The Law

I have a new mind-crush. My top 5 has gained another member. Bastiat has joined the Who would you have to dinner club along with Locke, Paul, Madison, and either that guy I forgot about or I still have an open space. Oh yeah, Jesus, but that goes without saying. Seriously, this is a great read. This is one of those reads that should be required, but its painfully obvious as to why it isnt. It will be required for my kiddos once theyre around the 7th or 8th grade mark. I think anyone 12 and over could easily grasp and appreciate the concepts laid out in The Law. Not to mention that its a quick read for those that flirt with philosophy, but arent committed. Where did I NOT highlight? I usually try to summarize my reads according to how much I underlined or scribbled. Now that I look back, nearly every page has a remark. So, my major crush topics are 1) Bastiat takes on Rousseau and the Reign of Terror 2) Bastiat takes on Democracy 3) Bastiat is pro-human 4) Bastiat is anti-slavery 5) Bastiat is anti-Socialism. That might be a lot of antis, but his solution is pro-Liberty. Hey Misanthropic Philanthropist guy who thinks hes above mankind and uses men as if theyre raw material- put the Law down. Hey Mr. Fancy Pants Utopian dude who wants to make the world over in your own image- check your vices. I think I have figured out why pro-Liberty books are so short compared to Utopian books. Its a lot quicker to say, we should be free and this is why as opposed to I am an authoritarian bent on making people into new creations, but I have to come across as if I really care about them, hence the 500 page sleeping pill. Except for the Communist Manifesto, and thats chiefly because Marx said hey, quit lying and tell these people who we really are. I should have read this book years ago. It is certainly foundational work.

Frederic Bastiat was a man of my kidney. This is a clear, simple crie de cour from someone who saw the law perverted to an instrument of plunder to almost everyones injury. He is eloquent in his plea for reform. The evil he wants to eradicate is socialism, and its face is all to familiar to readers 150 years after he wrote this powerful critique. Alas, we never learn.

Amazing title, considered the best for me in the issues of liberty, an eye opener in the end for what it is.

What book is is important enough that I read it once a year? The Law by Frederic Bastiat. Written in 1848 as a response to socialism in France, this book essay is just as relevant today as it was then. What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense. Each of us has a natural right-from God-to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend - even by force - his person, 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. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force - for the same reason - cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups. Such a perversion of force would be, in both cases, contrary to our premise. Force has been given to us to defend our own individual rights. Who will dare to say that force has been given to us to destroy the equal rights of our brothers? 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? If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all. My copy of The Law is filled with highlighted yellow phrases. Among them: But, unfortunately, law by no means confines itself to its proper functions. And when it has exceeded its proper functions, it has not done so merely in some inconsequential and debatable matters. The law has gone further than this; it has acted in direct opposition to its own purpose. 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. How has this perversion of the law been accomplished? And what have been the results? The law has been perverted by the influence of two entirely different causes: stupid greed and false philanthropy. Let us speak of the first. Every legislator should be forced to read Bastiats The Law once a month for their entire term and write a synopsis of how they have upheld the ideas contained within it. The tome should be taught in our school systems. It should be drilled into every citizens head from birth until death. When he was alive, Bastiat called the United States the one nation in the world that came close to applying law in a just manner. If he could visit us today, he would puke all over the steps of Congress. He would barf in the halls of the White House. He would upchuck in lobbyists offices all over Washington, D.C. When he was done throwing up, I do believe Bastiat would start a revolution. He would definitely take on our current system of governance because were turning into Socialism Lite Less Filling, More Taxes. 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 demand that the Constituent Assembly give him a small district with all its inhabitants, to try his experiments upon. In the same manner, an inventor makes a model before he constructs the full-sized machine; the chemist wastes some chemicals - the farmer wastes some seeds and land - to try out an idea. But what a difference there is between the gardener and his trees, between the inventor and his machine, between the chemist and his elements, between the farmer and his seeds! And in all sincerity, the socialist thinks that there is the same difference between him and mankind! It is no wonder that the writers of the nineteenth century look upon society as an artificial creation of the legislators genius. This idea - the fruit of classical education - has taken possession of all the intellectuals and famous writers of our country. To these intellectuals and writers, the relationship between persons and the legislator appears to be the same as the relationship between the clay and the potter. Moreover, even where they have consented to recognize a principle of action in the heart of man - and a principle of discernment in mans intellect - they have considered these gifts from God to be fatal gifts. They have thought that persons, under the impulse of these two gifts, would fatally tend to ruin themselves. They assume that if the legislators left persons free to follow their own inclinations, they would arrive at atheism instead of religion, ignorance instead of knowledge, poverty instead of production and exchange. Read The Law. It will change all your assumptions about what the role of government should be in your life in only 76 pages. When youre done, make your friends read The Law. If they wont, stop being friends with them. Send a copy to your Representatives and Congressmen and ask them what the hell they think theyre doing with this country of ours.

The only real downside to this book is vocabulary and the writing style. The content is excellent, but the delivery is of a style and usage of language that modern readers are not familiar with.

