 Section 8 of Sophisms of the Protectionists This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org Sophisms of the Protectionists by Frédéric Bastia Translated by Horace White Section 8 20. Human Labour, National Labour Destruction of machinery, prohibition of foreign goods. These are two acts proceeding from the same doctrine. We do meet with men who, while they rejoice over the revelation of any great invention, favor, nevertheless, the protective policy. But such men are very inconsistent. What is the objection they adduce against free trade? That it causes us to seek from foreign and more easy production, what would otherwise be the result of home production? In a word, that it injures domestic industry. On the same principle, can it not be objected to machinery? That it accomplishes, through natural agents, what would otherwise be the result of manual labour? And that it is thus injurious to human labour? The foreign labourer, enjoying greater facilities of production than the French labourer, is, with regard to the latter, a veritable economical machine, which crushes him by competition. Thus a piece of machinery capable of executing any work at a less price than could be done by any given number of hands, as regards these hands in the position of a foreign competitor, who paralyzes them by his rivalry. If then it be judicious to protect home labour against the competition of foreign labour, it cannot be less so to protect human labour against mechanical labour. Whoever adheres to the protective system ought not, if his brain be possessed of any logical powers, to stop at the prohibition of foreign produce, but should extend this prohibition to the produce of the loom and of the plough. I approve therefore of the logic of those who, whilst they cry out against the inundation of foreign merchandise, have the courage to reclaim equally against the excessive production, resulting from the inventive power of mind. Of this number is Mr. de Saint-Chamens, one of the strongest arguments, says he, which can be adduced against free trade and the too extensive employment of machines, is that many workmen are deprived of work, either by foreign competition, which depresses manufacturers, or by machinery, which takes the place of men in workshops. Mr. de Saint-Chamens saw clearly the analogy, or rather the identity, which exists between importation and machinery, and was therefore in favor of proscribing both. There is some pleasure in having to do with intrepid arguers, who, even in error, thus carry through a chain of reasoning. But let us look at the difficulty into which they are here led. If it be true, a priori, that the domain of invention, and that of labor, can be extended only to the injury of one another, it would follow that the fewest workmen would be employed in countries, like a shire, for instance, where there is the most machinery. And if it be on the contrary, proved that machinery and manual labor coexist to a greater extent among rich nations than among savages, it must necessarily follow that these two powers do not interfere with one another. I cannot understand how a thinking being can rest satisfied with the following dilemma. Either the inventions of man do not injure labor, and this, from general facts, would appear to be the case, for there exists more of both among the English and the French than among the Sioux and the Cherokees. If such be the fact, I have gone upon a wrong track, although unconscious at what point. I have wondered from my road, and I would commit, high treason against humanity, for I to introduce such an error into the legislation of my country. Or else the results of the inventions of mind limit manual labor, as would appear to be proved from limited facts, for every day we see some machine rendering unnecessary the labor of twenty, or perhaps a hundred workmen. If this be the case, I am forced to acknowledge, as a fact, the existence of a flagrant, eternal, and incurable antagonism between the intellectual and the physical power of man, between his improvement and his welfare. I cannot avoid feeling that the creator should have bestowed upon man either reason or bodily strength, moral force or brutal force, and that it has been a bitter mockery to confer upon him faculties which must inevitably counteract and destroy one another. This is an important difficulty, and how is it put aside by this singular apathem? In political economy, there are no absolute principles. There are no principles. Why, what does this mean, but that there are no facts? Principles are only formulas, which recapitulate a whole class of well-proved facts. Machinery and importation must certainly have effects. These effects must be either good or bad. Here there may be a difference of opinion as to which is the correct conclusion. But whichever is adopted, it must be capable of being submitted to the formula of one or other of these principles. Viz, machinery is good, or machinery is an evil? Importations are beneficial, or importations are injurious. But to say there are no principles is certainly the last degree of debasement to which the human mind can lower itself. And I confess that I blush for my country when I hear so monstrous and absurdity uttered before and approved by the French Chambers, the elite of the nation who thus justify themselves for imposing upon the country laws of the merits or demerits of which they are perfectly ignorant. But it may be said to me, finish then by destroying the Sophism. Prove to us that machines are not injurious to human labor, nor importations to national labor. In a work of this nature such demonstrations cannot be very complete. My aim is rather to point out than to explain difficulties. And to excite reflection rather than to satisfy it. The mind never attains to a firm conviction which is not wrought out by its own labor. I will, however, make an effort to put it upon the right track. The adversaries of importations and of machinery are misled by allowing themselves to form too hasty a judgment from immediate and transitory effects instead of following these up to their general and final consequences. The immediate effect of an ingenious piece of machinery is that it renders superfluous in the production of any given result a certain quantity of manual labor. But its action does not stop here. This result being obtained at less labor is given to the public at a less price. The amount thus saved to the buyers enables them to procure other comforts and thus to encourage general labor precisely in proportion to the saving that they have made upon the one article which the machine has given to them at an easier price. Thus the standard of labor is not lowered, though that of comfort is raised. Let me endeavor to render this double fact more striking by an example. I suppose that ten million of hats at fifteen francs each are yearly consumed in France. This would give to those employed in this manufacturer one hundred and fifty millions. A machine is invented which enables the manufacturer to furnish hats at ten francs. The sum given to the maintenance of this branch of industry is thus reduced if we suppose the consumption not to be increased to one hundred millions. But the other fifty millions are not therefore drawn from the maintenance of human labor. The buyers of hats are from the surplus saved upon the price of that article enabled to satisfy other ones and thus in the same proportion to encourage general industry. John buys a pair of shoes James a book Jerome an article of furniture etc. Human labor as a whole still receives the encouragement of the whole one hundred and fifty millions while consumers with the same supply of hats as before receive also the increased number of comforts accruing from the fifty millions which the use of the machine has been the means of saving to them. These comforts are the net gain which France has received from the invention. It is a gratuitous gift a tribute exacted from nature by the genius of man. We grant that during this process a certain sum of labor will have been displaced forced to change its direction but we cannot allow that it has been destroyed or even diminished. The case is the same with regard to importations. I will resume my hypothesis. France according to our supposition manufactured ten millions of hats at fifteen francs each. Let us now suppose that a foreign producer brings them into our market at ten francs. I maintain that national labor is thus in no wise diminished. It will be obliged to produce the equivalent of the hundred millions which go to pay for the ten millions of hats at ten francs and then there remains to each buyer five francs saved on the purchase of his hat or in total fifty millions which serve for the acquisition of other comforts and the encouragement of other labor. The mass of labor remains then what it was and the additional comforts accruing from the fifty millions saved in the purchase of hats are the net profit of importation or free trade. It is no argument to try and alarm us by a picture of the sufferings which in this hypothesis would result from the displacement or change of labor. For if prohibition had never existed labor would have classed itself in accordance with the laws of trade and no displacement would have taken place. If prohibition had led to an artificial and unproductive classification of labor then it is prohibition and not free trade which is responsible for the inevitable displacement which must result in the transition from evil to good. It is a rather singular argument to maintain that because an abuse which has been permitted a temporary existence cannot be corrected without wounding the interests of those who have profited by it. It ought therefore to claim perpetual duration. 