The Law

Bastiat saw the world with clarity while the rest of us still take the world for granted and either accept or not accept the world because of our own confirmation of biases. Like his other works What Is Seen and What is not Seen (e.g. The Broken Window Effect) and The Law (or perversion of it), he merely speaks of what should be obvious. Bastiat influenced later economists such as von Mises, Rothbard, Hazlitt, Sowell, and Hayek. The fact that he is not taught in our schools reveals a failure of our educational system. Teach Marx if you want but teach Bastiat too!

This was written in 1850, just after the 1848 revolution in France. Bastiat was concerned by all the different groups that were trying to use The Law or in Hayeks words, The State to remake society into their vision of a more perfect society. Bastiat argues that trying to use the law to help out one group does so at the expense of another group, he calls this legal plunder and points out how in the long run this will ruin society. Bastiat starts off saying that the basic gifts man has from God are: life, liberty, and property. It is appropriate and correct to defend yourself, your liberty, and your property. The Law was created to ensure that individuals in society were allowed to use these gifts. Bastiat says that unfortunately The Law is abused by the greed and false philanthropy of man. There are two basic ways of getting ahead in life, the first is to work hard and produce, the second is to plunder from others. When trade off and risks for plunder are better than labor, many people will turn to plunder. It is very tempting for those who make laws to use the law to plunder. Bastiat says legal plunder is to use the law to take property, which if was done without the benefit of the law would have been considered a crime. He has some fairly pointed barbs at socialists. He says many of the writers at his time seem to view people as raw material, to be formed or controlled. He says that most socialists see mankind as evil, while they (the socialists) are good. This leads the socialists to feeling justified in using The Law to make mankind be good. Bastiat asks why so many people in government feel that mankind makes too many mistakes, but that they in government are nobler and will make better choices. This is short, and because the original format was a pamphlet, Bastiat acknowledges that it is not complete. So many of his points and arguments are brief. This is a good call to action, to encourage people to be more informed about their government, and to work to limit the government. So much of what Bastiat said long ago is still true.

Its amazing that something written around 1850 would be so prophetic, with feelings of deja vu every other page. A must read for anyone interested in keeping the heavy hand of the state off our backs, and in preserving individual choice in our lives. The prose is, of course, mid-19th century, and the country he discusses is the France of that time, with the Socialists having come into view, but it is entirely relevant to America from about 1930 onwards, particularly now when the Socialists (still here in spite of their historic failures) are in charge.

A great reminder of what is Law and how it works and how it can and is abused. Perfect for the times we are living. I recommend this to anyone who wonders why, the more laws are passed, the more we slip into lawlessness.

My Niece teaches in a Home School Group and her young students read this book. They also read Shakespeare and perform in Shakespeare plays as young as 8... Our Education System needs an Overhaul. Here is a good start.

