Economic Sophisms

INTRODUCTION. 3

...deductions, if we can, in a light so clear that truth and error must show themselves plainly, openly, and without disguise—and so that the victory, once gained, may rest clearly with either restriction or freedom.

And here I must make an essential observation.

Some extracts from this small book have already appeared in the Journal des Économistes The premier French economic journal of the 19th century, where Bastiat frequently published his essays..

In a review—which was otherwise very favorable—written by the Viscount de Romanet, he assumes that I am calling for the total abolition of customs duties Taxes on imported goods. He is mistaken. I am calling for the abolition of the protectionist system original: régime. We do not refuse to pay taxes to the government, but we want, if possible, to persuade the citizens to stop taxing one another. Napoleon once said that "the customhouse should not be used to generate revenue, but as a way to protect domestic industry." We argue the opposite. We contend that the customhouse ought not to become a tool for mutual looting among the working classes, but that it may be used to raise revenue as legitimately as any other tax.

I am so far from demanding the abolition of customs—or at least, speaking for myself—that I see that branch of tax revenue as our future safety net. I believe our resources are capable of providing the Treasury with huge returns; and to be blunt, I must add that, seeing how slowly sound economic ideas spread while government budgets grow so rapidly, I am inclined to rely more on the Treasury's desperate need for money than on the power of enlightened public opinion to drive commercial reform.

You might ask me then, "What is your conclusion?" I reply that here there is no need to reach a specific conclusion. I am simply fighting against sophisms A sophism is a clever but false argument intended to deceive.; that is all.

But you might object that it is not enough to tear down—one must also build up. That is true; but to destroy an error is to build up the truth that stands against it.

After all, I am not reluctant to state my wishes. I would like to see public opinion support a customs law written roughly in these terms:

"Articles of primary necessity shall pay a duty of 5 percent of their value original: ad valorem."