21. Raw Material It is said that no commerce is so advantageous as that in which manufactured articles are exchanged for raw material because the latter furnishes ailment for national labor. And it is hence concluded that the best regulation of duties would be to give the greatest possible facilities to the importation of raw material and at the same time to check that of the finished article. There is in political economy no more generally accredited sophism than this. It serves for argument not only to the protectionists but also to the pretended free trade school and it is in the latter capacity that its most mischievous tendencies are called into action. For a good cause suffers much less in being attacked than in being badly defended. Commercial liberty must probably pass through the same ordeal as liberty in every other form. It can only dictate laws after having first taken thorough possession of men's minds. If then it be true that a reform to be firmly established must be generally understood, it follows that nothing can so much retard it as the misleading of public opinion. And what more calculated to mislead opinion than writings which, while they proclaim free trade, support the doctrines of monopoly. It is some years since three great cities of France, Viz, Lyons, Bordeaux, and Haver, combined in opposition to the restrictive system. France, all Europe, looked anxiously and suspiciously at this apparent declaration in favour of free trade. Alas, it was still the banner of monopoly which they followed, a monopoly only a little more sordid, a little more absurd than that of which they seemed to desire the destruction. Thanks to this autism, which I would now endeavour to deprive of its disguise, the petitioners only reproduced, with an additional incongruity, the old doctrine of protection to national labourer. What is, in fact, the prohibitive system? We will let Mr. DeSaint Crick answer for us. Labour constitutes the riches of a nation, because it creates supplies for the gratification of our necessities, and universal comfort consists in the abundance of these supplies. Here we have the principle. But this abundance ought to be the result of national labour. If it were the result of foreign labour, national labour must receive an inevitable check. Here lies the ever. See the preceding Sophism. What then ought to be the course of an agricultural and manufacturing country? It ought to reserve its market for the produce of its own soil and its own industry. Here is the object. In order to effect this, it ought, by restrictive and if necessary, by prohibitive duties to prevent the influx of produce from foreign soils and foreign industry. Here is the means. Let us now compare this system with that of the petition from Bordeaux. This divided articles of merchandise into three classes. The first class includes articles of food and raw material untouched by human labour. A judicious system of political economy would require that this class should be exempt from taxation. Here we have the principle of no labour, no protection. The second class is composed of articles which have received some preparation for manufacture. This preparation would render reasonable the imposition of some duties. Here we find the commencements of protection because at the same time, likewise, commences the demand for national labour. The third class comprehends finished articles which can, under no circumstances, furnish material for national labour. We consider this as the most fit for taxation. Here we have at once the maximum of labour and consequently of production. The petitioners then, as we here see, proclaimed foreign labour as injurious to national labour. This is the ever of the prohibitive system. They desired the French market to be reserved for French labour. This is the object of the prohibitive system. They demanded that foreign labour should be subjected to restrictions and taxes. These are the means of the prohibitive system. What difference, then, can we possibly discover to exist between the bordelais petitioners and the corepheus of restriction? One alone. And that is simply the greater or less extension which is given to the signification of the word labour. Mr. de Saint Crick, taking it in its widest sense, is therefore in favour of protecting everything. Labour, he says, constitutes the whole wealth of a nation. Protection should be for the agricultural interest and the whole agricultural interest. For the manufacturing interest and the whole manufacturing interest. And this principle I will continually endeavour to impress upon this chamber. The petitioners considered no labour but that of the manufacturers and accordingly it is that and that alone which they would wish to admit to the favours of protection. Raw material being entirely untouched by human labour. Our system should exempt it from taxes. Manufactured articles furnishing no material for national labour we consider as the most fit for taxation. There is no question here as to the propriety of protecting national labour. Mr. de Saint Crick and the Bordeleuil agree entirely upon this point. We have in our preceding chapters already shown how entirely we differ from both of them. The question to be determined is whether it is Mr. de Saint Crick or the Bordeleuil who give to the word labour its proper acceptation. And we must confess that Mr. de Saint Crick is here decidedly in the right. The following dialogue might be supposed between them. Mr. de Saint Crick. You agree that national labour ought to be protected. You agree that no foreign labour can be introduced into our markets without destroying an equal quantity of our national labour. But you contend that there are numerous articles of merchandise possessing value for they are souls and which are nevertheless untouched by human labour. Among these you name corn, flour, meat, cattle, bacon, salt, iron, copper, lead, coal, wool, skins, seeds, etc. If you can prove to me that the value of these things is not dependent upon labour I will agree that it is useless to protect them. But if I can prove to you that there is as much labour put upon a hundred francs worth of wool as upon a hundred francs worth of cloth, you want to acknowledge that protection is the right as much of the one as of the other. I ask you then why this bag of wool is worth a hundred francs. Is it not because this is its price of production? And what is the price of production but the sum which has been distributed in wages for labour, payment of skill, and interest on money among the various labourers and capitalists who have assisted in the production of the article? The Petitioners It is true that with regard to wool you may be right but a bag of corn, a bar of iron, a hundred weight of coal, are these the produce of labour? Is it not nature which creates them? Mr. Desaint Crick Without doubt nature creates these substances but it is labour which gives them their value. I have myself in saying that labour creates material objects used a false expression which has led me into many farther errors. No man can create, no man can bring anything from nothing, and if production is used as a synonym for creation then indeed our labour must all be useless. The Agriculturalist does not pretend that he has created the corn but he has given it its value. He has, by his own labour, and by that of his servants, his labourers, and his reapers, transformed into corn, substances which were entirely dissimilar from it. What more is affected by the miller who converts it into flour or by the baker who makes it into bread? In order that a man may be dressed in cloth numerous operations are first necessary. Before the intervention of any human labour the primary materials of this article are air, water, heat, gas, light, and the various salts which enter into its composition. These are indeed untouched by human labour for they have no value and I have never dreamed of their needing protection. But a first labour converts these substances into forage, a second into wool, a third into thread, a fourth into cloth, and a fifth into garments. Who can pretend to say that all these contributions to the work from the first furrow of the plow to the last stitch of the needle are not labour? And because for the sake of speed and greater perfection in the accomplishment of the final object these various branches of labour are divided among as many classes of workmen you, by an arbitrary distinction, determine that the order in which the various branches of labour follow each other shall regulate their importance so that while the first is not allowed to merit the name of labour the last shall receive all the favours of protection. The Petitioners Yes, we begin to understand that neither wool nor corn are entirely independent of human labour but certainly the agriculturalist has not, like the manufacturer, had everything to do by his own labour and that of his workmen. Nature has assisted him and if there is some labour at least all is not labour in the production of corn. Mr. Desaint Crick But it is the labour alone which gives it value. I grant that nature has assisted in the production of grain. I will even grant that it is exclusively her work but I must confess at least that I have constrained her to it by my labour and remark moreover that when I sell my corn it is not the work of nature which I make you pay for but my own. You will perceive also by following up your manner of arguing that neither will manufactured articles be the production of labour. Does not the manufacturer also call upon nature to assist him? Does he not, by the assistance of steam machinery force into his service the weight of the atmosphere