nature, operating in the same way as the valves in our arteries, erects obstacles to any retrograde step. It is therefore very easy for the intelligent and moral action that he exerts on his own reproduction to feel the effects of, be steeped in, and be inspired by these efforts, and combine them with these progressive habits. |
Les conséquences qui résultent de cette organisation de l'homme se présentent en foule : nous nous bornerons à en indiquer quelques-unes.— D"abord nous admettrons bien avec les économistes que la population et les moyens d'existence se font équilibre; mais le dernier de ces termes étant d'une mobilité infinie, et variant avec la civilisation et les habitudes, nous ne pourrions pas admettre qu'en comparant les peuples et les classes, la population soit proportionnelle à la production, comme dit J. B. Say,[fb-40] ou aux revenus, comme l'affirme M. de Sismondi. — Ensuite, chaque degré supérieur de culture impliquant plus de prévoyance, l'obstacle moral et préventif doit neutraliser de plus en plus l'action de l'obstacle brutal et répressif, à chaque phase de perfectionnement réalisé dans la société ou dans quelques-unes [443] de ses fractions.—Il suit de là que tout progrès social contient le germe d'un progrès nouveau, vires acquirit eundo, puisque le mieux-être et la prévoyance s"engendrent l'un l'autre dans une succession indéfinie.— De même, quand, par quelque cause, l'humanité suit un mouvement rétrograde, le malaise et l'imprévoyance sont entre eus cause et effet réciproques, et la déchéance n'aurait pas de terme si la société n'était pas pourvue de cette force curative, vis medicatrix, que la Providence a placée dans tous les corps organisés. Remarquons, en effet, qu'à chaque période dans la déchéance, l'action de la limitation dans son mode destructif devient à la fois plus douloureuse et plus facile à discerner. D"abord il ne s"agit que de détérioration, d'abaissement; ensuite c"est la misère, la famine, le désordre, la guerre, la mort; tristes mais infaillibles moyens d'enseignement. |
The consequences of mankind being constituted in this way are legion: we will limit ourselves to mentioning just a few. First of all, we fully agree with the economists that population and the means of existence balance each other, but since the second of these terms is infinitely changeable and varies with the degree of civilization and with habits, we cannot accept, when it comes to comparing nations and classes, that population is proportional to production, as J. B. Say says, or to income as Mr. de Sismondi claims. Next, with each higher level of culture requiring more foresight, moral, and preventive checks ought to neutralize the effect of brutal and repressive ones, at each stage of improvement which is achieved in society as a whole or in some of its parts. From this it follows that any social progress contains the seed of fresh progress, vires acquirit eundo, since well-being and foresight build upon each other in an indefinite upward succession. In the same way, when, for whatever reason, the human race follows a downward path, ill-feeling and lack of foresight are cause and effect reciprocally and the downward spiral would have no end if society were not in possession of this curative force, *vis medicatrix,*that Providence has placed in all living things. Indeed, we should note that at each period of decline, the effect of population limits in its destructive mode becomes both more painful and easier to discern. First of all, it is just a question of a deterioration and a worsening of conditions; this is followed by poverty, famine, disruption, war, and death, all sorry but unerring methods of teaching. |
Nous voudrions pouvoir nous arrêter à montrer combien ici la théorie explique les faits, combien, à leur tour, les faits justifient la théorie. Lorsque, pour un peuple ou une classe, les moyens d'existence sont descendus à cette limite inférieure où ils se confondent avec les moyens de pure subsistance, comme en Chine, en Irlande et dans les dernières classes de tous pays, les moindres oscillations de population ou de ressources alimentaires se traduisent eu mortalité : les faits confirment à cet égard l'induction scientifique.— Depuis longtemps la famine ne visite plus l'Europe, et l'on attribue la destruction de ce fléau à une multitude de causes. Il y en a plusieurs sans doute, mais la plus générale c"est que les moyens d'existence se sont, par suite du progrès social, exhaussés fort au-dessus des moyens de subsistance. Quand viennent des années disetteuses, on peut sacrifier beaucoup de satisfactions avant d'entreprendre sur les aliments eux-mêmes.—Il n'en est pas ainsi en Chine et en Irlande: quand les hommes n'ont rien au monde qu'un peu de riz ou de pommes de terre, avec quoi achèteront-ils d'autres aliments si ce riz et ces pommes de terre viennent à manquer? |
We would like to be able to pause here to show how far the theory explains the facts and how far in turn the facts justify the theory. When, for a nation or a class, the means of existence have dropped to the threshold at which they become confused with the means of mere subsistence, as in China, Ireland, and the lowest classes in all countries, the slightest variations in population or food supplies result in death, and the facts in this respect confirm scientific inference. Famine has not been seen in Europe for many years, and the elimination of this scourge has been attributed to a host of causes. There are probably several, but the most general cause is that, because of social progress, the means of existence have risen high above the means of subsistence. When years of scarcity occur, a great many forms of satisfaction may be sacrificed before we have to cut back on food itself. This is not true in China and Ireland: when people have nothing in the world other than a little rice or potatoes, what will they use to buy other foods if this rice and these potatoes are no longer there? |
Enfin il est une troisième conséquence de la perfectibilité humaine, que nous devons signaler ici, parce qu'elle contredit, en ce qu'elle a de désolant, la doctrine de Malthus. — Nous [444] avons attribué à cet économiste cette formule: — « La population tend à se mettre au niveau des moyens de subsistance. » — Nous aurions dû dire qu'il était allé fort au delà, et que sa véritable formule, celle dont il a tiré des conclusions si affligeantes, est celle-ci : — La population tend à dépasser les moyens de subsistance. — Si Malthus avait simplement voulu exprimer par là que, dans la race humaine, la puissance de propager la vie est supérieure à la puissance de l'entretenir, il n'y aurait pas de contestation possible. Mais ce n'est pas là sa pensée: il affirme que, prenant en considération la fécondité absolue d'une part, de l'autre la limitation manifestée par ses deux modes répressif et préventif, le résultat n'en est pas moins la tendance de la population à dépasser les moyens de vivre.[fb-41] — Cela est vrai de toutes les espèces animées, excepté de l'espèce humaine. L"homme est intelligent, et peut faire de la limitation préventive un usage illimité. Il est perfectible, il aspire au perfectionnement, il répugne à la détérioration; le progrès est son état normal; le progrès implique un usage de plus en plus éclairé de la limitation préventive : donc les moyens d'existence s"accroissent plus vite que la population. Non-seulement ce résultat dérive du principe de la perfectibilité, mais encore il est confirmé par le fait, puisque partout le cercle des satisfactions s"est étendu. — S"il était vrai, comme le dit Malthus, qu'à chaque excédant de moyens d'existence corresponde un excédant supérieur de population, la misère de notre race serait fatalement progressive, la civilisation serait à l'origine, et la barbarie à la fin des temps. Le contraire a lieu ; donc la loi de limitation a eu assez de puissance pour contenir le flot de la multiplication des hommes au-dessous de la multiplication des produits. |
Finally, there is a third consequence of human perfectibility, which we have to point out here because it contradicts the distressing aspects of Malthus’s doctrine. We have attributed the following formula to this economist: “Population tends to adjust to the level of the means of subsistence.” We ought to have said that he went far beyond this and that his true formula, the one from which he drew such distressing conclusions is this: “Population tends to exceed the means of subsistence.” If Malthus, by saying this, had simply wanted to propose that the human power to propagate life is greater than the power to sustain it, there would be no grounds for our objection possible. But this is not what his thinking is: he claims that, taking into consideration absolute fertility on the one hand and on the other the limitation of population shown by its two modes, repressive and preventive, the result is still a tendency of the population to exceed the means of staying alive. This is true for all living things except the human race. Man is intelligent, and is able to make unlimited use of the preventive limits to population. He is perfectible, he aspires to perfection, and he repudiates the idea of going backwards; progress is his normal condition and progress implies an increasingly enlightened use of preventive limits to population: therefore the means of existence increase faster than the population. Not only does this result derive from the principle of perfectibility but it is also confirmed by the facts, since the circle of satisfactions expands everywhere. If it were true, as Malthus says, that for each increase in the means of existence there will be a greater increase in the size of the population, then the poverty of our race would be doomed to increase, and civilization would be found at the beginning of time and barbarism at its end. The contrary has occurred, and therefore the law of population limits has had sufficient power to keep the flood of increasing numbers of people below the increase in the number of products. |
An example of his emerging subjective value theory (but he is not consistent in this);
Dans le premier chapitre, nous avons vu que l'homme est passif et actif; que le Besoin et la Satisfaction, n'affectant que la sensibilité, étaient, de leur nature, personnels, intimes, intransmissibles; que l'Effort, au contraire, lien entre le Besoin et la Satisfaction, moyen entre le principe et la fin, partant de notre activité, de notre spontanéité, de notre volonté, était susceptible de conventions, de transmission. Je sais qu'on pourrait, au point de vue métaphysique, contester cette assertion et soutenir que l'Effort aussi est personnel. Je n'ai pas envie de m"engager sur le terrain de l'idéologie, et j"espère que ma pensée [117] sera admise sans controverse, sous cette forme vulgaire: Nous ne pouvons sentir les besoins des autres; nous ne pouvons sentir les satisfactions des autres ; mais nous pouvons nous rendre service les uns aux autres. |
In the first chapter, we saw that man is both passive and active, that since need and the satisfaction (of need) affected only the senses, they were by their nature personal, private, and non-transferrable, that on the contrary, effort, (which is the) the link between need and satisfaction**,** and the means between the object of the exercise and the end, starting with our actions, spontaneity, and determination, might be subject to agreements and to (the possibility of being) transferred (to another). I know that this assertion might be disputed from the metaphysical point of view, and the claim made that effort too is personal. I do not wish to enter the terrain of ideology, and I hope that my thought will be accepted in this commonsense form: We cannot feel the needs of others, we cannot feel the satisfactions (enjoyed by) others, but we can render services to one another. |
