Petition...
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.
Government
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.
Law
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.
Sources
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.
Responding to "Petition…"
I did not think Bastiat meant that imminent death would happen to all of mankind if they found a way to extinguish the sun. I understood him as implying how even something so illogical could get government and law enforcement overreaching over something that is inherently "natural" to the world and already provided freely. This predisposes us to the contradiction that is the government (from his point of view) before we read about it in Government and Law. This also makes your analogy a bit skewed for me. Although you provided a new lens for me to see "The Petition"
This part got me to analyze the reading from an economic market perspective. In particular, how sometimes the systems own needs (in economic market sense profit) can go against the very interests that spanned the system to begin with (capitalism for consumer economic power and mobility due to a "free-er" market). This is a nice economic interpretation of the contradictions that Bastiat laments on through "Law" and "Government".
Responding to "Government"
I don't think Bastiat is particularly contradictory; I would argue that the majority of his writing is him parlaying the contradictions he's observed to us in a self-insertable writing style that can appear contradictory. From the beginning of government, Bastiat echoes all of the speakers' and press's cries, with half of them contradicting themselves within their very own demands.
Responding to "Law"
I fundamentally agree with your thoughts and opinions on "Law." I found your use of current day law enforcement to explain your stance and thoughts effective. It was a good way to say what Bastiat was stating, while explaining why your stance was what it was.
Those were really strong realities that helped contrast the differences between the demands a government must meet and how internally contradictory they could be. Which you go on to acknowledge this dilemma, even admitting you do not know the solution [I do not know who would]. It was great how you further showed the societal implications that can permeate the government and law enforcement choices by mentioning the unjust actions of police officers.
I found this a great read! I love the amount of opinion throughout and your willingness to have discourse!
I have to disagree that Bastiat’s opinion on government and the law is contradictory. I think he remains consistent throughout the articles we read; however the analogies he uses can be difficult to extract meaning from.
For example, I think Bastiat is trying to convey that the entire population should not be taxed for something that will not benefit everyone. I do not believe his intent was a discussion on welfare but a more broad discussion about how taxation is legal theft. When an individual is forced into paying a tax regardless of whether or not they take advantage of the program the taxes are funding, their freedoms are being stripped and government is overstepping its bounds. Rather than requiring taxpayers to fund mediocre state-run education, individuals should use that money to send their children to any number of private schools that would crop up as a result of the decentralization of education. That is not to say, however, that an educated society is not of importance, but rather individuals should be allowed to choose where their children go and what kind of curriculum they should be taught instead of being forced to pay a tax that funds public education.
I agree with your points on law enforcement. I think it would be interesting to hear what Bastiat would have to say about law enforcement specifically. He states that the sole purpose of government is to protect against injustice which seems to imply a need for some type of enforcement. I think there obviously has to be limits to the authority that police officers are given but if their job is to uphold the law then there are times when deadly force may be required. It is difficult to wrap my mind around allowing a human to be the judge, jury, and executioner of another human being in a split second, high intensity, high danger situation that law enforcement find themselves in. But, at the same time, without deadly force then we are essentially conceding to a criminal that they can do harm to another individual, effectively nullifying the use of law enforcement in general. Thankfully there are people much smarter than me that can resolve such a dilemma but I would like to see what Bastiat has to say about the current state of law enforcement and how much power they should be granted.