as I, by the use of the plow, take advantage of its humidity? Is it the cloth manufacturer who has created the laws of gravitation, transmission of forces, and of affinities? The Petitioners Well, well, we give up wool but assuredly coal is the work, the exclusive work of nature. This at least is independent of all human labour. Mr. DeSaint Crick Yes, nature certainly has made coal but labour has made its value. Where was the value of coal during the millions of years when it lay unknown and buried a hundred feet below the surface of the earth? It was necessary to seek it. Here was labour. It was necessary to transport it to a market. Again this was labour. The price which you pay for coal in the markets is the remuneration given to these labourers of digging and transportation. We see that, so far, all the advantage is on the side of Mr. DeSaint Crick and that the value of unmanufactured as of manufactured articles represents always the expense or what is the same thing, the labour of production. That it is impossible to conceive of an article of value independent of human labour. That the distinction made by the petitioners is futile in theory and as the basis of an unequal division of favours would be iniquitous in practice. For it would thence result that the one-third of the French occupied in manufactures would receive all the benefits of monopoly because they produce by labour while the two other thirds formed by the agricultural population would be left to struggle against competition under pretense that they produce without labour. It will, I know, be insisted that it is advantageous to a nation to import the raw material, whether or not it be the result of labour and to export manufactured articles. This is a very generally received opinion. In proportion, says the petitioner of Bordeaux, as raw material is abundant, manufactures will increase and flourish. The abundance of raw material, it says elsewhere, gives an unlimited scope to labour in those countries where it prevails. Raw material, says the petitioner from Haver, being the elements of labour should be regulated on a different system and ought to be admitted immediately and at the lowest rate. The same petition asks that the protection of manufactured articles should be reduced, not immediately, but at some indeterminate time, not to the lowest rate of entrance, but to 20%. Among other articles, says the petitioner of Lyons, of which the low price and the abundance are necessary, the manufacturers name all raw material. All this is based upon error. All value is, we have seen, the representative of labour. Now it is undoubtedly true that manufacturing labour increases tenfold, a hundredfold, the value of raw material, thus dispensing ten, a hundredfold, increased profits throughout the nation, and from this fact is deduced the following argument. The production of a hundred weight of iron the gain of only 15 francs to the various workers therein engaged. This hundred weight of iron, converted into watchsprings, is increased in value by this process, 10,000 francs. Who can pretend that the nation is not more interested in securing the 10,000 francs than the 15 francs worth of labour? In this reasoning it is forgotten that international exchanges are, no more than individual exchanges, affected through weight and measure. The exchange is not between a hundred weight of unmanufactured iron and a hundred weight of watchsprings, nor between a pound of wool just shorn and a pound of wool just manufactured into cashmere, but between a fixed value in one of these articles and a fixed equal value in another. To exchange equal value with equal value is to exchange equal labour with equal labour and it is therefore not true that the nation which sells its hundred francs worth of cloth or of watchsprings gains more than the one which furnishes its hundred francs worth of wool or of iron. In a country where no law can be passed, no contribution imposed without the consent of the governed, the public can be robbed only after it has first been cheated. Our own ignorance is the primary, the raw material of every act of extortion to which we are subjected and it may safely be predicted of every softism that it is the forerunner of an act of spoilation. Good public, whenever therefore you detect a softism in a petition, let me advise you put your hand upon your pocket for be assured it is that which is particularly the point of attack. Let us then examine what is the secret design which the ship owners of Bordeaux and Haver and the manufacturers of lions would smuggle in upon us by this distinction between agricultural produce and manufactured produce. It is, say the petitioners of Bordeaux, principally in the first class that which comprehends raw material untouched by human labour, that we find the principal encouragement of our merchant vessels, that a wise system of political economy would require that this class should not be taxed. The second class, articles which have received some preparation, may be considered as taxable. The third, articles which have received from labour, all the finish of which they are capable, we regard as most proper for taxation. Considering, say the petitioners of Haver, that it is indispensable to reduce immediately and to the lowest rate, the raw material, in order that manufacturing industry may give employment to our merchant vessels, which furnish its first and indispensable means of labour. The manufacturers could not allow themselves to be behindhand in civilities towards the ship owners, and accordingly the petition of lions demands the free introduction of raw materials. In order to prove, it remarks, that the interests of manufacturing towns are not opposed to those of maritime cities. This may be true enough, but it must be confessed that both, taken in the sense of the petitioners, are terribly adverse to the interest of agriculture and of consumers. This, then, gentlemen, is the aim of all your subtle distinctions. You wish the law to oppose the maritime transportation of manufactured articles, in order that the much more expensive transportation of the raw materials, should, by its larger bog, in its rough, dirty, and unimproved condition, furnish a more extensive business to your merchant vessels. And this is what you call a wise system of political economy. Why not also petition for a law requiring that fur trees imported from Russia should not be admitted without their branches, bark, and roots? That Mexican gold should be imported in the state of ore, and Buenos Aires leathers only allowed an entrance into our ports, while still hanging to the dead bones in putrifying bodies, to which they belong. The stockholders of railroads, if they can obtain a majority in the chambers, will no doubt soon favour us with the law forbidding the manufacture, of the brandy used in Paris. For, surely, they would consider it a wise law, which would, by forcing the transportation of ten casks of wine, instead of one of brandy, thus furnish to Parisian industry an indispensable encouragement to its labour, and at the same time give employment to railroad locomotives. Until when will we persist in shutting our eyes upon the following simple truth? Labour and industry, in their general object, have but one legitimate aim, and this is the public good, to create useless industrial pursuits, to favour superfluous transportation, to maintain a superfluous labour, not for the good of the public, but at the expense of the public, is to act upon a patissio principi. For, it is the result of labour, and not labour itself, which is a desirable object, all labour without a result, is clear loss. To pay sailors for transporting rough dirt and filthy refuse across the ocean, is about as reasonable as it would be to engage their services, and pay them for pelting the water with pebbles. Thus we arrive at the conclusion that political softisms, notwithstanding their infinite variety, have one point in common, is the constant confounding of the means, with the end, and the development of the former at the expense of the latter. End of Section 8, Recording by Katie Riley. April 2010. Section 9 of softisms of the protectionists. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Softisms of the protectionists by Frédéric Bastia. Translated by Horace White. Section 9. 