C"est cette transmission d'efforts, cet échange de services qui fait la matière de l'économie politique; et puisque, d'un autre côté, la science économique se résume dans le mot Valeur, dont elle n'est que la longue explication, il s"ensuit que la notion de valeur sera imparfaitement, faussement conçue si on la fonde sur les phénomènes extrêmes qui s"accomplissent dans notre sensibilité: Besoins et Satisfactions, phénomènes intimes, intransmissibles, incommensurables d'un individu à l'autre, — au lieu de la fonder sur les manifestations de notre activité, sur les efforts, sur les services réciproques qui s"échangent parce qu'ils sont susceptibles d'être comparés, appréciés, évalués, et qui sont susceptibles d'être évalués précisément parce qu'ils s"échangent. |
It is this transfer of effort, this exchange of services that is the subject matter of political economy and since on the other hand economic science can be summed up in the word value, of which economics is merely the lengthy explanation, it follows that the notion of value will be imperfectly and wrongly perceived if it is based on the extreme phenomena that take place in the realm of our senses, i.e. needs and satisfactions, (which are) private phenomena that are not transferrable (to others), incommensurable between one person and another, instead of being based on the (outward) expressions of our actions, our efforts, and the mutual services that are exchanged, because it is possible to compare them, appreciate them, and evaluate them, and they are capable of evaluation precisely because they are exchanged. |
The division of labour and free exchange create "harmony"; by pursuing one's own self-interest in a free economy one improves the condition of others (Adam Smith's "invisible hand")
J"ai établi ces deux propositions: |
I have established the following two propositions: |
Dans l'isolement, nos besoins surpassent nos facultés. Par l'échange, nos facultés surpassent nos besoins. |
In isolation, our needs are greater than our capacities. Through exchange, our capacities are greater than our needs. |
Elles donnent la raison de la société. En voici deux autres qui garantissent son perfectionnement indéfini: |
They explain why society exists. Here are two others that guarantee its unlimited progress (towards perfection): |
Dans l'isolement, les prospérités se nuisent. Par l'échange, les prospérités s"entr"aident. |
In a state of isolation, the prosperity of one man harms that of others. By exchanging with one another, the prosperity of one helps others to prosper. |
Est-il besoin de prouver que si la nature eût destiné les hommes à la vie solitaire, la prospérité de l'un ferait obstacle à la prospérité de l'autre? Plus ils seraient nombreux, moins ils auraient de chances de bien-être. En tous cas, on voit clairement en quoi leur nombre pourrait nuire, on ne comprend pas comment il pourrait profiter. Et puis, je demande : Sous quelle forme se manifesterait le principe sympathique? A quelle occasion prendrait-il naissance? Pourrions-nous même le concevoir? |
Is there any need to prove that if nature had intended man to live a solitary existence, the prosperity of one would be an obstacle to the prosperity of another? The greater they were in number, the fewer opportunities of well-being they would have. In any case, we can see clearly how their (greater) number would cause them harm but (we) do not understand how their (greater) number might benefit them. And then, I ask you, how would the principle of fellow-feeling reveal itself? When would it arise? Would we even be able to imagine it? |
Mais les hommes échangent. L"échange, nous l'avons vu, implique la séparation des occupations. Il donne naissance aux professions, aux métiers. Chacun s"attache à vaincre un genre d'obstacles au profit de la Communauté. Chacun se consacre à lui rendre un genre de services. Or, une analyse complète de la valeur démontre que chaque service vaut d'abord en raison de son utilité intrinsèque, ensuite en raison de ce qu'il est offert dans un milieu plus riche, c"est-à-dire au sein d'une communauté plus disposée à le demander, plus en mesure de le payer. L"expérience, en nous montrant l'artisan, le médecin, l'avocat, le négociant, le voiturier, le professeur, le savant tirer pour eux-mêmes [98] un meilleur parti de leurs services à Paris, à Londres, à New-York que dans les landes de Gascogne, ou dans les montagnes du pays de Galles, ou dans les prairies du Farwest, l'expérience, dis-je, ne nous confirme-t-elle pas cette vérité: L"homme a d'autant plus de chances de prospérer qu'il est dans un milieu plus prospère? |
However, men exchange things. As we have seen, exchange implies a division of labor. It gives rise to professions and trades. Each person concentrates on overcoming one type of obstacle for the benefit of the community. Each person devotes himself to providing it with one type of service. Well, a full analysis of (the nature of) value shows that each service has a value first of all because of its intrinsic utility, and then because it is provided in a wealthier environment, that is to say, within a community that is more inclined to demand it and more capable of paying for it. By showing us artisans, doctors, lawyers, traders, coachmen, and teachers who know how to earn themselves a greater reward for their services in (big cities like) Paris, London, and New York than in the (sparsely populated) heath lands of Gascony, the mountains of Wales, or the prairies of the Far West (of America), does experience not confirm for us this truth that men have all the more opportunities of prospering themselves, the more prosperous their surroundings (are)? |
De toutes les harmonies qui se rencontrent sous ma plume, celle-ci est certainement la plus importante, la plus belle, la plus décisive, la plus féconde. Elle implique et résume toutes les autres. C"est pourquoi je n'en pourrai donner ici qu'une démonstration fort incomplète. Heureux si elle jaillit de l'esprit de ce livre. Heureux encore si elle en sortait du moins avec un caractère de probabilité suffisante pour déterminer le lecteur à s"élever par ses propres efforts à la certitude. |
Of all the harmonies about which I have written, this is certainly the most important, the finest, the most decisive, and the most fruitful. It implies and encompasses all the others. For this reason, I can provide only a very inadequate vindication of it here. It will be fortunate if it emanates from the spirit of this book. It will also be fortunate if it emerges at least with a sufficient degree of likelihood to persuade the reader to achieve certainty (about this) through his own efforts. |
Car, il n'en faut pas douter, c"est là qu'est la raison de décider entre l'Organisation naturelle et les Organisations artificielles; c"est là, exclusivement là, qu'est le Problème Social. Si la prospérité de tous est la condition de la prospérité de chacun, nous pouvons nous fier non-seulement à la puissance économique de l'échange libre, mais encore à sa force morale. Il suffira que les hommes comprennent leurs vrais intérêts pour que les restrictions, les jalousies industrielles, les guerres commerciales, les monopoles, tombent sous les coups de l'opinion; pour qu'avant de solliciter telle ou telle mesure gouvernementale on se demande non pas: « Quel bien m"en reviendra-t-il? » mais : « Quel bien en reviendra-t-il à la communauté? » Cette dernière question, j"accorde qu'on se la fait quelquefois en vertu du principe sympathique, mais que la lumière se fasse et on se l'adressera aussi par Intérêt personnel. Alors il sera vrai de dire que les deux mobiles de notre nature concourent vers un même résultat: le Bien Général; et il sera impossible de dénier à l'intérêt personnel, non plus qu'aux transactions qui en dérivent, du moins quant à leurs effets, la Puissance Morale. |
For there should be no doubt that this is the reason for deciding between a natural form of organization and the artificial ones. It is here and only here that the social question lies. If the prosperity of all is the condition for the prosperity of each person, we can rely not only on the economic power of free trade, but also on its moral force. It will be enough for men to understand where their true interests lie for (trade) restrictions, industrial jealousy, trade wars, and monopoly to fall under the protests of public opinion; it will be enough for people to ask, not “What will I get out of this?” but “What will the community get out of this?” before demanding this or that measure from the government. I admit that the second of these questions is sometimes asked through the principle of fellow-feeling, but just let light be shed on it, and it will also be asked out of self-interest. At this point it would be true to say that the twin driving forces of our nature contribute to the same result, namely the general good, and it would be impossible to deny the moral power which self-interest has, in both giving rise to (many) transactions, as well as the effects these transactions produce. |
Que l'on considère les relations d'homme à homme, de famille à famille, de province à province, de nation à nation, d'hémisphère à hémisphère, de capitaliste à ouvrier, de propriétaire à prolétaire, il est évident, ce me semble, qu'on ne peut ni [99] résoudre ni même aborder te problème social à aucun de ses points de vue avant d'avoir choisi entre ces deux maximes: |
Whether we consider relations in terms of man to man, family to family, province to province, nation to nation, hemisphere to hemisphere, capitalist to worker, or (factory) owner to proletarian, I think it obvious that the social question cannot be solved nor even touched on from any point of view, without our first making a choice between the following two maxims: |
Le profit de l'un est le dommage de l'autre. Le profit de l'un est le profit de l'autre. |
One man’s profit is another man’s loss. One man’s profit is another man’s profit. |
Car si la nature a arrangé les choses de telle façon que l'antagonisme soit la loi des transactions libres, notre seule ressource est de vaincre la nature et d'étouffer la Liberté. Si, au contraire, ces transactions libres sont harmoniques, c"est-à-dire si elles tendent à améliorer et égaliser les conditions, nos efforts doivent se borner à laisser agir la nature et à maintenir les droits de la Liberté humaine. |
For if nature has arranged things in such a way that conflict is the law that governs free transactions, our sole recourse is to conquer nature and stifle freedom. If, on the other hand, these free transactions are harmonious, that is to say that they tend to improve our conditions and make them more equal, our efforts ought to be limited to allowing nature to (be free to) act and maintaining the rights of human freedom. |
Et c"est pourquoi je conjure les jeunes gens à qui ce livre est dédié de scruter avec soin les formules qu'il renferme, d'analyser la nature intime et les effets de l'échange. Oui, j"en ai la confiance, il s"en rencontrera un parmi eux qui arrivera enfin à la démonstration rigoureuse de cette proposition : Le bien de chacun favorise le bien de tous, comme le bien de tous favorise le bien de chacun; — qui saura faire pénétrer cette vérité dans toutes les intelligences à force d'en rendre la preuve simple, lucide, irréfragable. — Celui-là aura résolu le problème social; celui-là sera le bienfaiteur du genre humain. |
And this is why I urge the young people to whom this book is dedicated to examine carefully the advice it contains and to analyze the deeper nature and effects of exchange. Yes, I am confident that one person will be found among them who in the end will achieve the strict demonstration of the following proposition: Each individual’s good encourages the good of all, just as the good of all encourages the good of each individual, and who will know how to instill this truth in the minds of all by making the proof simple, lucid, and undeniable. This person will have solved the social question, and will be the benefactor of the human race. |
