Generally, what Bastiat is saying in the Petition, (this has a much longer name which I will omit), is that if the sun was extinguished, then candles would be in higher demand, and candlemakers would make more money, and this would improve the economy (Bastiat Frédéric, 2011). This is a comical argument, and I think Bastiat knew this when writing it. Clearly, there is no way in which we could extinguish the sun. This would lead to imminent death of all of mankind. Bastiat is a very knowledgeable man, and he knows this truth. However, looking at it from a purely economic standpoint, it does make sense. There is a similar argument going on right now that discusses the issue of curing cancer. Finding the cure for cancer is obviously a massive goal in the medical community, and there are people who believe that the cure has already been found. The issue is that if a cure for cancer is revealed and made accessible, there will be a massive economic loss for doctors, hospitals, and especially oncology specific practices.
Bastiat believed deeply that citizens functioning under a government should be protected by that government. While taxation is controversial, Bastiat had a very good look at it. He believed that there was no appropriate reason to use citizens' taxation to financially advance other citizens. I completely agree with this outlook on taxation. There are necessary needs for taxation such as road work, government buildings, and other community things that require funding. However, the idea that money should be taken from someone in the form of taxes and given to another citizen is a challenging concept for me to get behind.
“Government cannot satisfy one party without adding to the labor of the others.” (Bastiat Frédéric, 2011)
As complex, and at times maybe self-contradicting, Bastiat’s opinions about government are, I think this quote from his writing does a good job summing up how he viewed government and taxation.
I studied both the attached version of The Law and a different version translated from the French by Dean Russell.
“Since no individual acting separately can lawfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces.” (Bastiat Frédéric, 2011).
What Bastiat is saying here is if an individual does not have the right to tell people what they can and cannot do and make these restrictions punishable by arrest and in extreme cases death, then why can a group of individuals make this decision (Bastiat Frédéric, 2011). I fully understand where this thinking comes from and I even agree with it in that sense. Let us take law enforcement for example. Members of organized law enforcement such as police officers are permitted to act a certain way that is different from the general public with the conviction of following the rules that have been set before them. These individuals are allowed to drive faster than the speed limit in order to catch up to someone who is acting wrong. These people are permitted to carry guns and even fire them without facing punishment if the situation permits this. I would not want to live in a world where any random individual can act in the way that these officers act. However, these police officers are merely individuals pulled right out of their own environment. Even though this thinking seems skewed, I don’t want to live in a world without law enforcement. I don’t know what the solution to this dilemma is, but I do think that there is something to be said for the mere humanity of these types of individuals. Though these people go through a serious amount of training to become certified to act in this way, there are still some stories of police officers acting in extremely unjust ways, and no one was able to stop them because they were held to such a high title. Being a part of organized law enforcement does not negate the simple fact that these people are just that. People. I think that this was the thinking behind Bastiat’s writing. How do some people, just because they are a part of a government organized system, get to act so differently than other people? Especially when these actions can decide between the death and life of other citizens.
There are many other examples of this specific issue within our society, but I think the general idea that Bastiat was trying to get his readers to ponder was: What happens when the laws we set in place end up giving too much power to the people in power? Once it gets to this point, then society begins to walk on very thin ice, and it becomes very complicated to get out of. Once you have people in power that use the law as a weapon to keep themselves in a place of extreme power, it is very hard to undo that.
Bastiat Frédéric. (2011). Petition of the Manufacturers of Candles, Waxlights, Lamps, Candlelights, Street Lamps, Snuffers, Extinguishers, and the Producers of Oil, Tallow, Resin, Alcohol, and, Generally, of Everything Connected
with Lighting. In The bastiat collection (pp. 227–232). essay, Ludwig von
Mises Institute.
Bastiat Frédéric. (2011). Government. In The bastiat collection (pp. 95–107). essay, Ludwig von Mises Institute.
Bastiat Frédéric. (2011). The Law. In The bastiat collection (pp. 49–94). essay, Ludwig von Mises Institute.
