"Frederick Bastiat - That Which Is Seen-That Which Is Not" - читать интересную книгу автора (Bastiat Frederick)

of activity, because we desire to see those activities, on the one
hand free, and on the other seeking their own reward in themselves.
Thus, if we think that the State should not interfere by taxation in
religious affairs, we are atheists. If we think the State ought not to
interfere by taxation in education, we are hostile to knowledge. If we
say that the State ought not by taxation to give a fictitious value to
land, or to any particular branch of industry, we are enemies to
property and labour. If we think that the State ought not to support
artists, we are barbarians who look upon the arts as useless.

Against such conclusions as these I protest with all my
strength. Far from entertaining the absurd idea of doing away with
religion, education, property, labour, and the arts, when we say
that the State ought to protect the free development of all these
kinds of human activity, without helping some of them at the expense
of others, -we think, on the contrary, that all these living powers of
society would develop themselves more harmoniously under the influence
of liberty; and that, under such an influence no one of them would, as
is now the case, be a source of trouble, of abuses, of tyranny, and
disorder.

Our adversaries consider, that an activity which is neither
aided by supplies, nor regulated by Government, is an activity
destroyed. We think just the contrary. Their faith is in the
legislator, not in mankind; ours is in mankind, not in the legislator.

Thus M. Lamartine said, "Upon this principle we must abolish
the public exhibitions, which are the honour and the wealth of this
country." But I would say to M. Lamartine, -According to your way of
thinking, not to support is to abolish; because, setting out upon
the maxim that nothing exists independently of the will of the
State, you conclude that nothing lives but what the State causes to
live. But I oppose to this assertion the very example which you have
chosen, and beg you to remark, that the grandest and noblest of
exhibitions, one which has been conceived in the most liberal and
universal spirit -and I might even make use of the term humanitary,
for it is no exaggeration -is the exhibition now preparing in
London; the only one in which no Government is taking any part, and
which is being paid for by no tax.

To return to the fine arts: -there are, I repeat, many strong
reasons to be brought, both for and against the system of Government
assistance. The reader must see, that the especial object of this work
leads me neither to explain these reasons, nor to decide in their
favour, nor against them.

But M. Lamartine has advanced one argument which I cannot
pass by in silence, for it is closely connected with this economic
study. "The economical question, as regards theatres, is comprised
in one word -labour. It matters little what is the nature of this