Remarquons ceci en effet : Selon que cet axiome est vrai ou faux, les lois sociales naturelles sont harmoniques ou antagoniques. — Selon qu'elles sont harmoniques ou antagoniques, il est de notre intérêt de nous y conformer ou de nous y soustraire. — Si donc il était une fois bien démontré que, sous le régime de la liberté, les intérêts concordent et s"entre-favorisent, tous les efforts que nous voyons faire aujourd"hui aux gouvernements pour troubler l'action de ces lois sociales naturelles, nous les leur verrions faire pour laisser à ces lois toute leur puissance, ou plutôt ils n'auraient pas pour cela d'efforts à faire, si ce n'est celui de s"abstenir. ... |
Indeed, let us note this: depending on whether this axiom is true or false, the natural social laws are (either) in harmony or in conflict. Depending on whether they are in harmony or in conflict, it is in our interest to conform to them or to free ourselves from them. If therefore it were demonstrated once and for all that in a free society interests are in agreement and encourage one another, all the efforts we now see being made to have governments disrupt the operation of these natural social laws, we would see governments devote themselves instead to allowing these laws to exert their full power. Or rather, no effort in this direction would be needed, other than to refrain from doing anything. |
Un homme (il en est de même d'un peuple) peut se procurer des moyens d'existence de deux manières : en les créant ou en les volant. |
A person (this is also true of a nation) may get (its) means of existence in (one of) two ways: (either) by creating them or by stealing them (from others). |
Chacune de ces deux grandes sources d'acquisition a plusieurs procédés. |
Each of these two major sources of acquiring (wealth) has several methods (to achieve this). |
On peut créer des moyens d'existence par la chasse, la pêche, la culture, etc. |
(Their ) means of existence may be createdby hunting, fishing, farming, etc. |
On peut les voler par la mauvaise foi, la violence, la force, la ruse, la guerre, etc. |
They may be stolen by acting in bad faith, (by the use of) violence, force, fraud, war, etc. |
S"il suffit sans sortir du cercle de l'une ou l'autre de ces deux catégories, de la prédominance de l'un des procédés qui lui sont [503] propres pour établir entre les nations des différences considérables, combien cette différence ne doit-elle pas être plus grande entre un peuple qui vit de production, et un peuple qui vit de spoliation? |
Just staying within the limits (established) by either one of these two methods, if it is sufficient for the predominance of one of the appropriate procedures to give rise to considerable differences among the nations, how much greater must not this difference be between a people that lives by producing and a people that lives by plundering! |
Car il n'est pas une seule de nos facultés, à quelque ordre qu'elle appartienne, qui ne soit mise en exercice par la nécessité qui nous a été imposée de pourvoir à notre existence; et que peut-on concevoir de plus propre à modifier l'état social des peuples que ce qui modifie toutes les facultés humaines? |
For there is not one of our faculties, (whatever kind it might be), that is not exercised by the necessity imposed (up)on us to provide for our existence, and what can we imagine that is more likely to modify the social state of nations than something that modifies all human faculties? |
Cette considération, toute grave qu'elle est, a été si peu observée que je dois m"y arrêter un instant. |
As serious as it is, this consideration has been so little observed that I have to pause a while to comment on it. |
Pour qu'une satisfaction se réalise, il faut qu'un travail ait été exécuté, d'où il suit que la Spoliation, dans toutes ses variétés, loin d'exclure la Production, la suppose. |
In order for some satisfaction to be enjoyed, work has to be done, from which it follows that plunder in all its forms, far from excluding production, assumes that it occurs. |
Et ceci, ce me semble, est de nature à diminuer un peu l'engouement que les historiens, les poêtes et les romanciers manifestent pour ces nobles époques où, selon eux, ne dominait pas ce qu'ils appellent l'industrialisme. A ces époques on vivait; donc le travail accomplissait tout comme aujourd"hui sa rude lâche. Seulement, des nations, des classes, des individualités étaient parvenues à rejeter sur d'autres nations, d'autres classes, d'autres individualités, leur lot de labeur et de fatigue. |
And I believe that this is likely to put a damper on the enthusiasm shown by historians, poets, and novelists for these noble (historical) eras when, according to them, what they call industrialism was not dominant. At these times, people lived, therefore work accomplished its harsh task just as it does today. The only difference is that some nations, classes, and individuals had succeeded in imposing on other nations, classes, and individuals their own share of hard work and drudgery. |
Le caractère de la production, c"est de tirer pour ainsi dire du néant les satisfactions qui entretiennent et embellissent la vie, de telle sorte qu'un homme ou un peuple peut multiplier à l'infini ces satisfactions, sans infliger une privation quelconque aux autres hommes et aux autres peuples ; — bien au contraire, l'étude approfondie du mécanisme économique nous a révélé que le succès de l'un dans son travail ouvre des chances de succès au travail de l'autre. |
The nature of production is to draw, so to speak, from nothing, the satisfactions that maintain and embellish life in such a way that a person or a nation is capable of increasing these satisfactions without limit (and) without inflicting any hardship on other people or nations. On the contrary, a detailed study of the economic mechanism has shown us that the success of one person in his work offers the opportunity of success to the work of another. |
Le caractère de la spoliation est de ne pouvoir conférer une satisfaction sans qu'une privation égale y corresponde ; car elle ne crée pas, elle déplace ce que le travail a créé. Elle entraîne après elle, comme déperdition absolue, tout l'effort qu'elle-même coûte aux deux parties intéressées. Loin donc d'ajouter aux jouissances de l'humanité, elle les diminue, et, en outre, elle les attribue à qui ne les a pas méritées. [504] |
The nature of plunder is such that it cannot confer a given satisfaction (to one person) without imposing a corresponding privation (on another person), for it does not create but displaces what labor has (already) created. It brings in its wake, as a dead loss, all the effort that it itself has cost the two parties concerned. Far from adding to the benefits of society, therefore, it decreases them and in addition, allocates these benefits to those who do not deserve them. |
Pour produire, il faut diriger toutes ses facultés vers la domination de la nature ; car c"est elle qu'il s"agit de combattre, de dompter et d'asservir. C"est pourquoi le fer converti en charrue est l'emblême de la production. |
In order to produce, it is necessary to direct all of one’s capacities to the task of dominating nature, for it is nature that must be fought, tamed, and subjugated. This is why iron made into ploughs is a symbol of production. |
Pour spolier il faut diriger toutes ses facultés vers la domination des hommes; car ce sont eux qu'il faut combattre, tuer ou asservir. C"est pourquoi le fer converti en épée est l'embléme de la spoliation. |
In order to plunder (some one), it is necessary to direct all of (one’s) capacities to the task of dominating human beings, for these are the people that must be fought, killed, or subjugated. This is why iron made into swords is a symbol of plunder. |
Autant il y a d'opposition entre la charrue qui nourrit et l'épée qui tue, autant il doit y en avoir entre un peuple de travailleurs et un peuple de spoliateurs. Il n'est pas possible qu'il y ait entre eux rien de commun. Ils ne sauraient avoir ni les mêmes idées, ni les mêmes règles d'appréciation, ni les mêmes goûts, ni le même caractère, ni les mêmes mœurs, ni les mêmes lois, ni la même morale, ni la même religion. |
Just as there is a contradiction between the plow that feeds us and the sword which kills us, there has to be (a similar contradiction) between a nation of workers and a nation of plunders. It is not possible that they would have anything in common. They could not have the same ideas, the same standards to judge things, the same tastes, the same character, the same customs, the same laws, the same moral code, or the same religion. |
Et certes, un des plus tristes spectacles qui puissent s"offrira l'œil du philanthrope, c"est de voir un siècle producteur faire tous ses efforts pour s"inoculer, par l'éducation, les idées, les sentiments, les erreurs, les préjugés et les vices d'un peuple spoliateur. On accuse souvent notre époque de manquer d'unité, de ne pas montrer de la concordance entre sa manière de voir et d'agir; on a raison, et je crois que je viens d'en signaler la principale cause. |
And indeed, one of the saddest sights that can be brought before the eye of a lover of humanity, is to see a productive era (like ours) doing all it can to infect itself, by (means of classical) education, with the ideas, sentiments, the errors, the prejudices, and the vices of a nation of plunderers. Our era has often been accused of lacking consistency and failing to see any connection between the way it looks at the world and the way it acts. This is correct, and I believe that I have just pointed out the principal cause of this. |
La spoliation par voie de guerre, c"est-à-dire la spoliation toute naïve, toute simple, toute crue, a sa racine dans le cœur humain, dans l'organisation de l'homme, dans ce moteur universel du monde social : l'attrait pour les satisfactions et la répugnance pour la douleur; en un mot, dans ce mobile que nous portons tous en nous-mêmes : l'intérêt personnel. |
Plunder by means of war, that is to say totally primitive, simple, and rough plunder, has its roots in the human heart, in human nature, and in the universal driving force of the social world, namely, our attraction to getting satisfactions and (our) aversion to pain. In a word, in the driving force we all carry within us: self-interest. |
Hommes de spoliation, vous qui, de force ou de ruse, au mépris des lois ou par l'intermédiaire des lois, vous engraissez de la substance des peuples; vous qui vivez des erreurs que vous répandez, de l'ignorance que vous entretenez, des guerres que vous allumez, des entraves que vous imposez aux transactions : vous qui taxez le travail après l'avoir stérilisé, et lui faites perdre plus de gerbes que vous ne lui arrachez d'épis ; vous qui vous faites payer pour créer des obstacles, afin d'avoir ensuite l'occasion de vous faire payer pour en lever une partie, manifestations vivantes de l'égoïsme dans son mauvais sens, excroissances parasites de la fausse politique, préparez l'encre corrosive de votre critique: à vous seuls je ne puis faire appel, car ce livre a pour but de vous sacrifier, ou plutôt de sacrifier vos prétentions injustes. On a beau aimer la conciliation, il est deux principes qu'on ne saurait concilier : la Liberté et la Contrainte. |
Men who live by plunder, you who by (means) of force or fraud, either by scorning the law or by making use of it, are growing fat on the food of the people; you who make a living from the errors you spread, the ignorance you foster, the wars you start, or the obstacles you put in the way of transactions; you who impose taxes on labor after making it unproductive and making it lose more “sheafs of wheat” than you (are able) to extort from them in “ears of wheat;” you who see to it that you are paid for creating obstacles (in the first place) so that later you can be paid for removing some of them; you who are the living examples of egoism in its worst sense, parasitic growths (which live off) distorted policies, get your corrosive ink ready for the criticism (of me you will inevitably write); to you alone will I not appeal, for the aim of this book is to get rid of you, or rather your unjust claims. It is no use being in favor of conciliation; there are two principles that can never be reconciled: freedom and coercion. |