You can tell that this author has put a lot of time and thought into this post. They do an excellent job of giving their thoughts on Bastaits's works, one point that I really agreed with that the author wrote about was when they brought up Bastaits' analogy for supply and demand.While this quote is obviously exaggerated the point still holds true. When dealing with our economy it is important for us to realize that we need an influx of supply and demand in the order for our society to work. Even though most of us would prefer not to spend more money when it comes to inflation, but the truth of the matter is that in order for our society to function we need the inconvenience of market fluctuations. This brings me to the next part of the author's post which I have to agree with. Their next section is about taxation in our community and why there are both good and bad things that come with it. And as in most things in life, things can not be wholly good or bad and it is my opinion that this holds true for taxes as well. The point brought up in this post was that taxes should be used in order to better the community; however, they should not be taken from the working people and given to those who make no effort to make money of their own, and as a result, do not pay taxes. And the discussion of taxes brings us to the final talking point of the post, laws and how they affect everyday people. The author of this post goes into detail about how the people on the side of the law are oftentimes easily susceptible to power madness as once they get a taste they sometimes go to the extremist side and misuse their power oftentimes in order to hurt those they think of as less than them. I think this is interesting because it shows the duality of power, while some go into law to show others that there are people supporting them others go into it for no reason other than the fact that they want to hold people down. Even though there are bad individuals in our law system for most it is a worse thought to think of a world in total chaos where they don’t have anyone to fall back on, so while our justice system is not perfect it is the best one we have at this time."Petition"
The economy has a way of all working together, one thing happening can drastically change the sales or demand of another thing. I felt that you interpreted this analogy in a very unique way and I did not think of it entirely this way. Your analogy interpretation was a very interesting read. I really like how you pointed out the effects of one good can change another, and then it just continues to fall from there. That really helps people understand the economy in different ways, as well as educating them about it. I also feel like unfortunately there is a lot of discoveries that are kept under wraps in order to not negatively impact the social economy. There are so many things that we as a society may not know about, which is very scary to think about from our perspective.
"Government"
The essence of Bastiat's style, I would argue, is him presenting the contradictions he has noticed to us in a self-insertable literary style that can seem contradictory. I don't believe Bastiat is very contradictory. Bastiat repeats all of the newspaper and speaker cries from the outset of government, with part of them opposing their very own claims.
"Law"
Regarding law enforcement, I concur with your arguments. Bastiat could have some fascinating things to say regarding police enforcement in particular, in my opinion. He claims that the only goal of the state is to protect people from injustice, which suggests the necessity for some form of enforcement. I agree that police officers should have some discretion in how they exercise their authority, but I also believe that when it comes to upholding the law, fatal action may occasionally be necessary. In a split-second, high-intensity, high-danger circumstance like the one that law enforcement finds itself in, it is hard for me to see permitting a human to be the judge, juror, and executioner of another person.
Personally I agree with this because I think in society we see this all too much, and when we give too much power to a certain person it can be very difficult to undo. It is important to not give too much power to someone so soon.
You can tell that this author has put a lot of time and thought into this post. They do an excellent job of giving their thoughts on Bastaits's works, one point that I really agreed with that the author wrote about was when they brought up Bastaits' analogy for supply and demand.While this quote is obviously exaggerated the point still holds true. When dealing with our economy it is important for us to realize that we need an influx of supply and demand in the order for our society to work. Even though most of us would prefer not to spend more money when it comes to inflation, but the truth of the matter is that in order for our society to function we need the inconvenience of market fluctuations. This brings me to the next part of the author's post which I have to agree with. Their next section is about taxation in our community and why there are both good and bad things that come with it. And as in most things in life, things can not be wholly good or bad and it is my opinion that this holds true for taxes as well. The point brought up in this post was that taxes should be used in order to better the community; however, they should not be taken from the working people and given to those who make no effort to make money of their own, and as a result, do not pay taxes. And the discussion of taxes brings us to the final talking point of the post, laws and how they affect everyday people. The author of this post goes into detail about how the people on the side of the law are oftentimes easily susceptible to power madness as once they get a taste they sometimes go to the extremist side and misuse their power oftentimes in order to hurt those they think of as less than them. I think this is interesting because it shows the duality of power, while some go into law to show others that there are people supporting them others go into it for no reason other than the fact that they want to hold people down. Even though there are bad individuals in our law system for most it is a worse thought to think of a world in total chaos where they don’t have anyone to fall back on, so while our justice system is not perfect it is the best one we have at this time.Congratulations @averyroark1! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next target is to reach 50 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out our last posts:
Support the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!