The Law is concentrated and opinionated. I throughly enjoyed reading it, even if I disagreed with some of his points (see below). The concepts are simple and elegant, making this an immortal book. However, the values are strongly one-sided, and lacking concrete examples. Read on for my book review. The Law, published in 1850 France, declares the purpose of the law is to protect life, liberty and property. Thus, when the law is used otherwise, it is misused. Frédéric Bastiat calls this “legal plunder.” There are two types of legal plunder. The first type is motivated by “naked greed.” For example, think of lobbying. In theory, lobbying allows direct democratic participation, by you and I. But modern lobbying usually seeks to manipulate the laws to favor selfish economic agendas. Thus, even for-profit businesses are willing to invest in lobbyists. Bastiat says this is an abuse of the law. Modern economists agree, calling this “rent-seeking,” causing “deadweight-losses” and “opportunity-costs.” Indeed, very few support the commodification of politics. However, most support laws that are philanthropic, and for good reason. They believe the government has a duty to provide education, welfare and food stamps. Bastiat disagrees. The second type of legal plunder is motivated by “misconceived philanthropy.” Although pursued with good motives, Bastiat says that philanthropy and justice are mutually exclusive ends of the law. They “contradict each other,” because misplaced philanthropy necessarily infringes on inalienable rights. Bastiat would probably agree that taxation for police and court systems are acceptable, because they exist to protect our rights. Nevertheless, he reaches the extreme conclusion that education should not be provided by the state! Our automatic tendency is to reject him as ridiculous. But ignore that tendency for a moment, and consider Bastiat’s point: if you are against corn subsidies, does that mean you are against affordable food? No. Just because Bastiat is against public education, does not mean he is against education. Bastiat overlooks practical considerations by focusing on theory. If education was not funded by taxpayers, would private education alone be sufficient? I could imagine the free markets organizing more efficient school systems than the government. But I can also imagine illiteracy, crime and child labor rates increasing. It’s not even clear that taxpayers would would save money. That being said, I wonder if Bastiat rewrote the book today, if he would have reached a different conclusion. Today we consider education to be a human right. And remember, when this book was published, education was much less important in society. Although Bastiat is obviously educated, articulate and well-read, the language he chooses is too absolute for compromise. Even though conflicting with modern conceptions of government. Bastiat gives us a simple formula to identify legal plunder. Ask, “if a private citizen did what the government is doing, would it still be legal?” For example, it’s illegal to steal, even to donate the stolen property to the Salvation Army. Therefore, taxation is a type of systematic stealing. Bastiat quotes a few writers at length, including Rousseau. He criticizes them for proposing systems of government that treat humans like manipulable matter. Bastiat decries the superimposition of materialism and political science. He defends human dignity. He says that human rights precede the law, and not vice versa. Finally, Bastiat reminds us, “the safest way to make [the laws] respected is to make them respectable.” We sometimes forget that the laws crumble in revolutions. If people do not respect the laws, they have no power. Even force cannot prop up oppressive laws, as France witnessed in their bloody revolution. Bastiat seems to think the proper role of the law is what the common-law courts do, not the legislature. The courts enforce rights and prevent injustice. The legislature is officious and political. For me, the word “politician” implies flip-flopping and filibusters. Bastiat wrote during a transition. Europe was shedding its monarchies, and replacing them with legislatures. Bastiat realized that dictatorships do not require kings, because the laws can serve the same purpose. The law is always chosen by a few, and those few should not “regulate our consciences, our ideas, our will, our education, our sentiments, our works, our exchanges, our gifts, our enjoyments.” According to him, the happiest, safest societies are the freest ones.

One of the best books Ive ever read. Bastiat highlighted in 1849 the exact plights and issues of our time in regard to the collusion of special interests and government to the detriment of us all. Bastiat also in this short work defines man in the pursuit of life, liberty and property and makes the most succinct and effective arguments against socialism then and now. A life-changing book. If every American or human being on Earth were aware of the information in this book the world would be a much different place, a much better place. I cant recommend the book too much!

Prescient book for what happened to the U.S. At the time this book was written, the author considered the U.S. one of the most just nations, but he described perfectly what happens, and did happen, when you have an increase in the size of government, and the power of the legislators to legally plunder the citizens through the laws they enact.

What a simple and poignant essay on governments and politicians. This is an absolute must-read primer on government bodies and politicos constantly overstepping their bounds. In a world chock full of superficial and vapid political arguments spewed by mainstream media and propagated by indolent social media shares owing to humans natural predilection for inflammatory headlines and negativity in general, this book offers deep and simply stated insight into a theoretical manifesto of what a fair government should subscribe to. History repeats itself. Seemingly, its all its been doing in the annals of mankind. The similarites, nay the identical political atmospheres, drawn between now and Bastiats 19th century references of American and Europe should make any thinking citizen, of any country, motivated to understand what a country is and the role of its governing body. This book is not a bible. It is just an additional thinking voice in a world which has become diluted by inane debate and issues. Read this book and think with it.

I found this an excellent review of historical thinking prior to the industrial revolution. As I read books written in the 1800s I see the thoughts of the time. Unfortunately, most writers did not take into consideration that our various civilizations, and cultures came about on the backs of slaves. Slavery allowed the Greek Republic to bloom before Christ. I believe most just assumed that slavery though wrong, was a necessary evil. However today we face a different reality, we still have slavery but we no longer need it to build culture, due to robotics and automation. We need to change the law, not to take from the rich and give to the poor, but to provided incentives for the people who own the factors of productions (companies, stocks, and resources) to share these resources via ownership transference to the common worker, and not to the state, as in socialism. I think as a people we can make this happen without a violent revolution, because if we can not have full employment in the future, how does the common person purchase the goods and services available. I would state that improvements in technology, along with automation and robotics will eventually eliminate most jobs.