Si les lois providentielles sont harmoniques, c"est quand elles agissent librement, sans quoi elles ne seraient pas harmoniques par elles-mêmes. Lors donc que nous remarquons un défaut d'harmonie dans le monde, il ne peut correspondre qu'à un défaut de liberté, à une justice absente. Oppresseurs, spoliateurs, contempteurs de la justice, vous ne pouvez donc entrer dans l'harmonie universelle, puisque c"est vous qui la troublez. |
If the laws of Providence are harmonious, it is (only) when they act freely, otherwise they would not be harmonious in themselves. Therefore, when we note a lack of harmony in the world it can only be the result of a lack of freedom or an absence of justice. Oppressors, plunderers, those who hold justice in contempt, you can never be part of universal harmony since you are the people who are upsetting it. |
Est-ce dire que ce livre pourra avoir pour effet d'affaiblir le pouvoir, d'ébranler sa stabilité, de diminuer son autorité ? J"ai en vue le but directement contraire. Mais entendons-nous. |
Is this to say that the effect of this book might be to weaken the government, to undermine its stability, or reduce its authority? The goal in my sight is quite the contrary. But let us understand each other fully. |
La science politique consiste à discerner ce qui doit être ou ce qui ne doit pas être dans les attributions de l'État; et, pour faire ce grand départ, il ne faut pas perdre de vue que l'État agit toujours par l'intermédiaire de la Force. Il impose tout à la fois et les services qu'il [13] rend et les services qu'il se fait payer en retour, sous le nom de contributions. |
Political science consists in perceiving what ought to be and what ought not to be included in the powers of the state, and setting out on this major journey, you should not lose sight of the fact that the state always acts by means of the use of force. It imposes on us at the same time both the services it provides and the services it makes us pay in return in the form of taxes. |
La question revient donc à ceci : Quelles sont les choses que les hommes ont le droit de s"imposer les uns aux autres par la force ? Or, je n'en sais qu'une dans ce cas, c"est la justice. Je n'ai pas le droit de forcer qui que ce soit à être religieux, charitable, instruit, laborieux; mais j"ai le droit de le forcer à être juste : c"est le cas de légitime défense. |
The question can be summed up thus: What things have men the right to impose on one another by force? Well, I know of just one that comes into this category, and that is justice. I have no right to force anyone to be religious, charitable, educated, or hardworking, but I do have the right to force him to be just. This is the case of legitimate self-defense. |
Or, il ne peut exister, dans la collection des individus, aucun droit qui ne préexiste dans les individus eux-mêmes. Si donc l'emploi de la force individuelle n'est justifié que par la légitime défense, il suffit de reconnaître que l'action gouvernementale se manifeste toujours par la Force pour en conclure qu'elle est essentiellement bornée à faire régner l'ordre, la sécurité, la justice. |
Well, in a group of individuals, no right can exist that does not previously exist in those individuals themselves. If, therefore, the use of individual force is justified only by legitimate self-defense, you have only to acknowledge that government action always manifests itself through the use of force to conclude that it is essentially limited to ensuring order, security, and justice. |
Toute action gouvernementale en dehors de cette limite est une usurpation de la conscience, de l'intelligence, du travail, en un mot de la Liberté humaine. |
Any government action outside this limit is an infringement of (the individual’s) conscience, mind, and labor, in a word, human freedom. |
Cela posé, nous devons nous appliquer sans relâche et sans pitié à dégager des empiétements du pouvoir le domaine entier de l'activité privée. C"est à cette condition seulement que nous aurons conquis la Liberté ou le libre jeu des lois harmoniques que Dieu a préparées pour le développement et le progrès de l'humanité. |
This having been said, we must unceasingly and ruthlessly devote ourselves to the task of separating the entire domain of private activity from encroachment by (government) power. This is the only condition under which we will (succeed in) winning our freedom or the free play of the harmonious laws that God has put into place for the development and progress of the human race. |
Le Pouvoir sera-t-il pour cela affaibli? Perdra-t-il de sa stabilité parce qu'it aura perdu de son étendue? Aura-t-il moins d'autorité parce qu'il aura moins d'attributions? S"attirera-t-il moins de respects parce qu'il s"attirera moins de plaintes? Sera-t-il davantage le jouet des factions, quand on aura diminué ces budgets énormes et cette influence si convoitée, qui sont l'appât des factions ? Courra-t-il plus de dangers quand il aura moins de responsabilité? |
Will the government be weakened by this? Will it lose stability because it has lost some of its scope? Will it have less authority because it has fewer functions? Will it be less respected because there are fewer complaints made against it? Will it be more of a plaything of factions when these huge budgets and this much coveted (sought after) influence, (both) of which are the bait (which attracts) factions, have been reduced? Will it face greater danger when it has fewer responsibilities? |
Il me semble évident, au contraire, que renfermer la force publique dans sa mission unique, mais essentielle, incontestée, bienfaisante, désirée, acceptée de tous, c"est lui concilier le respect et le concours universels. Je ne vois plus alors d'où pourraient venir les oppositions systématiques, les luttes parlementaires, les insurrections des rues, les révolutions, les péripéties, les factions, les illusions, les prétentions de tous à gouverner sous toutes les formes, ces systèmes aussi dangereux qu'absurdes qui enseignent au peuple à tout attendre du gouvernement, cette diplomatie compromettante, ces guerres toujours en perspective ou ces paix armées presque aussi funestes, ces taxes écrasantes et impossibles à répartir équitablement, cette immixtion absorbante et si peu naturelle de la politique en toutes choses, ces grands déplacements factices de capital et de travail, source de frottements inutiles, [14] de fluctuations, de crises et de chômages. Toutes ces causes et mille autres de troubles, d'irritation, de désaffection, de convoitise et de désordre n'auraient plus de raison d'être, et les dépositaires du pouvoir, au lieu de la troubler, concourraient à l'universelle harmonie. Harmonie qui n'exclut pas le mal, mais ne lui laisse que la place du plus en plus restreinte que lui font l'ignorance et la perversité de notre faible nature, que sa mission est de prévenir ou de châtier. |
On the contrary, it appears obvious to me that to restrict the coercive power of the state to its sole but essential function, one that is widely agreed upon, benevolent, desired, and accepted by all, is to give it both universal respect and co-operation. If this happened, I do not see how there could be systematic opposition, parliamentary conflict, riots in the streets, revolutions, crises, factions, political delusions, ubiquitous claims to govern in a myriad of ways, theories that are as dangerous as they are absurd, teaching the masses to expect everything from the government, this (practice of) diplomacy by compromise, these wars which are always on the horizon, or this armed peace which is almost as disastrous, these crushing taxes, (which are) impossible to allocate equitably, this dedicated and unnatural interference of policy in everything, those huge and artificial displacements of capital and labor, giving rise to unnecessary friction, fluctuation, crises, and other damage. All these and a thousand or more causes of unrest, irritation, disaffection, envy, and disorder, would no longer have any reason to exist, and the holders of power, instead of undermining it, would contribute to achieving universal harmony. This harmony does not exclude harm but allows it the increasingly limited place taken by ignorance and the perversity of our weak nature, which its mission is to counter and punish. |
Nous nous sommes appliqués à découvrir le vrai rôle de la concurrence dans le développement des richesses. Nous avons [477] vu qu'il consistait à faire glisser le bien sur le producteur, à faire tourner le progrès au profit de la communauté, à élargir sans cesse le domaine de la gratuité et, par suite, de l'égalité. |
We have tried to find out the true role of competition in the development of wealth. We have seen that it consisted in causing the benefits to be quickly passed on by the producers, to make progress work for the benefit of the community, and to constantly expand the domain of gratuitousness, and consequently, that of equality. |
Mais quand les services privés deviennent publics, ils échappent à la concurrence, et cette belle harmonie est suspendue. En effet, le fonctionnaire est dénué de ce stimulant qui pousse au progrès, et comment le progrès tournerait-il à l'avantage commun quand il n'existe même pas? Le fonctionnaire n'agit pas sous l'aiguillon de l'intérêt, mais sous l'influence de la loi. La loi lui dit: « Vous rendrez au public tel service déterminé, et vous recevrez de lui tel autre service déterminé. » Un peu plus, un peu moins de zèle ne change rien à ces deux termes fixes. Au contraire, l'intérêt privé souffle à l'oreille du travailleur libre ces paroles: « Plus tu feras pour les autres, plus les autres feront pour toi. » Ici la récompense dépend entièrement de l'effort plus ou moins intense, plus ou moins éclairé. Sans doute l'esprit de corps, le désir de l'avancement, l'attachement au devoir, peuvent être pour le fonctionnaire d'actifs stimulants. Mais jamais ils ne peuvent remplacer l'irrésistible incitation de l'intérêt personnel. L"expérience confirme à cet égard le raisonnement. Tout ce qui est tombé dans le domaine du fonctionnarisme est à peu près stationnaire; il est douteux qu'on enseigne mieux aujourd"hui que du temps de François Ier; et je ne pense pas que personne s"avise de comparer l'activité des bureaux ministériels à celle d'une manufacture. |
But when private services become public they escape competition, and this beautiful harmony is suspended. Indeed, state functionaries are deprived of this incentive, which spurs progress on, and how will progress be turned to common advantage if it does not even exist? Functionaries do not act under the spur of (self)interest, but under the influence of the law. The law tells them: “You will render a service fixed in advance to the general public and will receive from it this other service (also) fixed in advance.” A little more or a little less zeal will change nothing of these two fixed amounts. On the contrary, private interest breathes into the free worker’s ears these words: “The more you do for others, the more others will do for you.” Here reward depends entirely on the intensity of the effort made, or how well thought out it was. Doubtless team spirit, a desire for advancement, or devotion to duty may be strong incentives for the state functionary. But they can never replace the irresistible incentive of personal self-interest. Experience has confirmed this reasoning in this respect. Everything that has moved into the domain of government bureaucratism is virtually stationary; it is doubtful whether teaching is better now than in the time of Francis I, and I do not think that anyone would dream of comparing the activity in ministerial offices with that in a factory. |
A mesure donc que des services privés entrent dans la classe des services publics, ils sont frappés, au moins dans une certaine mesure, d'immobilisme et de stérilité, non au préjudice de ceux qui les rendent (leurs appointements ne varient pas), mais au détriment de la communauté tout entière. |
Therefore, as private services enter the class of public services, they are afflicted, at least to a certain extent, with immobility and sterility, not to the disadvantage of those providing them (their salaries never change) but to the detriment of the entire community. |