22. Metaphors. A softism will sometimes expand and extend itself through the whole tissue of a long and tedious theory. Often it contracts into a principle and hides itself in one word. Heaven preserve us, said Paul Louis, from the devil and from the spirit of metaphor. And truly it might be difficult to determine which of the two sheds the most noxious influence over our planet. The devil, you will say, because it is he who implants in our hearts the spirit of spoilation. I, but he leaves the capacity for checking abuses by the resistance of those who suffer. It is the genius of softism which paralyzes this resistance. The sword which the spirit of evil places in the hands of the aggressor would fall powerless if the shield of him who was attacked were not shattered in his grasp by the spirit of softism. Malbranche has, with great truth, inscribed upon the front piece of his book The Sentence. Ever is the cause of human misery. Let us notice what passes in the world. Ambitious hypocrites may take a sinister interest in spreading, for instance, the germ of national emnities. The noxious seed may, in its developments, lead to a general conflagration, check civilization, spill torrents of blood, and draw upon the country that most terrible of scourges, invasion. Such hateful sentiments cannot fail to degrade in the opinion of other nations the people among whom they prevail and force those who retain some love of justice to blush for their country. These are fearful evils, and it would be enough that the public should have a clear view of them, to induce them to secure themselves against the plotting of those who would expose them to such heavy chances. How, then, are they kept in darkness? How, but by metaphors? The meaning of three or four words is forced, changed, and depraved, and all is said. Such is the use made, for instance, of the word invasion. A master of French ironworks exclaims, save us from the invasion of English iron. An English landholder cries, let us oppose the invasion of French corn, and forthwith all their efforts are bent upon raising barriers between these two nations. Hence follows isolation. Isolation leads to hatred, hatred to war and war to invasion. What matters it, say the two Sophists, is it not better to expose ourselves to a possible invasion than to meet a certain one? And the people believe and the barriers are kept up. And yet what analogy can exist between an exchange and an invasion? What resemblance can possibly be discovered between a man of war vomiting fire, death and desolation over our cities and a merchant vessel which comes to offer in free and peaceable exchange produce for produce? Much in the same way has the word inundation been abused. This word is generally taken in a bad sense and it is certainly a frequent occurrence for inundations to ruin fields and sweep away harvests. But if, as in the case of the inundations of the Nile, they were to leave upon the soil a superior value to that which they carried away, we ought, like the Egyptians, to bless and deify them. Would it not be well before declining against the inundations of foreign produce and checking them with expensive and embarrassing obstacles to certify ourselves whether these inundations are of the number desolate or of those which fertilize a country? What would we think of Mehmet Ali if, instead of constructing at great expense, dams across the Nile to increase the extent of its inundations, he were to scatter his piasters in attempt to deepen its bet that he might rescue Egypt from the defilement of the foreign mud which is swept down upon it from the mountains of the moon? Exactly such a degree of wisdom do we exhibit when at the expense of millions we strive to preserve our country. From what? From the blessings with which nature has gifted other climates. Among the metaphors which sometimes conceal, each in itself, a whole theory of evil, there is none more common than that which is presented under the words tribute and tributary. These words are so frequently employed as synonyms of purchase and purchaser that the terms are now used almost indifferently, and yet there is as distinct a difference between a tribute and a purchase as between a robbery and an exchange. It appears to me that it would be quite as correct to say cartouche has broken open my strongbox and has bought a thousand crowns from me as to state as I have heard done to our honorable deputies, we have paid in tribute to Germany the value of a thousand horses which she has sold us. The action of cartouche was not a purchase because he did not put, and with my consent, into my strongbox an equivalent value to that which he took out. Neither could the purchase money paid to Germany be tribute because it was not on our part of forced payment, gratuitously received on hers, but a willing compensation from us for a thousand horses which we ourselves judged to be worth five hundred thousand francs. Is it necessary then seriously to criticize such abuses of language? Yes, for very seriously are they put forth in our books and journals. Nor can we flatter ourselves that those expressions of uneducated writers, ignorant even of the terms of their own language. They are current with a vast majority, and among the most distinguished of our writers. We find them in the mouths of our Diarrgos, Dupins, Villiers, of peers, deputies, and ministers, men whose words become laws and whose influence might establish the most revolting sophisms as the basis of the administration of their country. A celebrated modern philosopher has added to the categories of Aristotle the Sophism which consists in expressing in one word a patissio principie. He cites several examples and might have added the word tributary to his nomenclature. For instance, the question is to determine whether foreign purchases are useful you answer hurtful and why because they render us tributary to foreigners. Truly here is a word which begs the question at once. How has this delusive figure of speech introduced itself into the rhetoric of monopolists? Money is withdrawn from the country to satisfy the capacity of a victorious enemy. Money is also withdrawn from the country to pay for merchandise. The analogy is established between the two cases calculating only the point of resemblance and abstracting that by which they differ. And yet it is certainly true that the non reimbursement in the first case and the reimbursement freely agreed upon in the second establishes between them so decided a difference as to render it under the same category. To be obliged with a dagger at your throat to give a hundred francs or to give them willingly in order to obtain a desired object truly these are cases in which we can perceive little similarity. It might just as correctly be said that it is a matter of indifference whether we eat our bread or have it thrown into the water because in both cases it is destroyed. Here draw a false conclusion as in the case of the word tribute by a vicious manner of reasoning which supposes an entire similitude between two cases their resemblance only being noticed and their difference suppressed. Conclusion All the sophisms which I have so far combated relate to the restrictive policy and some even on this subject and those of the most remarkable I have in pity to the reader passed over, acquired rights, unsuitableness exhaustion of money etc etc but social economy is not confined within this narrow circle. Forearism, Saint Simonism Communism, Agrarianism Anti-rentism Mysticism, Sentimentalism False Philanthropy affected aspirations for a comarical equality and fraternity questions relative to luxury wages, machinery to the pretended tyranny of capital to colonies, outlets population to immigration, association imposts and loans have encumbered the field of science with a crowd of parasitical arguments Sophisms whose rank growth calls for the spade and the weeding hoe I am perfectly sensible of the defect of my plan or rather absence of plan by attacking as I do one by one so many incoherent Sophisms which clash and then again often mingle with each other I am conscious that I condemn myself to a disorderly and capricious struggle and am exposed to perpetual repetitions I should certainly much prefer to state simply how things are without troubling myself to contemplate the thousand aspects under which ignorance supposes them to be to lay down at once the laws under which society prospers or perishes would be virtually to destroy at once all Sophisms When Laplace described what up to his time was known of the movements of celestial bodies he dissipated without even naming them all the astrological reveries of the Egyptians, Greeks and Hindus much more certainly than he could have done by attempting to review them directly through innumerable volumes Truth is one and the work which it expounds is an imposing and durable edifice error is multiple and of ephemeral nature The work which compats it cannot bear in itself a principle of greatness or of durability But if power and perhaps opportunity have been wanting to me to enable me to proceed in the manner of Laplace and of say I still cannot but believe that the mode adopted by me has also its modest usefulness It appears to me likewise to be well suited to the once of the age and to the broken moments which it is now the habit to snatch for study A treatise has without doubt incontestable superiority but it requires to be read meditated and understood It addresses itself to the select few Its mission is to fix attention and then to enlarge the circle of acquired knowledge A work which undertakes the refutation of vulgar prejudices cannot have so high a name It aspires only to clear the way for the steps of truth to prepare the minds of men to receive her to rectify public opinion and to snatch from unworthy hands dangerous weapons which they misuse It is above all in social economy that this hand-to-hand struggle this ever-reviving combat with popular errors has a true practical utility Sciences might be arranged in two categories Those of the first class whose application belongs only to particular professions can be understood only by the learned but the most ignorant may profit by their fruits We may enjoy the comforts of a watch We may be transported by locomotives or steamboats although knowing nothing of mechanism and astronomy We walk according to the laws of equilibrium while entirely ignorant of them But there are sciences whose influence upon the public is proportioned only to the information of that public itself and whose efficacy consists not in the accumulated knowledge of some few learned heads but in that which has diffused itself into the reason of man in the aggregate Such are morals hygiene, social economy and in countries where men belong to themselves political economy Of these sciences Bentham might above all have said it is better to circulate than to advance them What does it profit us that a great man even a god should promulgate moral laws if the minds of men steeped in error will constantly mistake vice for virtue and virtue for vice What does it benefit us that Smith say, and