If you have no idea what Libertarianism is and would like to understand, this would be a wonderful book for you. I got my mom to read it and she loved it. Its only around 70 pages, so its really short. But there is so much philosophy in here that it will blow your mind. If I could add any one book to the high school curriculum throughout the U.S., it would be this book. The title of the book is called The Law. The title gives away the whole message. Bastiat shares his views on what the function of law should be in any society. Here is the folly that we have committed in this modern day of legislation - Here I encounter the most popular fallacy of our

The Law by Frederic Bastiat is perhaps the clearest and most logically founded explanation of the proper role of the law (government) in society I have yet read, and it is clearly in the same constellation of thought in which you will find the luminary ideas of our nations own brilliant founding. Writing on his deathbed and freshly after the events of the 1848 revolutions, although the logic and consequences of his ideas are timeless, appears to have sharpened his mind and imparts this book with a profoundness and sagacity beyond its 106 short pages. The simple central concept that shines throughout, familiar to Americans and certainly inspired by 1776, is that individuals have natural rights to life, liberty, and to property, which is the fruit of their efforts and faculties. Injustice is any violation of these rights, and the only just purpose of the law is their protection. As nature gave us the ability to defend these rights for ourselves, law is only their organized defense in the society. At the core of the logic of his thought is a practical model of human behavior, one clearly developed by his background as an exporter. (The Law is his seminal work, his previous works were on economics.) He states A science of economics must be developed before a science of politics can be logically formulated. Essentially, economics is the science of determining whether the interests of human beings are harmonious or antagonistic. This must be known before a science of politics can be formulated to determine the proper functions of government. Implicit in his reasoning is that once the organized monopoly on force inherent in government is wielded only to protect each individuals naturally endowed rights, human interests are harmonious and no further extension of the law is necessary. Human nature and interests are not inherently nor completely harmonious of course, necessitating the need for law in the first place. The vices he clearly identifies in human nature which must be guarded against are based in mans tendency to live and prosper at the expense of others, or plunder. This vice ranges from the hard vice of illegal plunder, represented by anything from a petty theft conducted by an individual to the expansionist conquest undertaken by a whole people, to the softer sounding vice of legal plunder in which the law has been perverted to take from one class and give to another a positive right (i.e. to education, or health care, or housing) in the name of false philanthropy. Positive rights, which can only be produced by someone elses labor, come only with the destruction of naturally endowed negative rights as the law -force- cannot produce goods, cannot enlighten, cannot heal and cannot clothe by its mere existence. For the law to create these things it is only by use of force to coerce others to do them or take from their labor. This legal plunder sets up war of class against class, union against employer, trade against trade, as each races to beat the other in using the unchecked power of government to favor them. As simple proof of this he points out how no mob or lobbyist has ever rioted a police station in demand for a benefit, instead they storm the legislature where legal plunder can be drafted into law. Socialism is at the heart of trying to provide positive rights and thus perverting the law towards instituting legal plunder. It was also at the heart of the 1848 revolutions, and it is not surprising then that his arguments against it receive the lions share of this work. There are many parallels in his arguments against socialism applicable today, due to the unwavering nature of man over time. Bastiat describes in concise detail the pitfalls, traps, and false assumptions behind socialism, even in its most well intentioned and noble forms. Besides the inability of the law to create positive rights by fiat the largest false assumption is the inertness and malleability of men. That law is needed to create society, to socially engineer a mass of beings that can be formed by force and whom left to their own devices would slide into greed, destitution, and misery. This is at the heart of the Utopian fantasy which is so infectious to mens souls yet so ultimately poisonous. For if the natural tendencies of men are so poor, Bastiat asks us, how is it that the organizers of the law, the legislators, can be relied upon to be of a higher and better nature, pointing out the ironic self contradiction behind socialist and utopian engineering. Men are neither lifeless beings waiting for instruction from the law, man existed and developed before the law was created, nor are they so vile as to need the law to guide them in their lives and build their society for them, otherwise the cruel trick of mans cold nature would leave the development of good civil societies impossible. He shows how contradictions are not only inherent but central to socialism, and how socialism inevitably leads to tryanny and often to dictatorship. He also shows how faith in a free society, one in which government does not extend into providing education, health care, etc. is consistent with religious faith in how God made mans nature, and draws an interesting comparison between how modern secular societies are seeming to ineluctably move away from classical liberty and towards socialism. In another interesting flourish Bastiat also predicted how slavery would threaten to destroy the American republic before the Civil War, perhaps not an earth shattering prediction of the time but one he explains with an elegant degree of logic. An amazing work which should be read by anyone interested in liberty, natural rights, philosophy, and the state of government. Each page rings with insight and reason for which you will be the better for having read.

Is the law a sword or a shield? What is the limiting principle of Government? Bastiat considers these weighty topics and presents the views of many other great thinkers thoughtfully and concisely. Easy read yet extremely thought provoking. Highly recommend for everyone.

One of the best essays ever on the proper role of government.