Ce n'est donc pas parce qu'il y a peu de lois et de fonctionnaires, autrement dit, peu de services publics, que les révolutions sont à craindre. C"est, au contraire, parce qu'il y a beaucoup de lois, beaucoup de fonctionnaires, beaucoup de services publics. Car, [486] par leur nature, les services publics, la loi qui les règle, la force qui les fait prévaloir, ne sont jamais neutres. Ils peuvent, ils doivent s"étendre sans danger, avec avantage, autant qu'il est nécessaire pour faire régner entre tous la justice rigoureuse : au delà, ce sont autant d'instruments d'oppression et de spoliation légales, autant de causes de désordre, autant de ferments révolutionnaires. |
Thus, it is not because there are (too) few laws and (state) functionaries, in other words (too) few public services, that revolutions are to be feared. On the contrary, it is because there are a great many laws, a great many functionaries, and a great many public services. For, by their very nature, public services, the law that governs them, and the force that ensures that they prevail, are never neutral. They can and ought to be extended without danger and even with some benefit, as far as is necessary to ensure strict justice for all. Beyond this, they are just so many tools of legal oppression and plunder, (which are so many) causes of disorder and catalysts of revolution. |
Parlerai-je de cette délétère immoralité qui filtre dans toutes les veines du corps social, quand, en principe, la loi se met au service de tous les penchants spoliateurs? Assistez à une séance de la Représentation nationale le jour où il est question de primes, d'encouragements, de faveurs, de restrictions. Voyez avec quelle rapacité éhontée chacun veut s"assurer une part du vol, vol auquel, certes, on rougirait de se livrer personnellement. Tel se considérerait comme un bandit s"il m"empêchait, le pistolet au poing, d'accomplir à la frontière une transaction conforme âmes intérêts ; mais il ne se fait aucun scrupule de solliciter et de voter une loi qui substitue la force publique à la sienne, et me soumette, à mes propres frais, à cette injuste interdiction. Sous ce rapport, quel triste spectacle offre maintenant la France! Toutes les classes souffrent, et au lieu de demander l'anéantissement, à tout jamais, de toute spoliation légale, chacune se tourne vers la loi, lui disant: |
Shall I mention the pernicious immorality that filters through all the veins of the social body when, in theory, the law is at the service of every plunderous impulse? Attend a session at the National Assembly when questions relating to subsidies, incentives, favors, and restrictions are being discussed. See with what shameless rapacity each one seeks to ensure for himself a share of the theft that he would undoubtedly blush at committing personally. This individual would consider himself a bandit if he stopped me at pistol point from completing at the border some transaction in line with my interests, but he has absolutely no scruples in soliciting and voting for a law that substitutes the power of the state for his own and subjects me, at my expense, to this unjust prohibition (of trade). From this point of view, what a sorry picture France is now offering of itself! Every class is suffering, and instead of demanding the destruction of all forms of legal plunder for all time, each person is turning to the law and saying to it: |
« Vous qui pouvez tout, vous qui disposez de la Force, vous qui convertissez le mal en bien, de grâce spoliez les autres classes à mon profit. Forcez-les à s"adresser à moi pour leurs achats, ou bien à me payer des primes, ou bien à me donner l'instruction gratuite, ou bien à me prêter sans intérêt etc etc.... » |
“You who can do everything, you who have the power of the state at your disposal, you who convert harm into good, I beg you, plunder the other classes for my benefit. Force them to come to me for their purchases, or else pay me subsidies, or else give me free education, or else provide me with interest-free loans, and so on and so forth.” |
C"est ainsi que la loi devient une grande école de démoralisation ; et si quelque chose doit nous surprendre, c"est que le penchant au vol individuel ne fasse pas plus de progrès, quand le sens moral des peuples est ainsi perverti par leur législation même. |
This is how the law becomes a major school for corruption, and if anything ought to surprise us it is that the inclination to individual theft does not become more widespread when the moral sense of nations is perverted in this way by their very legislation. |
Ce qu'il y a de plus déplorable, c"est que la spoliation, quand elle s"exerce ainsi à l'aide de la loi, sans qu'aucun scrupule individuel lui fasse obstacle, finit par devenir toute une savante théorie qui a ses professeurs, ses journaux, ses docteurs, ses législateurs, ses sophismes, ses subtilités. Parmi les arguties [487] traditionnelles qu'on fait valoir en sa faveur, il est bon de discerner elle-ci: Toutes choses égales d'ailleurs, un accroissement de demande est un bien pour ceux qui ont un service à offrir; puisque ce nouveau rapport entre une demande plus active et une offre stationnaire est ce qui augmente la valeur du service. De là on tire cette conclusion : La spoliation est avantageuse à tout le monde : à la classe spoliatrice qu'elle enrichit directement, aux classes spoliées qu'elle enrichit par ricochet. En effet, la classe spoliatrice, devenue plus riche, est en mesure d'étendre le cercle le ses jouissances. Elle ne le peut sans demander, dans une plus grande proportion, les services des classes spoliées. Or, relativement à tout service, accroissement de demande, c"est accroissement de valeur. Donc, les classes légalement volées sont trop heureuses de l'être, puisque le produit du vol concourt à les faire travailler. |
What is most deplorable is that plunder, when it is carried out in this way with the help of the law, without any individual scruple standing in its way, ends up by become a detailed and learned theory with its teachers, journals, doctors of philosophy, legislators, sophisms, and subtleties of argument. Among the standard verbal chicanery used in its support, we ought to highlight this one: All other things being equal, an increase in demand is good for those who have a service to offer, since this new relationship between a stronger demand and a static supply is what increases the valueof the service. From this the following conclusion is drawn: Plunder is advantageous for everybody: the plundering class that it enriches directly and the plundered classes that it enriches by the ricochet effect. Indeed, the plundering class that has become wealthier has the means of expanding the circle of its benefits. It cannot do this without demanding (an even greater share of) the services of the plundered classes. Well, with regard to any kind of service, an increase in demand is an increase in value. Thus the classes that have been (legally) robbed are only too happy to be so, since the result of the theft contributes to providing work for them. |
Tant que la loi s"est bornée à spolier le grand nombre au profit du petit nombre, cette argutie a paru fort spécieuse et a toujours été invoquée avec succès. « Livrons aux riches des taxes mises sur les pauvres, disait-on ; par là nous augmenterons le capital des riches. Les riches s"adonneront au luxe, et le luxe, donnera du travail aux pauvres. » Et chacun, les pauvres compris, de trouver le procédé infaillible. Pour avoir essayé d'en signaler le vice, j"ai passé longtemps, je passe encore pour un ennemi des classes laborieuses. |
As long as the law limits itself to plundering the majority for the benefit of the minority, this chicanery has seemed to be very plausible and has always been invoked with success. “Let us hand over to the wealthy the taxes levied on the poor,” it was said, “In this way we will increase the capital of the wealthy. The wealthy are given to luxury and luxury goods provides work for the poor.” And everyone, including the poor, is ready to find the procedure infallible. Because I endeavored to point out its error, I was and still am considered to be an enemy of the working classes. |
Mais, après la Révolution de Février, les pauvres ont eu voix au chapitre quand il s"est agi de faire la loi. Ont-ils demandé qu'elle cessât d'être spoliatrice? Pas le moins du monde : le sophisme des ricochets était trop enraciné dans leur tête. Qu"ont-ils donc demandé? Que la loi, devenue impartiale, voulût bien spolier les classes riches à leur tour. Ils ont réclamé l'instruction gratuite, des avances gratuites de capitaux, des caisses de retraite fondées par l'État, l'impôt progressif, etc., etc.... Les riches se sont mis à crier: « O scandale ! Tout est perdu! De nouveaux barbares font irruption dans la société! » Ils ont opposé aux prétentions des pauvres une résistance désespérée. On s"est battu d'abord à coups de fusil; on se bat à présent à coups de scrutin. Mais les riches ont-ils renoncé pour cela à la spoliation ? Ils n'y [488] ont pas seulement songé. L"argument des ricochets continue à leur servir de prétexte. |
But following the February Revolution the poor had a say when the law was being drafted. Did they request that it should stop being a plunderer? Not at all; the sophism of the ricochet effect was too deeply rooted in their minds. What did they ask for, then? That the law, now that it had become impartial, should agree to plunder the wealthy classes in their turn. They demanded free education, free loans of capital, retirement funds established by the state, progressive taxation etc. etc. …. The wealthy began to howl: “How scandalous! All is lost! A new horde of barbarians has burst into society!” They resisted the claims of the poor desperately. They once fought with guns but now with the ballot box. But have the wealthy abandoned plunder for all that? The thought has not even crossed their minds. They continue to use the argument of the ricochet effect as a pretext. |
On pourrait cependant leur faire observer que, si, au lieu d'exercer la spoliation par l'intermédiaire de la loi, ils l'exerçaient directement, leur sophisme s"évanouirait: Si, de votre autorité privée, vous preniez dans la poche d'un ouvrier un franc qui facilitât votre entrée au théâtre, seriez-vous bien venu à dire à cet ouvrier: « Mon ami, ce franc va circuler et donner du travail à loi et à tes frères? » Et l'ouvrier ne serait-il pas fondé à répondre : « Ce franc circulera de même si vous ne me le volez pas; il ira au boulanger au lieu d'aller au machiniste : il me procurera du pain au lieu de vous procurer des spectacles. » |
However, it might be pointed out to them that if, instead of carrying out plunder using the law as an intermediary, they exercised it directly, their sophism would vanish: “If on your individual authority you took from the pockets of a workman one franc to help to pay for your admission to the theatre, would you be in any position to say to this workman: ‘My friend, this franc will be put into circulation and will give work to you and your brethren.”? And would the workman not be entitled to reply: “This franc would circulate even if you did not steal it from me. It would go to the baker instead of the stagehand; it would provide me with bread instead of entertainment for you.” |
Il faut remarquer, en outre, que le sophisme des ricochets pourrait être aussi bien invoqué par les pauvres. Ils pourraient dire aux riches: |
What is more, it should be noted that the sophism of the ricochet effect might also be invoked by the poor. They might say to the wealthy: |
« Que la Loi nous aide à vous voler. Nous consommerons plus de drap, cela profitera à vos manufactures; nous consommerons plus de viande, cela profitera à vos terres; nous consommerons plus de sucre, cela profitera à vos armements. » |
“Let the law help us to rob you. We will consume more woolen cloth, and that will benefit your factories. We will consume more meat, and that will benefit your land. We will consume more sugar, and that will benefit your shipping.” |
