Claude Frédéric Bastiat (1801–1850)

Bastiat's most important work was probably "The Law." Published in the year of his death, it is a concise formulation of the case for classic liberalism, and a stern warning against the dark clouds of socialism that were descending upon Europe, particularly after the great upheavals of 1848.

Bastiat begins by clarifying the proper role of law in an enlightened Liberal society: the preservation of life, liberty, and property:

"If every person has the right to defend--even by force--his person, show more his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right--its reason for existing, its lawfulness--is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute."

Bastiat explains how the collectivist agitation sweeping Western Europe in the mid nineteenth century sought to use the law for purposes well outside its purview. In a passage that sounds like it was written today, he laments this unfortunate turn of events:

"The law has been used to destroy its own objective: It has been applied to annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain; to limiting and destroying rights which its real purpose was to respect. The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense."

One of the causes of this perversion of the law, says Bastiat, is greed. To satisfy his needs, man must labor. But needs can also be met by resorting to plunder, i.e., appropriating the fruits of someone else's labor. Socialism is nothing but generalized plunder, where groups who feel aggrieved enter the political process with the goal of using the law to steal from those they consider to be their oppressors.

What are the consequences of this trend?

"It would require volumes to describe them all. Thus we must content ourselves with pointing out the most striking. In the first place, it erases from everyone's consciousness the distinction between justice and injustice...The nature of the law is to maintain justice. This is so much the case that, in the minds of the people, law and justice are one and the same thing. There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are "just" because law makes them so. Thus, in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary for the law to decree and sanction it."

Bastiat's words bring to mind the contemporary wave of legislation and adjudications in the realm of affirmative action. This is one of our own highly-developed methods of legal plunder, and it has done much to "erase from everyone's conscience the distinction between justice and injustice."

Taking the perversion of law to its logical extreme, Bastiat declares:

"By what right does the law force me to conform to the social plans of Mr. Mimerel, Mr. de Melun, Mr. Thiers, or Mr. Louis Blanc? If the law has a moral right to do this, why does it not, then, force these gentlemen to submit to my plans? Is it logical to suppose that nature has not given me sufficient imagination to dream up a utopia also? Should the law choose one fantasy among many, and put the organized force of government at its service only?"

On page after page, Bastiat picks apart socialist ideology, revealing its arrogance and its true intentions. I was particularly struck by the following passage, which carried the heading, "The Socialists Wish to Play God":

Socialists look upon people as raw material to be formed into social combinations. This is so true that, if by chance, the socialists have any doubts about the success of these combinations, they will demand that a small portion of mankind be set aside to experiment upon. The popular idea of trying all systems is well known. And one socialist leader has been known seriously to defend that the Constituent Assembly give him a small district with all its inhabitants, to try his experiments upon.

I conclude with Bastiat's clarion call for classic liberalism:

"Look at the entire world. Which countries contain the most peaceful, the most moral, and the happiest people? Those people are found in the countries where the law least interferes with private affairs; where government is least felt; where the individual has the greatest scope, and free opinion the greatest influence; where administrative powers are fewest and simplest; where taxes are lightest and most nearly equal, and popular discontent the least excited and the least justifiable; where individuals and groups most actively assume their responsibilities, and, consequently, where the morals of admittedly imperfect human beings are constantly improving; where trade, assemblies, and associations are the least restricted..." show less

The main weakness of this book is that Bastiat does not sufficiently analyze the meaning of property; this is despite the fact that Bastiat makes the preservation of property the sole purpose of the law. The result is that Bastiat fails to anticipate arguments for socialism that are based on the nature of property.

That said, Bastiat does well to criticize that species of statism that regards human beings as so much clay to be molded in the hands of the legislator. On this head, Bastiat's show more arguments are effective, passionate, and humane. show less

Bastiat's "La Loi" is undoubtedly an interesting read, for those already of a libertarian-dispostion, and for others curious about the ideas and arguments of those who advocate a limited government. The arguments put across by Bastiat, however, did not win me round to the completely libertarian way of thinking.

The book is certainly short, serving more as an introduction to the ideas of liberty, property and the role of government. However, the style the book is written in makes it difficult show more to pick out some of the more complex arguments, and makes the book quite boring at times. However, it is worth reading as the actual essay is fairly short. show less

Summary: Small government is good government. I mean really small. You should pretty much trust individual people and groups unregulated by law to take care of most of the stuff the current Australian Government does on our/their behalf.

Things I liked:

Interesting argument

Plenty of examples/quotes

Amusing, kind of sarcastic style.

Things I thought could be improved:

Could have spent more time identifying and engaging opposing ideas.

Probably would have been good to to acknowledge some show more weaknesses in his arguments or unanswered questions requiring further investigation (he came off as a bit of know it all).

Highlight:

Probably the bit where he says our mistake isn't in admiring the leaders in the past, its in thinking we can't do any better. show less