according to Mr. DeSaint-Chammons political economists of every school should have proclaimed the superiority in all commercial transactions of liberty above restraint if those who make laws and for whom laws are made are convinced of the contrary These sciences which have very properly been named social are again peculiar in this that they, being of common application no one will confess himself ignorant of them If the object be to determine a questioning chemistry or geometry nobody pretends to have an innate knowledge of the science or is ashamed to consult Mr. Tenor or to seek information from the pages of Legendre or Bezot But in the social sciences authorities are rarely acknowledged as each individual daily acts upon his own notions whether right or wrong of morals hygiene and economy of politics or things he has a right to pros comments decide and dictate in these matters Are you sick? There is not a good old woman in the country who is not ready to tell you the cause and the remedy of your sufferings It is from humours in the blood says she you must be purged But what are these humours or are there any humours at all? On this subject she troubles herself but little This good old woman comes into my mind whenever I hear an attempt made to account for all the maladies of the social body by some trivial form of words It is superabundance of produce tyranny of capital industrial plethora or other such nonsense of which it would be fortunate if we could say verbatimoses parteria cute nihil for these are errors from which fatal consequences follow From what precedes the two following results may be deduced First that the social sciences, more than others necessarily abound in softisms because in their application each individual consults only his own judgment and his own instincts Second that in these sciences softisms are especially injurious because they mislead opinion on a subject in which opinion is power is law Two kinds of books that are necessary in these sciences those which teach and those which circulate those which expound the truth and those which combat error I believe that the inherent defect of this little work repetition is what is likely to be the cause of its principal utility Among the softisms which it has discussed each has undoubtedly its own formula and tendency but all have a common root and this is the forgetfulness of the interests of men considered as consumers By showing that a thousand mistaken roads all lead to this great generative softism I may perhaps teach the public to recognize to know and to mistrust it under all circumstances After all I am less at forcing convictions than at waking doubts I have no hope that the reader as he lays down my book will exclaim I know my aspirations will be fully satisfied if he can but sincerely say I doubt I doubt for I begin to fear that there may be something illusory in the supposed blessings of scarcity softism one I am not so certain the beneficial effect of obstacles softism two effort without result no longer appears to me so desirable as result without effort softism three I understand that the more an article has been labored upon the more is its value but in trade due to equal values sees to be equal because one comes from the plow and the other from the workshop softism 21 I confess that I begin to think it's singular that mankind should be better of hindrances and obstacles or should grow rich upon taxes and truly I would be relieved from some anxiety would be really happy to see the proof of the fact as stated by the author of the softisms that there is no incompatibility between prosperity and justice between peace and liberty between the extension of labor and the advance of intelligence softisms 14 and 20 without then giving up entirely to arguments which I am yet in doubt whether to look upon as fairly reasoned or as paradoxical I will at least seek enlightenment from the masters of the science I will now terminate this sketch by a last and important recapitulation the world is not sufficiently conscious of the influence exercised over it by sophistry when might ceases to be right and the government of mere strength is dethroned sophistry transfers the empire to cunning and subtlety it would be difficult to determine which of the two tyrannies is most injurious to mankind men have an immoderate love for pleasure influence, consideration power in a word for riches and they are by an almost unconquerable inclination pushed to procure these at the expense of others but these others who form the public have a no less strong inclination to keep what they have acquired and this they will do if they have the strength and the knowledge to affect it they play so important a part in the affairs of this world half then to agents force and cunning she has also two checks courage and knowledge force applied to spoilation furnishes the great material for the annals of men to retrace its history would be to present almost the entire history of every nation Assyrians Babylonians Greeks Romans Arabs without counting the more recent expeditions of the English in India the French in Africa the Russians in Asia etc. etc but among civilized nations surely the producers of riches are now become sufficiently numerous and strong to defend themselves does this mean that they are no longer robbed they are as much so as ever and moreover they rob one another the only difference is that spoilation has changed her agents she acts no longer by force but by cunning to rob the public it is necessary to deceive them to deceive them it is necessary to persuade them that they are robbed for their own advantage and to induce them to accept an exchange for their property imaginary services and often worse hence spring in all their varieties then since force is held in check sophistry is no longer only an evil it is the genius of evil and requires a check in its turn this check must be the enlightenment of the public which must be rendered more subtle than the subtle a little tardy stronger than the strong good public I now dedicate to you this first essay though it must be confessed that the preface is strangely transposed and the dedication a little tardy end of section 9 end of part 1 recording by Katie Riley April 2010 section 10 of Sophism's protectionists this is a LibriVox recording all LibriVox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org Sophisms of the Protectionists by Frédéric Bastia translated by Horace White section 10 part 2 Sophisms of Protection second series the request of industry to the government is as modest as that of diogenes to Alexander stand out of my sunshine Bentham one natural history of spoilation why do I give myself up to that dry science political economy the question is a proper one all labor is so repugnant in its nature that one has the right to ask of what use it is let us examine and see I do not address myself to those philosophers who if not in their own names at least in the name of humanity preface to adore poverty I speak to those who hold wealth in esteem and understand by this word not the opulence of the few but the comfort the well-being, the security the independence the instruction, the dignity of all there are only two ways by which the means essential to the preservation the adornment and the perfection of life may be obtained production and spoilation some persons may say spoilation is an accident a local and transient abuse denounced by morality punished by the law and the intention of political economy still however benevolent or optimistic one may be he is compelled to admit that spoilation is practiced on so vast a scale in this world and is so generally connected with all great human events that no social science and least of all political economy can refuse to consider it I go farther that which prevents the perfection of the social system at least in so far as it is capable of perfection is the constant effort of its members to live and prosper at the expense of each other so that if spoilation did not exist society being perfect the social sciences would be without an object I go still farther when spoilation becomes a means of subsistence for a body of men united by social ties in course of time they make a law which sanctions it a morality which glorifies it it is enough to name some of the best defined forms of spoilation to indicate the position it occupies in human affairs first comes war among savages the conqueror kills the conquered to obtain an uncontested if not incontestable right to game next slavery man learns that he can make the earth fruitful by labor he makes this division with his brother you work and I eat then comes superstition according as you give or refuse me that which is yours I will open to you the gates of heaven or of hell finally monopoly appears its distinguishing characteristic is to allow the existence of the grand social law while it brings the element of force into the discussion and thus alters the just proportion between service received and service rendered spoilation always bears within itself the germ of its own destruction very rarely the many to spoil a few in such a case the latter soon become so reduced that they can no longer satisfy the cupidity of the former and spoilation ceases from the sustenance almost always the few oppress the many and in that case spoilation is nonetheless undermined for if it has force as an agent as in war and slavery it is natural that force in the end should be on the side of the greater number and if deception is the agent as with superstition and monopoly it is natural that the many should ultimately become enlightened another law of providence wars against spoilation it is this spoilation not only displaces wealth but also