Malheureuse, trois fois malheureuse la nation où les questions se posent ainsi ; où nul ne songe à faire de la loi la règle de justice ; où chacun n'y cherche qu'un instrument de vol à son profit, et où toutes les forces intellectuelles s"appliquent à trouver des excuses dans les effets éloignés et compliqués de la spoliation. |
How unfortunate, how very, very unfortunate is the nation in which the question is put in this way, in which nobody dreams of making the law the rule of justice, in which each person seeks only a tool in order to steal for his own advantage and in which all the intellectual effort is devoted to finding excuses (for plunder in its distant and round about effects). |
Coercion by the state causes disruption, disturbance, and displacement; opportunity costs:
Les gouvernements, toujours disposés à se persuader que rien de bien ne se fait sans eux, se refusent à comprendre cette loi harmonique : |
As they are always ready to think that nothing good happens without them, governments refuse to understand this law of harmony: |
L"échange se développe naturellement jusqu"où point où il serait plus onereux qu'utile, et s"arrête naturellement à cette limite. |
Exchange develops naturally up to the point at which its cost outweighs its usefulness and it stops naturally at this limit. |
En conséquence, on les voit partout fort occupés de le favoriser ou de le restreindre. |
Consequently governments can be seen everywhere spending a lot of time encouraging or restricting it (exchange). |
Pour le porter au delà de ses bornes naturelles, ils vont à la conquête de débouchés et de colonies. Pour le retenir en deçà, ils imaginent toutes sortes de restrictions et d'entraves. |
To take exchange beyond its natural limits, they go out to conquer markets and colonies. To keep it within these limits, they dream up all sorts of restrictions and impediments. |
Cette intervention de la Force dans les transactions humaines est accompagnée de maux sans nombre. |
This intervention of force in human transactions is followed by countless harms. |
L"Accroissement même de cette force est déjà un premier mal; car il est bien évident que l'État ne peut faire des conquêtes, retenir sous sa domination des pays lointains, détourner le cours naturel du commerce par l'action des douanes, sans multiplier beaucoup le nombre de ses agents. |
The increase in (the size of) this force is itself already an initial harm, for it is perfectly clear that the state cannot make conquests, keep distant countries under its domination, and divert the natural course of trade through the activities of the Customs Service, without greatly increasing the number of its agents. |
La Déviation de la Force publique est un mal plus grand encore que son Accroissement. Sa mission rationnelle était de protéger toutes les Libertés et toutes les Propriétés, et la voilà appliquée à violer elle-même la Liberté et la Propriété des citoyens. Ainsi les gouvernements semblent prendre à tâche d'effacer des intelligences toutes les notions et tous les principes. Dès qu'il est admis que l'Oppression et la Spoliation sont légitimes pourvu qu'elles soient légales, pourvu qu'elles ne s"exercent entre citoyens que par l'intermédiaire de la Loi ou de la Force publique, on voit peu à peu chaque classe venir demander de lui sacrifier toutes les autres. |
This diversion of the coercive power of the state (from its proper purpose) is an evil even greater than its increase. The rational purpose of government is to protect all forms of freedom and property and here we find it, applied to violating the freedom and property of its citizens. When they act like this governments seem bent on removing from people’s minds any principled notions at all. As soon as it is accepted that oppression and plunder are legitimate because they are legal, provided that they are carried out on the citizens only through the intermediary of the law and the (coercive power of) the state, gradually we begin to see each class stepping forward to demand that all the other classes be sacrificed to it. |
Soit que cette intervention de la Force dans les échanges en provoque qui ne se seraient pas faits, ou en prévienne qui se seraient accomplis, il ne se peut pas qu'elle n'occasionne tout à la fois Déperdition et Déplacement de travail et de capitaux, et par suite perturbation dans la manière dont la population se serait naturellement distribuée. Des intérêts naturels disparaissent sur un point, des intérêts factices se créent sur un autre, et les hommes suivent forcément le courant des intérêts. C"est ainsi [96] qu'on voit de vastes industries s"établir là où elles ne devaient pas naître, la France faire du sucre, l'Angleterre filer du coton venu des plaines de l'Inde. Il a fallu des siècles de guerres, des torrents de sang répandu, d'immenses trésors dissipés pour arrivera ce résultat: substituer en Europe des industries précaires à des industries vivaces, et ouvrir ainsi des chances aux crises, aux chômages, à l'instabilité et, en définitive, au Paupérisme. |
Whether the intervention of this coercive power in exchanges stimulates some exchanges that would never have been made, or prevents some that would have been made, it cannot fail to cause the simultaneous loss or displacement of labor and capital, and consequently a disturbance in the way that populations are naturally distributed. Natural interests disappear at one place, artificial interests are created at another, and people are forced to follow the flow of these (opposing) interests. This is the reason why we see huge industries established in places where they should never be, (such as) France making sugar and England spinning cotton imported from the plains of India. Centuries of wars have been necessary, rivers of blood spilt, and huge (amounts of) treasure wasted to achieve the result of substituting unsound industries for sound ones in Europe, thus creating opportunities for crises, unemployment, and instability, and finally pauperism. |
Here is my list of “The Best of Bastiat” for such an anthology:
See a larger version of this image [1500 px or 3000 px]
See a larger version of this image [1500 px or 3000 px]
See a larger version of this image [1500 px or 3000 px]
See a larger version of this image [1500 px or 3000 px]
See a larger version of this image [1500 px or 3000 px]
Frédéric Bastiat, Oeuvres complètes de Frédéric Bastiat, mises en ordre, revues et annotées d’après les manuscrits de l’auteur. Ed. Prosper Paillottet and biographical essay by Royer de Fontenay. (Paris: Guillaumin, 1st ed. 1854-55, 6 vols; 2nd ed. 1862-64, 7 vols; 3rd ed. 1870-73; 4th ed. 1878-79; 5th ed. 1881-84; 6th ed. 1907).
Frédéric Bastiat, Works online at my personal website:
Frédéric Bastiat, The Collected Works (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2011-)
Frédéric Bastiat, Harmonies économiques par M. Fr. Bastiat, Membre correspondant de l’Institut, Représentant du Peuple à l’Assemblée Législative (Paris: Guillaumin, 1850).
Frédéric Bastiat, Harmonies économiques. 2me Édition augmentées des manuscrits laissés par l’auteur. Publiée par la Société des amis de Bastiat (Paris: Guillaumin, 1851). I have edited a "near replica" edition of this work which can be found at my personal website online.
Frédéric Bastiat, Economic Sophisms, trans. Arthur Goddard, introduction by Henry Hazlitt (Irvington-on-Hudson: Foundation for Economic Education, 1996). online.
Frédéric Bastiat, Selected Essays on Political Economy, translated from the French by Seymour Cain. Edited by George B. de Huszar (Irvington-on-Hudson, New York: The Foundation for Economic Education, 1968) (1st edition D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc. 1964. Copyright William Volker Fund). online.
Frédéric Bastiat, “What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen” in Selected Essays on Political Economy (above). Online at online.
Frédéric Bastiat, Economic Harmonies, trans by W. Hayden Boyers, ed. George B. de Huszar, introduction by Dean Russell (Irvington-on-Hudson: Foundation for Economic Education, 1996). online.
Frédéric Bastiat, “Un chemin de fer négatif” (A Negative Railway] [n.d.] [es1] [oc4.1.17, pp. 93-94] [cw3] online.
Frédéric Bastiat, ES1 18 "There Are No Absolute Principles" (c. 1845), in CW3, pp. 83-85. online.
Frédéric Bastiat, "Un économiste à M. de Lamartine. A l’occasion de son écrit intitulé: Du Droit au travail" (Letter from an Economist to M. de Lamartine. On the occasion of his article entitled: "The Right to a Job"), Journal des Économistes, Feb. 1845, T.10, no. 39, pp. 209-223 Online.
Frédéric Bastiat, "Sur l’ouvrage de M. Dunoyer, De la Liberté du travail" (On the Book by M. Dunoyer. On The Liberty of Working). Unpublished draft, possibly written in May after Bastiat met Dunoyer for the first time at his welcome dinner and Dunoyer asked him to write an article on it for the Journal des débats. Bastiat never finished it. OC1.10, pp. 428-33. Online.
Frédéric Bastiat, La Spoliation, la Classe, et l’État (Plunder, Class, and State): An Anthology of Texts (1845-1851). Edited and with an Introduction by David M. Hart (Sydney: The Pittwater Free Press, 2023). Online.
Frédéric Bastiat, La Loi. Par M. F. Bastiat. Membre correspondent de l'Institut. représentant du peuple a l'assemblée nationale. (Paris: Librairie de Guillaumin et Cie, 1850). Online. An English translation can be found in CW2: The Law (June 1850) (CW2, pp. 107–46).
Frédéric Bastiat, Ce qu’on voit et ce qu’on ne voit pas, ou l’Économie politique en une leçon. Par M. F. Bastiat. Représentant du Peuple à l’Assemblée Nationale, Membre correspondant de l’Institut (Paris: Guillaumin, 1850). Online.
Peter Boettke and Liya Palagashvili, "Henry Hazlitt as an Intellectual Middleman or "Orthodox Economics," History of Political Economy (2013) 45 (annual supplement),pp. 137-65.
Thomas J. DiLorenzo, "Frédéric Bastiat: Between the French and Marginalist Revolutions," in 15 Great Austrian Economists. Edited and with and Introduction by Randall G. Holcombe (Auburn Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1999), pp. 59-69.
Pierre Garello et al., Journal des Économistes et des Études Humaines, vol. 11, no. 2/3 (June 2001). Editor-in-Chief: Garello, Pierre. Special issue devoted to papers given at the Bastiat bicentennial conference. Online online.
David M. Hart, "Reader's Guide to the Works of Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)."
David M. Hart, “Opposing Economic Fallacies, Legal Plunder, and the State: Frédéric Bastiat’s Rhetoric of Liberty in the Economic Sophisms (1846–1850)”. A paper given at the July 2011 annual meeting of the History of Economic Thought Society of Australia (HETSA) at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. online.
David M. Hart, “Frédéric Bastiat’s Distinction between Legal and Illegal Plunder” - A Paper given at the Molinari Society Session “Explorations in Philosophical Anarchy” at the Pacific Meeting of the American Philosophical Society, Seattle WA, 7 April, 2012. online.
David M. Hart, "Is Biography History? The Relationship between Ideas and Human Action in the Life of Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850): A Biographical Approach" (June 2012) A Paper given at the Historical Society’s conference on “Popularizing Historical Knowledge: Practice, Prospects, and Perils,” University of South Carolina in Columbia, SC, May 31 - June 3, 2012. Online.
David M. Hart, “On Ricochets, Hidden Channels, and Negative Multipliers: Bastiat on Calculating the Economic Costs of ‘The Unseen’.” A Paper given at the History of Thought Session of the Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, Southern Economic Association 83rd Annual Meeting, 24 Nov. 2013. online.
David M. Hart, “Negative Railways, Turtle Soup, talking Pencils, and House owning Dogs”: “The French Connection” and the Popularization of Economics from Say to Jasay" (Sept. 2014) online.
David M. Hart, “Seeing the ‘Unseen’ Bastiat: the changing Optics of Bastiat Studies. Or, what the Liberty Fund’s Translation Project is teaching us about Bastiat.” A paper presented to the “Colloquium on Market Institutions & Economic Processes” at NYU, Monday, December 1, 2014. online.
