Frederic Basitat’s ‘Petition’ essay is a satire on the use of natural light, which in this instance is known as the foreign competitor, in relation to manufacturers of artificial light such as candles and lamps. These two factors are used to oppose taxation on imports because of cheaper alternatives available. With the essay being written metaphorically, the words and meanings were confusing, but one quote that stood out is,
What we pray for is that it may please you to pass a law ordering the shutting up of all windows, skylights, dormer-windows, outside and inside shutters, curtains, blinds, bull’s-eyes; in a word, of all openings, holes, chinks, clefts, and fissures, by or through which the light of the sun has been in use to enter houses, to the prejudice of the meritorious manufactures with which we flatter ourselves we have accommodated our country – a country that, in gratitude, ought not to abandon us now to a strife so unequal (Bastiat, 2011, p. 228).
This quote asks an absurd task of the French because blocking sunlight out, and avoiding it at all costs, is quite impossible to do. Natural sunlight is cheaper to obtain than buying artificial lights from a manufacturer, so shutting out sunlight to force consumers to buy expensive products explains what society is doing when placing taxes on imports. Bastiat (2011, p. 231) further explains that nature and human labor work together to create products, and the work done by nature is a gift, as well as products sent from abroad save them additional labor costs. While the petition seems effective in terms of saving resources that otherwise would have been wasted when spending more rather than using the cheaper alternative that is already available, it does not support the side that has to provide the labor costs. Comparing imports to something that is natural is not completely accurate when it still costs someone else energy and money to produce it.
Following his ‘Petition’ essay, Bastiat goes on to write ‘Government’ which strives to find the meaning and purpose of Government in French society. He gives his version of what he believes government is with,
Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else (Bastiat, 2011, p. 99).
As a society, we depend on others to get by in our day-to-day lives by supporting products and services provided by other people. We do not, however, realize how much we rely on this, and often find it difficult to face the truth that we benefit through the work of others. Government follows this by taking from the people, such as imposing taxes, but not returning the value that they may promise by helping our community and giving us what we want. I believe that Bastiat’s definition accurately describes government and the people that fall beneath it because the government is trying to live through our expense, just like we are trying to live through others. Even though this is written for the French society after the French Revolution when they created the French Republic, this definition can easily define Government in America. The role of government is a controversial topic that has no clear meaning that can satisfy everyone. This definition follows his main point in the previous essay, ‘Petition,’ asking that government withdraws taxes from salt, liquor, letters, and other necessities (Bastiat, 2011, p. 97). I see both good and bad to his statement here. On one hand, taxing necessity items is wrong because we have no choice but to pay the tax because we need it to get by. On the other hand, we are still getting it at a better price than what it would take for us to provide it ourselves because we must add in the time it takes to produce it, which is eliminated by outsourcing.
Bastiat furthers this discussion of the role of government by stating that it has two hands, one to give and one to receive (2011, p. 102). They give the people protection in resources, but in return take money, and to some extent, personal rights such as freedom of expression. He explains this more in ‘The Law,’ but implies that government will never be able to give back the full amount that we give to them. It is difficult to claim that the government just takes stuff without returning it back to us because we cannot always see behind the scenes. He concludes his essay with,
For ourselves, we consider that Government is and ought to be nothing whatever but common force organized, not to be an instrument of oppression and mutual plunder among citizens; but, on the contrary, to secure to everyone his own, and to cause justice and security to reign (2011, p. 107).
Government should be a unit that leads the people in a way that is mutually beneficial to everyone, which includes giving the people what they need to help them survive and not enacting oppressive laws that do more harm than good. I believe that Bastiat has good intentions with the way he views government, but I think that he makes a few points that conflict with society such as free trade because it is not entirely feasible for everyone involved.
Bastiat’s essay ‘The Law’ follows ‘Government’ with an in-depth analysis of the individual rights we are given from God, and how those can be impacted by Government failing to protect these rights with unjust laws.
The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense; it is the substitution of collective for individual forces, for the purpose of acting in the sphere in which they have a right to act, of doing what they have a right to do, to secure persons, liberties, and properties, and to maintain each in its right, so as to cause justice to reign over all (Bastiat, 2011, p. 51).
As long as life, liberty, and property are protected, the law is just and rightful. In reference to ‘Government,’ Bastiat (2011, p. 52) rephrases what he said about everybody living at the expense of others, with the idea that people strive for self-preservation and development that is found at the expense of others. Because of this, some laws are created at the disadvantage at others so one specific group of people can benefit. The group that has the disadvantage in most cases of laws is the lower class because they do not have the money and resources to defend themselves against injustice, such as taxation. The lower class is not the only group that is affected, but the basis of sex, age, and race can also play a role in the inequalities of certain laws. Bastiat (2011, p. 56) mentions suffrage and the injustice of not letting women and children vote on the presumption that they are incapable. In the United States, women were not given the right to vote until 1920 and the voting age was not lowered until the late 1900s. To presume someone is incapable without justified evidence takes away individual’s liberty, which is a natural right given to everyone at birth. Incapability can be solved with education to learn about a topic rather than stay ignorant and withdrawn from their natural rights. This leads to Bastiat’s views on education. Discovering his view on education was troubling because although it sounds like he is against it, he was implying that free education would lead to more costly injustices.
Who is to give education and tools of labor? Society, who owes them (Bastiat, 2011, p. 84).
This quote shows his perspective that he does not believe that education should come from the government, but rather the society. On one hand, this can hurt society because not everyone can afford to pay for proper education. On the other hand, this is a logical view to have because when society works towards educating themselves, they are more likely to engage in their activities rather than being taught something they may not want to learn. This is true of education in the United States. When children are forced into their education, they do not always use their best effort as they would if they truly wanted to be educated. Having society provide the tools for growth betters the community by uniting them towards a common goal.
Bastiat mentions “legal plunder,” which is taking something that belongs to one person and giving it to someone else. Bastiat (2011, p. 61) aims for absence of plunder in which includes the basis of natural rights. Bastiat is implying that taxation is a legal plunder because it violates property rights by taking what is ours, money and resources, for their own benefit, or so we believe. Although I believe that government is still trying to do what is best for the people with taxation, they are making it more difficult to get the necessities of life. From this, government needs to focus on listening to what the people want in order to maintain life, liberty, and property, and to rid the society of plunder.
Although Bastiat’s essays included descriptive terminology that was difficult to decode at times, he connected all his essays with the singular point: the abolition of taxation because of its injustice to society. By his ‘Petition’ to the ‘Government,’ he was able to thoroughly analyze injustice in ‘The Law’ from taking away the natural rights of the people.
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.
