Latest / The Philosophy Insights Collection / 03 - The Law - Frederic Bastiat

Transcript

03 - The Law - Frederic Bastiat · The Philosophy Insights Collection

• 0:00
  Section three. This plunder may be only an exceptional blemish in the legislation of
• 0:07
  a people. And in this case, the best thing that can be done
• 0:11
  is, without so many speeches and lamentations, to do away with it as
• 0:17
  soon as possible, notwithstanding the clamors of interested parties. But how is it
• 0:23
  to be distinguished? Very easily? See whether the law takes from some persons
• 0:30
  that which belongs to them, to give to others what does not belong to
• 0:34
  them. See whether the law performs for the benefit of one citizen and to
• 0:40
  the injury of others, And act that this citizen cannot perform without committing a
• 0:45
  crime. Abolish this law without delay. It is not merely an iniquity.
• 0:52
  It is a fertile source of iniquities, for it invites reprisals. And if
• 0:57
  you do not take care, the exceptional case will extend multiply and become systematic.
• 1:04
  No doubt, the party benefit will exclaim loudly, he will assert his
• 1:10
  acquired rights. He will say that the state is bound to protect and encourage
• 1:15
  his industry. He will plead that it is a good thing for the state
• 1:19
  to be enriched, that it may spend the more. And thus shower down
• 1:23
  salaries upon the poor workmen. Take care not to listen to this sophistry,
• 1:29
  for it is just by the systematizing of these arguments that legal plunder becomes systematized.
• 1:37
  And this is what has taken place. The delusion of the day is
• 1:42
  to enrich all classes at the expense of each other. It is to generalize
• 1:47
  plunder under pretense of organizing it. Now Leo, plunder may be exercised in
• 1:55
  an infinite multitude of ways. Hence come an infinite multitude of plans for organization.
• 2:01
  Tariffs, protection, perquisites, gratuities, encouragements, progressive taxation, free
• 2:08
  public education, right to work, right to profit, right to ages,
• 2:14
  right to assistance, right to instruments of labor, gratuity of credit, et
• 2:20
  cetera, et cetera. And it is all these plans taken as a whole,
• 2:25
  with what they have in common legal plunder that takes the name of socialism.
• 2:32
  Now socialism thus defined in forming a doctrinal body. What other war would
• 2:38
  you make against it than a war of doctrine. You find this doctrine false,
• 2:44
  absurd, abominable, refute it. This will be all the easier,
• 2:50
  the more false, absurd, and abominable. It is above all, if
• 2:55
  you wish to be strong, begin by routing out of your election every particle
• 3:01
  of socialism which may have crept into it, and this will be no light
• 3:07
  work. Mister Montalambert has been reproached with wishing to turn brute force against socialism.
• 3:15
  He ought to be exonerated from this reproach, for he has plainly said,
• 3:19
  quote the war that we must make against socialism must be one that is
• 3:24
  compatible with the law, honor and justice. Close quote. But how is
• 3:30
  it that mister Montalambert does not see that he is placing himself in efficious circle.
• 3:38
  You would oppose law to socialism, But it is the law that socialism
• 3:43
  in folks, It aspires to legal, not extra legal plunder. It is
• 3:49
  of the law itself, like the monopolists of all kinds, that it wants
• 3:53
  to make an instrument. And when once it has the law on its side,
• 3:58
  how will you be able to turn the law well against it? How
• 4:00
  will you place it under the power of your tribunals, your gendarmes, and
• 4:04
  your prisons. What will you do? Then, you wish to prevent it
• 4:11
  from taking any part in the making of laws, you would keep it outside
• 4:15
  the legislative palace. In this you will not succeed. I venture to prophesy.
• 4:20
  So long as legal plunder is the basis of the legislation within. It
• 4:28
  is absolutely necessary that this question of legal plunder should be determined. And there
• 4:33
  are only three solutions of it. One when the few plunder the many,
• 4:40
  two when everybody plunders everybody else, and three when nobody plunders anybody, partial
• 4:48
  plunder, universal plunder, absence of plunder. Amongst these we have to make
• 4:55
  our choice. The law can only produce one of these results, partial plunder.
• 5:02
  This is the system that prevailed so long as the elective privilege was partial,
• 5:09
  a system that is resorted to to avoid the invasion of socialism universal plunder.
• 5:15
  We have been threatened by this system when the elective privilege has become universal,
• 5:20
  the masses having conceived the idea of making law on the principle of legislators
• 5:27
  who have preceded them, absence of plunder. This is the principle of justice,
• 5:33
  peace, order, stability, conciliation, and of good sense, which
• 5:39
  I shall proclaim with all the force of my lungs, which is very inadequate