David M. Hart, "The Liberal Roots of American Conservatism: Bastiat and the French Connection" (March, 2015). A paper given to the Philadelphia Society meeting March 27–29, 2015 on “The Roots of American Conservatism - and its Future”. Online.
David M. Hart, ”Literature IN Economics, and Economics AS Literature II: The Economics of Robinson Crusoe from Defoe to Rothbard by way of Bastiat" (April, 2015). online.
David M. Hart, “Literature IN Economics, and Economics AS Literature I: Bastiat’s use of Literature in Defense of Free Markets and his Rhetoric of Economic Liberty" (April, 2015). online.
David M. Hart, "Broken Windows and House-Owning Dogs: The French Connection and the Popularization of Economics from Bastiat to Jasay," Symposium on Anthony de Jasay, The Independent Review (Summer 2015), vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 61-84. online.
David M. Hart, "Reassessing Frédéric Bastiat as an Economic Theorist.” A paper presented to the Free Market Institute, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, October 2, 2015. online.
David M. Hart, “Frédéric Bastiat: The ‘Unseen’ Radical” (Feb. 2017). A talk given at the Students for Liberty 10th Anniversary Conference, 17–20 Feb. 2017, Washington DC. Online.
David M. Hart, “Bastiat: the ‘Unseen’ Radical”. The Henry Hazlitt Memorial Lecture, Austrian Economics Research Conference, Mises Institute (March 2017). online.
David M. Hart, ”’I, Pencil’: An Intellectual History” (January, 2017), an unpublished paper.
David M. Hart, "Reassessing Bastiat's Economic Harmonies after 160 Years" (May 2019). The Participants were Donald J. Boudreaux, Guido Hülsmann, and Joseph T. Salerno. online.
David M. Hart, “The Paris School of Liberal Political Economy” in The Cambridge History of French Thought, ed. Michael Moriarty and Jeremy Jennings (Cambridge University Press, 2019), pp. 301-12. A such longer version of this chapter is available online: “The Paris School of Liberal Political Economy, 1803-1853” (2018) online.
David M. Hart, “Frédéric Bastiat on Plunder, Class, and the State” (October, 2021). This essay was written to accompany an anthology of Bastiat's writings on plunder, class, and the state. Online.
David M. Hart, "Bastiat on The Seen and The Unseen: An Intellectual History" (June, 2022) Online.
David M. Hart, "Vocabulary Clusters in the Thought of Frédéric Bastiat" (June 2022) online.
David M. Hart, “Bastiat's Theory of Harmony and Disharmony: An Intellectual History” (Dec. 2023) Online.
David M. Hart, Glossary entries and Essays in the Collected Works of Bastiat:
David M. Hart, unpublished Notes:
William Edward Hearn, Plutology: or the Theory of the Efforts to Satisfy Human Wants (Melbourne: George Robertson, 1863). online.
Gertrude Himmelfarb, Lord Action: A Study in Conscience and Politics ((University of Chicago Press, 1962).
Jörg Guido Hülsmann, “Bastiat’s Legacy in Economics,” Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 4, no. 4 (Winter 2000) pp. 55-70.
Anthony de Jasay, “The Seen and the Unseen” (Econlib , December 2004 and January 2005). online.
Anthony de Jasay,, “Thirty-five Hours” (Econlib, Jul 15, 2002) online.
Anthony de Jasay, "Two Cheers For Fiscal Austerity: Part I." Econlib, Aug. 02, 2010 online.
Michael C. Munger, "Did Bastiat Anticipate Public Choice?" in Liberty Matters: Robert Leroux, “Bastiat and Political Economy” (July 1, 2013) online.
Leonard Read, "I, Pencil: My Family Tree as Told to Leonard E. Read," The Freeman (December 1958). online.
Leonard E. Read, I Pencil: My Family Tree as told to Leonard E. Reed (Irvington-on-Hudson, New York: Foundation for Economic Education, Inc., 1999). online.
Murray N. Rothbard, Classical Economics: An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought (Auburn, Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2006).
Joseph A. Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis. Edited from Manuscript by Elizabeth Boody Schumpeter (New York: Oxford University Press, 1974). 1st ed. 1954).
Mark Thornton, "Frederic Bastiat as an Austrian Economist", Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, Volume 11, numéro 2/3, Juin/Septembre 2001, pp. 387-398.
[1] A near final draft was finished in February 2019.
[2] Bastiat was working furiously over the summer of 1849 in the seclusion of a hunting lodge in a forest on the outskirts of Paris putting together the first volume of Economic Harmonies. He had this ready for publication by the end of the year and it appeared in January 1850. He had plans to write a second volume which he was not able to complete before his death on 24 December 1850. His friends Prosper Paillottet and Roger de Fontenay assembled the second volume from Bastiat’s papers and published an enlarged, second edition in July 1851.
[3] See David M. Hart, "Reassessing Bastiat's Economic Harmonies after 160 Years" (May 2019). The Participants were Donald J. Boudreaux, Guido Hülsmann, and Joseph T. Salerno. online.
[4] Rothbard discusses Bastiat’s followers in the U.S. in "Bastiat and laissez-faire in America," Classical Economics: An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought (Auburn, Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2006). Vol. 2, pp. 466-70.
[5] William Edward Hearn, Plutology: or the Theory of the Efforts to Satisfy Human Wants (Melbourne: George Robertson, 1863). online.
[6] The first part of Economic Harmonies published in Bastiat’s lifetime contained only the first 10 chapters and appeared in January 1850: Harmonies économiques par M. Fr. Bastiat, Membre correspondant de l’Institut, Représentant du Peuple à l’Assemblée Législative (Paris: Guillaumin, 1850).
[7] The second, enlarged edition of the Economic Harmonies was published posthumously by “les Amis de Bastiat” (the friends of Bastiat), or Prosper Paillottet and Roger de Fontenay, who added an additional 15 chapters which they had reconstructed from Bastiat’s notes and drafts. See, Harmonies économiques. 2me Édition augmentées des manuscrits laissés par l’auteur. Publiée par la Société des amis de Bastiat (Paris: Guillaumin, 1851). I have edited a "near replica" edition of this work which can be found at my personal website online.
[8] See my "Reader's Guide to the Works of Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)" online in the section called "The Unfinished Treatises: The Social and Economic Harmonies and The History of Plunder (1850–51)." Volume one would be a general theory of how human society functions, called Social Harmonies; Volume two would be his economic theory, called Economic Harmonies; and Volume three would deal with disrupting factors or “disharmonies”, perhaps called The History and Theory of Plunder.
[9] "Table of Contents of the Second Edition of the Oeuvres Complètes de Frédéric Bastiat (1862-64), 7 Volumes. online.
[10] My edition of his Works in chronological order in one large file (1,070,215 words; 3,334 pages): The Collected Works in French in Chronological Order online.
[11] A list of the Works of Frédéric Bastiat in the form of sortable tables (sortable by date, title, location) - one table for articles, pamphlets, and books; and the other for his correspondence. There are links to the individual works. online.
[12] See, David M. Hart, “The Paris School of Liberal Political Economy” in The Cambridge History of French Thought, ed. Michael Moriarty and Jeremy Jennings (Cambridge University Press, 2019), pp. 301-12. A such longer version of this chapter is available online: “The Paris School of Liberal Political Economy, 1803-1853” (2018) online.
[13] I first made this argument in a 2013 Liberty Matters discussion about Bastiat: David M. Hart, “What Might Bastiat Have Achieved If He Had Lived as Long as Karl Marx?” [posted: july 26, 2013] in the Liberty Matters discussion headed by Robert Leroux, “Bastiat and Political Economy” (July 1, 2013) online.
[14] Bastiat’s volume might rank alongside Lord Acton's much anticipated History of Liberty as one of the most important classical liberal books never written. See Gertrude Himmelfarb, Lord Action: A Study in Conscience and Politics ((University of Chicago Press, 1962), pp.221-22, where she sates that "The History of Liberty that was to have been his monument as an historian was never constructed. Only fragments of it can be pieced together from essays and lectures posthumously published and from notes bequeathed to future historians."
[15] There were many inadequacies in previous translations of Bastiat’s Economic Harmonies. The Stirling translation appeared in several parts and it would take 30 years before the entire enlarged second edition appeared in English. The FEE edition done in the 1960s was good but the translator missed some of the very specific terminology Bastiat had developed over the previous several years. For example, he missed for example, the whole notion of “the ricochet effect,” his theory of “displacement”, and the very Austrian nature of his ideas about human action.
[16] Frédéric Bastiat, Economic Sophisms, trans. Arthur Goddard, introduction by Henry Hazlitt (Irvington-on-Hudson: Foundation for Economic Education, 1996). online; Selected Essays on Political Economy, translated from the French by Seymour Cain. Edited by George B. de Huszar (Irvington-on-Hudson, New York: The Foundation for Economic Education, 1968) (1st edition D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc. 1964. Copyright William Volker Fund). online, “What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen” in Selected Essays on Political Economy (above). Online at online, and Economic Harmonies, trans by W. Hayden Boyers, ed. George B. de Huszar, introduction by Dean Russell (Irvington-on-Hudson: Foundation for Economic Education, 1996). online.
[17] Schumpeter said that Bastiat was less than a theorist since he was “no theorist at all” but grudgingly seemed to acknowledge his reputation as the most brilliant economic journalist who ever lived. See, Joseph A. Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis. Edited from Manuscript by Elizabeth Boody Schumpeter (New York: Oxford University Press, 1974). 1st ed. 1954), p. 500-1.
[18] I compiled a budget for the years 1848-49 of government revenue and expenditure in order to check Bastiat's claims in his journalism. He was spot on each time. See “French Government’s Budgets for Fiscal Years 1848 and 1849,” in Appendix 4, in CW3, pp. 509-16. online.
[19] Goguettes were social clubs where individuals could gather to drink and sing songs, often political or patriotic in nature. The poets who wrote these songs were called “goguettiers.” The members of these clubs were ordinary people, often from the lower or middle class, who would gather to talk politics when other forms of political association were forbidden or strictly limited. Pierre-Jean Béranger (1780-1857) was a particular favourite of Bastiat who referred to his satirical poems and songs several times.
[20] See my Note “Bastiat’s Anti-Socialist Pamphlets”.
[21] : See, “Bastiat the Revolutionary Journalist and Politician,” in the Introduction to CW3, pp. lxviii-lxxiii. online.
[22] See my Note “What was the Cause of Bastiat’s Death?”
[23] See, David M. Hart, “Bastiat: the ‘Unseen’ Radical”. The Henry Hazlitt Memorial Lecture, Austrian Economics Research Conference, Mises Institute, Auburn AL (March 2017). online.
