Harmonies of Political Economy: Translated from the Third French Edition, with a Notice of the Life and Writings of the AuthorBastiat, Frédéric
Philosophy
Harmonies of Political Economy: Translated from the Third French Edition, with a Notice of the Life and Writings of the Author
Bastiat, Frédéric
Economics
The explanation which Condillac has given appears to me to be quite
unsatisfactory and empirical—in fact, it explains nothing. “From
the very fact,” he says, “that an exchange is made, it follows that
there must be profit for the two contracting parties, for otherwise
it would not take place. Then each exchange includes two gains for
humanity.”
Holding this proposition as true, we see in it only the statement of
a result. It is in this way that the ‹Malade Imaginaire› explains the
narcotic virtue of opium:—
Quia est in eo
Virtus dormitiva
Quæ facit dormire.
Exchange includes two gains, you say. How? Why? It results from the
fact that it takes place. But why does it take place? What motive has
induced the contracting parties to effect the exchange? Has Exchange
in itself a mysterious virtue, necessarily beneficial, and incapable
of explanation?
Others make the advantage consist in this, that the one gives away
a commodity of which he has too much in order to receive another of
which he has too little. Exchange, they say, is a ‹barter of the
superfluous for the necessary›. This is contradicted by facts which
pass under our own eyes; for who can say that the peasant, in giving
away the corn which he has raised, but which he is never to eat,
gives away a superfluity? I see in this axiom very clearly how two
men may make an accidental arrangement, but I see no explanation of
progress.
Observation gives us a more satisfactory explanation of the power of
Exchange.
Exchange has two manifestations—namely, union of forces, and
separation of occupations.
It is very clear that in many cases the united force of several men
is superior, all things considered, to the sum of their individual
forces. Suppose that what is wanted is to remove a heavy load. Where
a thousand men in succession may fail, it is possible that four men
may succeed by uniting their efforts. Just let us reflect how few
things were ever accomplished in this world without union! [p104]
And yet this is only the concurrence of muscular forces in a common
design. Nature has endued us with very varied physical, intellectual,
and moral faculties. There are in the co-operation of these faculties
endless combinations. Is it wished to accomplish a useful work, like
the construction of a road, or the defence of a country? One gives
the community the benefit of his strength, another of his agility,
another of his courage, another of his experience, foresight,
imagination, even of his reputation. It is easy to comprehend
that the same men acting singly could not have attained, or even
conceived, the same results.
Now, union of forces implies Exchange. To induce men to co-operate,
they have the prospect of participating in the benefit to be
obtained. Each makes the other profit by his Efforts, and he profits
by the other’s Efforts in return, which is Exchange.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account