• 5:44
  alas till the day of my death, and in all sincerity, Can anything
• 5:49
  more be required at the hands of the law. Can the law, whose
• 5:55
  necessary sanction is forced be reasonably employed upon anything beyond securing to every one his
• 6:00
  right? I defy anyone to remove it from this circle without perverting it and
• 6:08
  consequently turning force against right. And as this is the most fatal, the
• 6:14
  most illogical, social perversion that can possibly be imagined, it must be admitted
• 6:19
  that the true solution, so much sought after of the social problem is contained
• 6:26
  in these simple words. Law is organized justice. Now, it is important
• 6:32
  to remark that to organize justice by law, that is to say, by
• 6:38
  force, excludes the idea of organizing by law or by force, any manifestation
• 6:45
  whatever of human activity labor, charity, agriculture, commerce, industry, instruction,
• 6:51
  the fine, arts, or religion. For any one of these organizings
• 6:58
  would inevitably destroy the essential organization. How, in fact, can we imagine
• 7:03
  force encroaching upon the liberty of citizens without infringing upon justice and so acting against
• 7:12
  its proper aim. Here I am taking on the most popular prejudice of our
• 7:16
  time. It is not considered enough that law should be just, It must
• 7:21
  be philanthropic. It is not sufficient that it should guarantee to every citizen the
• 7:28
  free and inoffensive exercise of his faculties apply to his physical, intellectual, and
• 7:33
  moral development. It is required to extend well being, instruction, and morality
• 7:40
  directly over the nation. This is a fascinating side of socialism. But I
• 7:46
  repeat it. These two missions of the law contradict each other. We have
• 7:51
  to choose between them. A citizen cannot at the same time be free and
• 7:59
  not free. Mister de Lamartine wrote to me one day thus, quote,
• 8:05
  your doctrine is only the half of my program. You have stopped at liberty.
• 8:11
  I go on to fraternity close quote. I answered him. Quote the
• 8:16
  second part of your program will destroy the first close quote. And in fact,
• 8:24
  it is impossible for me to separate the word fraternity from the word voluntary.
• 8:30
  I cannot possibly conceive fraternity legally enforced without liberty being legally destroyed and justice
• 8:37
  legally trampled under foot. Legal plunder has two roots. One of them,
• 8:45
  as we have already seen, is in human greed. The other is in
• 8:50
  misconceived philanthropy. Before I proceed, I think I ought to explain myself upon
• 8:56
  the word plunder. I do not take it as it often is taken in
• 9:01
  a vague, undefined, relative or metaphorical sense. I use it in its
• 9:07
  scientific acceptation and as expressing the opposite idea to property. When a portion of
• 9:15
  wealth passes out of the hands of him who has acquired it without his consent,
• 9:20
  and without compensation to him who has not created it, whether by force
• 9:26
  or by artifice, I say that property is violated, that plunder is perpetrated.
• 9:33
  I say that this is exactly what the law ought to repress, Always
• 9:37
  and everywhere. If the law itself performs the action it ought to repress,
• 9:43
  I say that plunder is still perpetrated, and even in a social point of
• 9:48
  view, under aggravated circumstances. In this case, however, he who profits
• 9:54
  from the plunder is not responsible for it. It is the law, the
• 9:58
  law giver, society itself, and this is where the political danger lies.
• 10:05
  It is to be regretted that there is something offensive in the word I have
• 10:11
  sought in vain for another. For I would not wish at any time,
• 10:15
  and especially just now, to add an irritating word to our disagreements. Therefore,
• 10:20
  whether I am believed or not, I declare that I do not mean
• 10:24
  to impugne the intentions nor the morality of anybody. I am attacking an idea
• 10:31
  that I believe to be false, a system that appears to me to be
• 10:35
  unjust. And this is so independent of intentions that each of us profits by
• 10:41
  it without wishing it, and suffers from it without being aware of the cause.
• 10:48
  Any person must write, under the influence of party spirit or of fear,
• 10:52
  who would call into question the sincerity of protectionism, of socialism, and
• 10:58
  even of communism, which are the one and the same plant in three different
• 11:03
  periods of growth. All that can be said is that plunder is more visible
• 11:09
  by its partiality in protectionism, and by its universality in communism. Whence it
• 11:18
  follows that of the three systems, socialism is still the most vague, the
• 11:22
  most undefined, and consequently the most sincere. Be that as it may,
• 11:30
  to conclude that legal plunder has one of its roots in misconceived philanthropy, is
• 11:35
  evidently to put intentions out of the question. End of Section three