[24] See my Note “Self-Ownership and the Right to Property.”
[25] See my Note “Victimless Crimes.”
[26] “Standing Armies, Militias, and the Utopia of Peace,” in Appendix 1 (CW3, pp. 464-70). online.
[27] Bastiat clearly stated his opposition to colonialism in an electoral manifesto he wrote in 1846: “the colonial system is the most disastrous illusion ever to have led nations astray.” See "To the Electors of Saint-Sever, 1846” (CW1, pp. 363-65). On his opposition to war see his speech at the large international Friends of Peace Conference held in Paris in August 1849, "Disarmament and Taxes" (August 1849), in CW3, pp. 526-32.
[28] See, “Bastiat’s Rhetoric of Liberty: Satire and the ‘Sting of Ridicule’,” in the Introduction to CW3, pp. lviii-lxiv. online.
[29] See, “Standing Armies, Militias, and the Utopia of Peace” in Further Aspects of Bastiat’s Thought, in CW3, pp. 464-70. online.
[30] See, “Bastiat on Enlightening the ‘Dupes’ about the Nature of Plunder,” in the Introduction to CW3, pp. lv-lviii. online; and my Notes “Theory of Plunder” and “Rule by Functionaries.”
[31] See my Note “All Forms of Liberty.”
[32] For a discussion of this see David M. Hart, ”Literature IN Economics, and Economics AS Literature II: The Economics of Robinson Crusoe from Defoe to Rothbard by way of Bastiat" (April, 2015). online.
[33] David M. Hart, "Reassessing Frédéric Bastiat as an Economic Theorist.” A paper presented to the Free Market Institute, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, October 2, 2015. online.
[34] David M. Hart, "Reassessing Bastiat's Economic Harmonies after 160 Years" Liberty Matters (May 2019) online.
[35] “The Sophism Bastiat Never Wrote: The Sophism of the Ricochet Effect” (CW3, pp. 457-61) online.
[36] “The Double Incidence of Loss” in Further Aspects of Bastiat’s Thought, in CW3, pp. 456-57 online.
[37] Bastiat and Read where not the first. See my unpublished paper ”’I, Pencil’: An Intellectual History” (January, 2017). Leonard Read's story "I, Pencil" (1958) was only one of many similar attempts by economists to explain themselves by means of amusing or simplified stories. It was a rhetorical device which attracted many famous economists, not all of whom had the literary talent of a Bastiat to pull it off. However, their attempts are instructive. This paper discusses the intellectual history of stories of this type including the works of an anonymous Englishman in the 17thC, the Dutch-English writer Bernard Mandeville (1670-1733), the economist Adam Smith (1723-1790), the businessman and economist J.B. Say (1767-1832), one of the leading speakers of the Anti-Corn Law League William Fox (1786-1864), the economist Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850), and Leonard Read (1898-1983). I have given them new titles in keeping with the tone of Leonard Read's original story: 1. Anon, "I, Mill Horse" (1644) 2. Bernard Mandeville, "I, Beehive" (1714) 3. Adam Smith, "I, Pin-Maker" (1776) 4. Jean-Baptiste Say, "I, Playing Card Maker" (1828) 4. William Fox, “I, Foreigner” (1844) 5. Frédéric Bastiat, “I, Carpenter” (1848) 6. Frédéric Bastiat, "I, Broken Window" (1850) 7. Leonard Read, “I, Pencil” (1958)
[38] Jasay wrote a two part article called “The Seen and the Unseen” which appeared on the Econlib website in December 2004 and January 2005 where he applies Bastiat’s idea and borrows the name for his own title online. He makes explicit reference to the greatness of Bastiat as an economist in the second article he wrote for Econlib, “Thirty-five Hours” (Jul 15, 2002) online and credits him for inventing the idea of “opportunity cost”: “he anticipated the concept of opportunity cost and was, to my knowledge, the first economist ever to use and explain it.”
[39] See my Note “Ceteris Paribus".
[40] See my essay “Bastiat's Theory of Harmony and Disharmony: An Intellectual History” (Dec. 2023) Online.
[41] See my Note “Disturbing and Restorative Factors.”
[42] Jasay has argued that Bastiat's notion of negative factor productivity in "The Negative Railway" (c. 1845) was an innovation ahead of its time. See, Jasay, "Two Cheers For Fiscal Austerity: Part I." Econlib, Aug. 02, 2010 online, and Bastiat, “Un chemin de fer négatif” (A Negative Railway] [n.d.] [es1] [oc4.1.17, pp. 93-94] [cw3] online.
[43] See my Note “Service for Service.”
[44] See my Note “The ‘Apparatus’ or Structure of Exchange.”
[45] Peter Boettke and Liya Palagashvili, "Henry Hazlitt as an Intellectual Middleman or "Orthodox Economics," History of Political Economy (2013) 45 (annual supplement), pp. 137-65.
[46] See my discussion on “How Austrian was Bastiat?” in my paper "Seeing the "Unseen" Bastiat: the changing Optics of Bastiat Studies. Or, what the Liberty Fund's Translation Project is teaching us about Bastiat." (NYU, 2014); and also Mark Thornton, "Frederic Bastiat as an Austrian Economist", Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, Volume 11, numéro 2/3, Juin/Septembre 2001, pp. 387-398; Jörg Guido Hülsmann, “Bastiat’s Legacy in Economics,” Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 4, no. 4 (Winter 2000) pp. 55-70; Thomas J. DiLorenzo, "Frédéric Bastiat: Between the French and Marginalist Revolutions," in 15 Great Austrian Economists. Edited and with and Introduction by Randall G. Holcombe (Auburn Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1999), pp. 59-69, and the collection of articles in Garello et al., Journal des Économistes et des Études Humaines, vol. 11, no. 2/3 (June 2001). Editor-in-Chief: Garello, Pierre. Special issue devoted to papers given at the Bastiat bicentennial conference. Online online.
[47] See my Note “Human Action".
[48] “Bastiat’s Invention of ‘Crusoe Economics’" (CW3, pp. lxiv-lxvii). online; also my paper David M. Hart, ”Literature IN Economics, and Economics AS Literature II: The Economics of Robinson Crusoe from Defoe to Rothbard by way of Bastiat" (April, 2015). online.
[49] See my Note “Mechanics and Organizers."
[50] ES1 18 "There Are No Absolute Principles" (c. 1845), in CW3, pp. 83-85. online.
[51] See Michael C. Munger, "Did Bastiat Anticipate Public Choice?" in Liberty Matters: Robert Leroux, “Bastiat and Political Economy” (July 1, 2013) online.
[52] “On Malthus and Malthusian Limits to the Growth of the State” (CW3, pp. 461-64). online.
[53] See my Note “Bastiat on Taxation and the Function of Government”
[54] See “Standing Armies, Militias, and the Utopia of Peace,” in Appendix 1 (CW3, pp. 464-70). online.
[55] For an overview, see my essay “Frédéric Bastiat on Plunder, Class, and the State” (October, 2021) Online. This essay was written to accompany an anthology of Bastiat's writings on plunder, class, and the state: La Spoliation, la Classe, et l’État (Plunder, Class, and State): An Anthology of Texts (1845-1851). Edited and with an Introduction by David M. Hart (Sydney: The Pittwater Free Press, 2023). Online. See also my Notes on “Theory of Plunder”, "History of Plunder", "Theocratic Plunder", and “Rule by Functionaries".
[56] Bastiat's most extended treatment of "legal plunder" can be found in his long essay La Loi (The Law) (June 1850).
[57] See my reconstruction of what the three volumes Bastiat had in mind would look like had he lived long enough to finish it.
[58] See my Note “Rule by Functionaries."
[59] Bastiat, "Un économiste à M. de Lamartine. A l’occasion de son écrit intitulé: Du Droit au travail" (Letter from an Economist to M. de Lamartine. On the occasion of his article entitled: "The Right to a Job"), Journal des Économistes, Feb. 1845, T.10, no. 39, pp. 209-223 Online; "Sur l’ouvrage de M. Dunoyer, De la Liberté du travail" (On the Book by M. Dunoyer. On The Liberty of Working). OC1.10, pp. 428-33. Online.
[60] David M. Hart, "Vocabulary Clusters in the Thought of Frédéric Bastiat" (June 2022) online.
[61] References are to my online edition of the 1851 French edition. HE, I. Organisation Naturelle. Organisation Artificielle, pp. 17-18 (EH 1 “Natural and Artificial Organisation”). Online.
[62] Leonard Read, "I, Pencil: My Family Tree as Told to Leonard E. Read," The Freeman (December 1958). On the FEE website it is described as an economic "parable." online. See also Leonard E. Read, I Pencil: My Family Tree as told to Leonard E. Reed (Irvington-on-Hudson, New York: Foundation for Economic Education, Inc., 1999). online.
[63] See my essay “The Use of Economic Stories to explain Economic Ideas”. We have counted 55 “economic stories” Bastiat used in EH (34 in EH1 and 18 in EH2, and 3 in the Taranne Hall lecture).
[64] Both are in Chap. 1: Natural and Artificial Social Order in Economic Harmonies. My online edition of the 1851 edition, pp. 17-18 online In the FEE edition, pp. 3-4 (cabinet maker) and pp. 5-6 (student in Paris): Economic Harmonies, trans by W. Hayden Boyers, ed. George B. de Huszar, introduction by Dean Russell (Irvington-on-Hudson: Foundation for Economic Education, 1996). online.
[65] HE, IV. Échange, pp. 90-91 (EH 4 “Exchange”) Online.
[66] HE, XVIII Causes Perturbatrices, pp. 495-96 (EH 18 Disturbing Factors) Online
[67] HE, VII. Capital, pp. 190-91 (EH 7 "Capital") Online
[68] HE, VI. Richesse, pp. 182-83 (EH 6 “Wealth”) Online
[69] HE, X. Concurrence, pp. 322-24 (EH 10 “Competition”) Online
[70] HE, XVI. De La Population, pp. 441-44 (EH 16 “On Population") Online
[71] HE, V. De La Valeur, pp. 116-17 (EH 5 “On Value”) Online
[72] HE, IV. Échange, pp. 97-99 (EH 4 “Exchange) Online
[73] HE, XIX. Guerre, pp.502-04 (EH 19 “War”) Online
[74] HE, A La Jeunesse Française, pp. 12-14 (EH, “To the Youth of France”) Online
[75] HE, XVII. Services Privés, Services Publics, pp. 476-77 (EH 17 “Private and Pubic Services”) Online
[76] HE, XVII. Services Privés, Services Publics, pp. 485-88 (EH 17 “Private and Public Services”) Online