destroys a portion war annihilates values slavery paralyzes the faculties monopoly transfers wealth from one pocket to another but it always occasions the loss of a portion in the transfer this is an admirable law without it provided the strength of oppressors and oppressed were equal spoilation would have no end a moment comes when the destruction of wealth is such that the despoiler is poorer than he would have been if he had remained honest so it is with a people when a war costs more than the booty is worth with a master who pays more for slave labor than for free labor with a priesthood which has so stupefied the people and destroyed its energy that nothing more can be gotten out of it with a monopoly which increases its attempts at absorption as there is less to absorb just as the difficulty of milking increases with the emptiness of the utter monopoly is a species of the genus spoilation it has many varieties among them sinecure privilege and restriction upon trade some of the forms it assumes are simple and naive like feudal rights under this regime the masses are despoiled and know it other forms are more complicated often the masses are plundered and do not know it it may even happen that they believe that they owe everything to spoilation not only what is left to them but what is taken from them and what is lost in the operation I also assert that in the course of time thanks to the ingenious machinery of habit many people become spoilers without knowing it or wishing it monopolies of this kind are begotten by fraud and nurtured by error they vanish only before the light I have said enough to indicate that political economy has a manifest practical use it is the torch which unceasing deceit and dissipating error destroys that social disorder called spoilation someone a woman I believe has correctly defined it as the safety lock upon the property of the people commentary if this little book were destined to live three or four thousand years to be read and re-read pondered and studied phrase by phrase word by word and letter by letter from generation to generation like a new Quran if it were to fill the libraries of the world with avalanches of annotations explanations and paraphrases I might leave to their fate in their rather obscure consciousness the thoughts which precede but since they need a commentary it seems wise to me to furnish it myself the true inequitable law of humanity is the free exchange of service for service spoilation consists in destroying by force or by trickery the freedom of exchange in order to receive a service without rendering one forcible spoilation is exercised thus wait till a man has produced something then take it from him by violence it is solemnly condemned by the decalogue thou shalt not steal when practiced by one individual on another it is called robbery and leads to the prison when practiced among nations it takes the name of conquest and leads to glory why this difference it is worthwhile to search for the cause it will reveal to us an irresistible power public opinion which, like the atmosphere envelops us so completely that we do not notice it we're also never said a truer thing than this a great deal of philosophy is needed to understand the facts which are very near to us the robber, for the reason that he acts alone has public opinion against him he terrifies all who are about him yet, if he has companions he plumes himself before them on his exploits and here we may begin to notice the power of public opinion for the approbation of his band deserves to obliterate all consciousness of his turpitude and even to make him proud of it the warrior lives in a different atmosphere the public opinion which would rebuke him is among the vanquished he does not feel its influence but the opinion of those by whom he is surrounded approves his acts and sustains him he and his comrades are vividly conscious of the common interest which unites them the country which has created enemies and dangers needs to stimulate the courage of his children to the most daring to those who have enlarged the frontiers and gathered the spoils of war are given honors reputation glory poets sing their exploits fair women weave garlands for them and such is the power of public opinion that it separates the idea of injustice from spoilation and even reads the dispoiler of the consciousness of his wrongdoing the public opinion which reacts against military spoilation as it exists among the conquered and not among the conquering people has very little influence but it is not entirely powerless it gains in strength as nations come together and understand one another better thus it can be seen that the study of languages and the free communication of peoples tend to bring about the supremacy of an opinion opposed to this sort of spoilation unfortunately it often happens that the nations adjacent to a plundering people are themselves spoilers when opportunity offers and hence are impute with the same prejudices then there is only one remedy time it is necessary that nations learn from their harsh experience the enormous disadvantage of dispoiling each other you say there is another restraint moral influences but moral influences have for their object the increase of virtuous actions how can they restrain these acts of spoilation when these very acts are raised by public opinion to the level of the highest virtues a potent moral influence than religion has there ever been a religion more favorable to peace or more universally received than Christianity and yet what has been witnessed during 18 centuries men have gone out to battle not merely in spite of religion but in the very name of religion a conquering nation does not always wage offensive war its soldiers are obliged to protect the heart stones of the country, the families the independence and liberty of their native land at such a time war assumes a character of sanctity and grandeur the flag blessed by the ministers of the god of peace represents all that is sacred on earth the people rally to it as the living image of their country and their honor the war like virtues are exalted above all others when the danger is over and by a natural reaction of the spirit of vengeance which confounds itself with patriotism they love to bear the cherished flag from capital to capital it seems that nature has thus prepared the punishment of the aggressor it is the fear of this punishment and not the progress of philosophy which keeps arms in the arsenal for it cannot be denied that those people who are most advanced in civilization make war and bother themselves very little with justice when they have no reprisals to fear witness the Himalayas the Atlas and the Caucasus if religion had been impotent if philosophy is powerless how is war to cease political economy demonstrates that even if the victors alone are considered war is always begun in the interest of the few and at the expense of the many all that is needed then is that the masses should clearly perceive this truth the weight of public opinion which is yet divided would then be cast entirely on the side of peace forcible speculation also takes another form without waiting for a man to produce something in order to romp him they take possession of the man himself deprive him of his freedom and force him to work they not say to him if you will do this for me I will do that for you but they say to him you take all the troubles we all the enjoyments this is slavery now it is important to inquire whether it is not in the nature of uncontrolled power always to abuse itself for my part I have no doubt of it and should as soon expect to see the following proceed from the stone itself as to trust force within any defined limits I should like to be shown a country where slavery has been abolished by the voluntary action of the masters slavery furnishes a second striking example of the impotence of philosophical and religious sentiments in a conflict with the energetic activity of self-interest this may seem sad to some modern schools which seek the reformation of society in self-denial let them begin by reforming the nature of man in the Antilles the masters from father to son have since slavery was established professed the Christian religion many times a day they repeat these words all men are brothers love thy neighbor as thyself in this are the law and the prophets yet they hold slaves and nothing seems to them more legitimate or natural do modern reformers hope that their mortal creed will ever be as universally accepted as popular as authoritative or as often on all lips as the gospel if that has not passed from the lips to the heart over or through the great barrier of self-interest the system will work this miracle well then is slavery invulnerable no self-interest which founded it will one day destroy it provided the special interests which have created it do not stifle those general interests which tend to overthrow it another truth demonstrated by political economy is that free labor is progressive slave labor stationary hence the triumph of the first over the second is inevitable what has become of the cultivation of indigo by the blacks free labor applied to the production of sugar is constantly causing a reduction in the price slave property is becoming proportionately less valuable to the master slavery will soon die out in America unless the price of sugar is artificially raised by legislation accordingly we see today the masters their creditors and representatives making vigorous efforts to maintain these laws which are the pillars of the edifice unfortunately they still have the sympathy of people among whom slavery has disappeared from which circumstance the sovereignty of public opinion