

The Law
-
Steven Tursi
> 3 dayFrederick Bastiat was a French Farmer in the first half of the 19th century who watched his countrys government assume more and more power. That is what I thought made this book unique - In the first paragraph, he states his intent of the book to be an alert to his countrymen - which is probably why the book is so emotional as well as succinct. Bastiat manages to describe the purpose of law, from a religious standpoint, in the first 3-4 pages. The rest of the book is mostly specific details of how his description of the proper purpose of the law has been thwarted in France in 1850. Many of the same principals apply today. For three bucks and an hour of your time, this book is guaranteed to engage you and make you think. In my experience, its ability to persuade people is uncanny.
-
H. Herstad
> 3 dayI think that other reviews have done a fine job of praising the importance and genius of Bastiats work. And I thoroughly enjoyed his reasoning and clarity as well. But I was pretty disappointed by the quality of this edition. The book has misplaced punctuation and typos in it -- the kind that would be caught by a simple spell checker. Maybe Im picky, but I find such errors to be rather distracting when reading. When I buy a book, I expect that someone has carefully proofread it, but somehow that seems to have been overlooked here. So, 5+ stars for Bastiat, and a generous 2 stars for the publisher.
-
Mark Gaska
> 3 dayI have not read this work for 45 years. I have a greater appreciation now in light of the current political and administrative State we live in today as opposed to any other time of my life. I a ‘Just’ society it should be required reading and adherence for judges and society as a whole. I doubt the population as it exist today would even come close to grasping the importance of ‘The Law’. Thus Liberty does not exist.
-
Christina
> 3 dayPrescient 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.
-
Deborah B.
> 3 dayThe law perverted! Yes this books reveals what the law has been made to do. This is an old book but it is very relevant today, as it shows just how far the law has been perverted because of peoples ignorance of it. A must read!
-
Byren Stowe
> 3 dayExcellent read. The realization that the same political turmoil we are going through now was going on in 19th century France is stunning and Bastiat has a way of laying out the truth unlike any of todays pundits.
-
Huck Finn
> 3 dayThe one dissenter of the philosophers of his day. Bastiat considered the periods just before, during and after the French revolution. He has a very common sense and very practical God fearing thought process to mankind and the rules we make up while sharing his respect and admiration for the ways of God, the Creator.This man will help any American to see what is true and good about the Constitution for the United States. After all, France adopted our constitution shortly after we did. ~A United States born Natural person
-
Thomas K.
Greater than one weekI 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.
-
David H. Eisenberg
> 3 dayThis proto-libertarian writing by Bastiat stands along with Alexis de Tocqueville as the greatest 19th century political writing contributions to our country. Bastiat is easier to read and much faster. The whole of it in a sitting can be trying to read, though it did sparkle throughout. In any event, Bastiats view would likely be a libertarianism that few would suggest today. For example, even most modern libertarians and conservatives with libertarian streaks like lead-free paint. He might say it interferes with individual property and liberty rights. I really do not know where he would hold on that because though it would interfere with private property, but lead paint clearly was a threat to us, particularly small children and a 20th century Bastiat might appreciate it. Heres a taste of Bastiat I copied onto my computer: Law was the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense. [T]he common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission that that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force—for the same reason—cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups. The law has been perverted by the influence of two entirely different causes: stupid greed and false philanthropy. . . [E]very time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. . . We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want to religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain. Like or love it? Youll like or love him. Offended and love Obamacare and federal governments growth? You will think he is a proto-wing-nut.
-
JR
> 3 dayTo the point! Explains the foundation of law that stands today.