may again be observed if public opinion is sovereign in the domain of force it is much more so in the domain of fraud fraud is its proper sphere stratagem is the abuse of intelligence imposter on the part of the dispoiler implies credulity on the part of the despoiled and the natural antidote of credulity is truth it follows that to enlighten the mind is to deprive this species of spoilation of its support I will briefly pass in review a few of the different kinds of spoilation which are practiced on an exceedingly large scale the first which presents itself is spoilation through the avenue of superstition in what does it consist in the exchange of food, clothing luxury, distinction influence, power substantial services for fictitious services if I tell a man I will render you an immediate service I am obliged to keep my word or he would soon know what to depend upon and my trickery would be unmasked but if I should tell him in exchange for your services I will do you immense service not in this world but in another after this life you may be eternally happy or miserable and that happiness or misery depends upon me I am a vicar between God and man and can open to you the gates of heaven for a pal if that man believes me he is at my mercy this method of imposter has been very extensively practiced since the beginning of the world and it is well known to what omnipotence the egyptian priests attained by such means it is easy to see how imposters proceed it is enough to ask oneself what he would do in their place if I entertaining views of this kind had arrived in the midst of an ignorant population and were to succeed by some extraordinary act or marvelous appearance in passing myself off as a supernatural being I would claim to be a messenger from God having an absolute control over the future destinies of men then I would forbid all examination of my claims I would go still further and as reason would be my most dangerous enemy I would interdict the use of reason at least as applied to this dangerous subject I would taboo as the savages say this question and all those connected with it to agitate them discuss them or even think of them should be an unpardonable crime certainly it would be the acme of art thus to put the barrier of the taboo upon all intellectual avenues which might lead to the discovery of my imposture what better guarantee of its perpetuity than to make even doubt sacrilege however I would add accessory guarantees to this fundamental one for instance in order that knowledge might never be disseminated among the masses I would appropriate to myself and my accomplices the monopoly of the sciences I would hide them under the veil of a dead language and hieroglyphic writing and in order that no danger might take me unawares I would be careful to invent some ceremony which day by day would give me access to the privacy of all consciences it would not be a miss for me to supply some of the real ones of my people especially if by doing so I could add to my influence and authority for instance men need education and moral teaching and I would be the source of both thus I would guide as I pleased the minds and hearts of my people I would join morality to my authority by an indissoluble chain and I would proclaim that one could not exist without the other so that if any audacious individual attempted to meddle with a tabooed question society which cannot exist without morality would feel the very earth tremble under its feet and would turn its wrath upon the rash innovator when things have come to this pass it is plain that these people are more mine than if they were my slaves the slave curses his chain but my people will bless theirs and I shall succeed in stamping not on their foreheads but in the very center of their consciences the seal of slavery public opinion alone can overturn such a structure of iniquity but where can it begin if each stone is tabooed it is the work of time and the printing press God forbid that I should seek to disturb those consoling beliefs which link this life of sorrows to a life of felicity but that the irresistible longing which attracts us toward religion has been abused no one, not even the head of Christianity, can deny there is it seems to me one signed by which you can know whether the people are or are not dupes examine religion and the priest and see whether the priest is the instrument of religion or religion the instrument of the priest if the priest is the instrument of religion if his only thought is to disseminate its morality and its benefits on the earth he will be gentle, tolerant humble, charitable and full of zeal his life will reflect that of his divine model he will preach liberty and equality among men and peace and fraternity among nations he will repel the allurements of temporal power and will not allay himself with that which, of all things in this world has the most need of restraint he will be the man of the people the man of good advice and tender consolations he will be the guardian the man of the evangelist if on the contrary religion is the instrument of the priest he will treat it as one dozen instrument which has changed bent and twisted in all ways so as to get out of it the greatest possible advantage for oneself he will multiply tabooed questions his morality will be as flexible as seasons men and circumstances he will seek to impose on humanity by gesticulations and studied attitudes an hundred times a day he will mumble over words whose sense has evaporated and which have become empty conventionalities he will traffic in holy things but just enough not to shake the faith in their sanctity and he will take care that the more intelligent the people are the less open shall the traffic be he will take part in the intrigues of the world and he will always side with the powerful on the simple condition that they side with him in a word it will be easy to see in all his actions that he does not desire to advance religion by the clergy but the clergy by religion and as so many efforts indicate an object and as this object according to the hypothesis can be only power and wealth that the people are dupes is when the priest is rich and powerful it is very plain that a true religion can be abused as well as a false one the higher its authority the greater the fear that it may be severely tested but there is much difference in the results abuse always stirs up to revolt the sound, enlightened intelligent portion of a people this inevitably weakens faith and the weakening of a true religion is far more lamentable than of a false one this kind of spoilation and popular enlightenment are always in an inverse ratio to one another for it is in the nature of abuses to go as far as possible not that pure and devoted priests cannot be found in the midst of the most ignorant population but how can the nave be prevented from donning the cassock and nursing the ambitious hope of wearing the mitre dispoilers obey the Malthusian law they multiply it with the means of existence and the means of existence of naves is the credulity of their dupes turn whichever way you please you always find the need of an enlightened public opinion there is no other cure all another species of spoilation is commercial fraud a term which seems to me too limited because the tradesmen who changes his weights and measures is not alone culpable but also the physician who receives a fee for evil council the lawyer who provokes litigation etc in the exchange of two services one may be of less value than the other but when the service received is that which has been agreed upon it is evident that spoilation of that nature will diminish with the increase of public intelligence the next in order is the abuse in the public service an immense field of spoilation so immense that we can give it but partial consideration if god had made man a solitary animal everyone would labor for himself individual wealth would be in proportion to the services each one rendered to himself but since man is a social animal one service is exchanged for another a proposition which you can transpose if it suits you in society there are certain requirements so general so universal in their nature that provision has been made for them in the organizing of the public service among these is the necessity of security society agrees to compensate in services of a different nature those who render it the service of guarding the public safety in this there is nothing contrary to the principles of political economy do this for me i will do that for you the principle of the transaction is the same although the process is different but the circumstance has great significance in private transactions each individual remains the judge both of the service which he renders and of that which he receives he can always decline in exchange or negotiate elsewhere there is no necessity of an interchange of services except by previous voluntary agreements such is not the case with the state especially before the establishment of representative government whether or not we require its services whether they are good or bad we are obliged to accept such as are offered and to pay the price it is the tendency of all men to magnify their own services and to disparage services rendered them and private matters would be poorly regulated if there was not some standard of value this guarantee we have not or we hardly have it in public affairs but still society composed of men however strongly the contrary may be insinuated obeys the universal tendency the government wishes to serve us a great deal much more than we desire and forces us to acknowledge as a real service that which sometimes is widely different and this is done for the purpose of demanding contributions from us in return the state is also subject to the law of Malthus it is continually living beyond its means it increases in proportion to its means and draws its support solely to the substance of the people woe to the people who are incapable of limiting the sphere of action of the state liberty, private activity riches, well-being independence, dignity depend upon this there is one circumstance which must be noticed chief among the services which we ask of the state is security that it may guarantee this to us it must control a force capable of overcoming all individual or collective domestic or foreign forces which might endanger it combined with that fatal disposition among men to live at the expense of each other which we have before noticed this fact suggests a danger patent to all you will accordingly observe on what an immense scale spoilation by the abuses of the government has been practiced if one should ask what service has been rendered the public and what return has been made therefore by such governments as Assyria, Babylon Egypt, Rome, Persia Turkey, China Russia, England Spain and France he would be astonished at the enormous disparity at last representative government was invented and a priori one might have believed that the disorder would have ceased as if by enchantment the principle of these governments is this the people themselves by their representatives shall decide as to the nature and extent of the public service and the remuneration for those services the tendency to appropriate the property of another and the desire to defend one's own are thus brought in contact one might suppose that the latter would overcome the former assuredly I am convinced that the latter will finally prevail but we must concede that thus far it has not why for a very simple reason governments have had too much sagacity people too little governments are skillful they act methodically consecutively on a well concerted plan which is constantly improved by tradition and experience they study men and their passions if they perceive for instance that they have war like instincts they incite and inflame this fatal propensity they surround the nation with dangers through the conduct of diplomats and then naturally ask for soldiers sailors, arsenals and fortifications often they have but the trouble is that they don't have them then they have pensions places and promotions to offer all this calls for money hence loans and taxes if the nation is generous the government proposes to cure all the ills of humanity it promises to increase commerce to make agriculture prosperous to develop manufacturers to encourage letters and arts to banish misery etc all that is necessary is to create offices and to pay public functionaries in other words their tactics consist in presenting as actual services things which are but hindrances then the nation pays not for being served but for being subservient governments assuming gigantic proportions and by absorbing half of all the revenues the people are astonished that while marvelous labor-saving inventions destined to infinitely multiply productions are ever increasing in number they are obliged to toil on as painfully as ever and remain as poor as before this happens because while the government manifests so much ability the people show so little thus when they are called upon to choose their agents those who are to determine the sphere of and compensation or governmental action whom do they choose the agents of the government they entrust the executive power with the determination of the limit of its activity and its requirements they are like the bourgeois gentelhum who referred the selection and number of his suits of clothes to his tailor however things go from bad to worse and at last the people open their eyes not to the remedy for there is none as yet but to the evil governing is so pleasant a trade that everybody desires to engage in it thus the advisors of the people do not cease to say we see your sufferings and we weep over them it would be otherwise if we governed you this period which usually lasts for some time for some time when the people are conquered the expenses of the war are added to their burdens when they conquer there is a change of those who govern and the abuses remain this lasts until the people learn to know and defend their true interests thus we always come back to this there is no remedy but in the progress of public intelligence certain nations seem remarkably inclined to become the prey of governmental spoilation they are those where men not considering their own dignity and energy would believe themselves lost if they were not governed and administered upon in all things without having traveled much I have seen countries where they think agriculture can make no progress unless the state keeps up experimental farms that there will presently be no horses the state has no stables and that fathers will not have their children educated or will teach them only immoralities if the state does not decide what it is proper to learn in such a country revolutions may rapidly succeed one another and one set of rulers after another be overturned but the governed are nonetheless governed at the caprice and mercy of their rulers until the people see that it is better to leave the greatest possible number of services in the category of those which the parties interested exchange after a fair discussion of the price we have seen that society is an exchange of services and should be but an exchange of good and honest ones but we have also proven that men have a great interest in exaggerating the relative value of the services they render one another I cannot indeed see any other limit to these claims than the free acceptance or refusal of those to whom these services are offered hence it comes that certain men resort to the law to curtail the natural prerogatives of this liberty this kind of is called privilege or monopoly we will carefully indicate its origin and character everyone knows that the services which he offers in the general market are the more valued and better paid for the scarcer they are each one then will ask for the enactment of a law to keep out of the market all who offer services similar to his this variety of spoilation being the chief subject of this volume I will say little of it here and will restrict myself to one remark when the monopoly is an isolated fact it never fails to enrich to whom the law has granted it it may then happen that each class of workmen instead of seeking the overthrow of this monopoly claim a similar one for themselves this kind of spoilation thus reduced to a system becomes the most ridiculous of mystifications for everyone and the definite result is that each one believes that he gains more from a general market impoverished by all it is not necessary to add that this singular regime also brings about a universal antagonism between all classes all professions and all peoples that it requires the constant but always uncertain interference of government that it swarms with the abuses which have been the subject of the proceeding paragraph that it places all industrial pursuits in hopeless insecurity and that it accustoms men to place upon the law and not upon themselves the responsibility for their very existence it would be difficult to imagine a more active cause of social disturbance justification it may be asked why this ugly word spoilation it is not only course but it wounds and irritates it turns calm and moderate men against you and embitter the controversy I earnestly declare that I respect individuals I believe in the sincerity of almost all the friends of protection and I do not claim that I have any right to suspect the personal honesty, delicacy of feeling or philanthropy of any one I also repeat that protection is the work, the fatal work of a common error of which all or nearly all are at once victims and accomplices but I cannot prevent things being what they are just imagine some diogenes putting his head out of his tub and saying Athenians you are served by slaves have you never thought that you practice on your brothers the most iniquitous spoilation or a tribune speaking in the forums Romans you have laid the foundation of all your greatness on the pillage of other nations they would only state undeniable truths but must we conclude from this that Athens and Rome were inhabited only by dishonest persons that Socrates and Plato Cato and Cincinnati were despicable characters who could harbor such a thought but these great men lived amidst surroundings that relieved their consciences of the sense of this injustice even Aristotle could not conceive the idea of a society existing without slavery in modern times slavery has continued to our own day without causing many spruples among the planters armies have served as the instruments of grand conquests that is to say of grand spoilations is this saying that they are not composed of officers and men as sensitive of their honor even more so perhaps than men in ordinary industrial pursuits men who would blush at the very thought of theft would face a thousand deaths rather than stoop to a base action it is not individuals who are to blame but the general movement of opinion which deludes and deceives them a movement for which society in general is culpable thus it is with monopoly I accuse the system and not individuals society as a mass and not this or that one of its members if the greatest philosophers have been able to deceive themselves as to the iniquity of slavery how much easier is it for farmers and manufacturers to deceive themselves as to the nature and effects of the protective system End of section 10 Recording by Katie Riley April 2010