第 51 节
作者:管他三七二十一      更新:2021-02-20 05:36      字数:9322
  renewed annually。  The combined deficits of the years 1838 and 1839 amount to forty… seven million five hundred thousand francs。  In 1840; the excess of expenses over receipts is expected to be twenty…two million five hundred thousand francs。  Attention was called to these figures by Lord Ripon。  Lord Melbourne replied:  ‘The noble earl unhappily was right in declaring that the public expenses continually increase; and with him I must say that there is no room for hope that they can be diminished or met in any way。'〃 National:  January 26; 1840。
  A nation is the tenant of a rich proprietor called the GOVERNMENT; to whom it pays; for the use of the soil; a farm… rent called a tax。  Whenever the government makes war; loses or gains a battle; changes the outfit of its army; erects a monu… ment; digs a canal; opens a road; or builds a railway; it borrows money; on which the tax…payers pay interest; that is; the government; without adding to its productive capacity; increases its active capital;in a word; capitalizes after the manner of the proprietor of whom I have just spoken。
  Now; when a governmental loan is once contracted; and the interest is once stipulated; the budget cannot be reduced。  For; to accomplish that; either the capitalists must relinquish their interest; which would involve an abandonment of property; or the government must go into bankruptcy; which would be a fraudulent denial of the political principle; or it must pay the debt; which would require another loan; or it must reduce expenses; which is impossible; since the loan was contracted for the sole reason that the ordinary receipts were insufficient; or the money expended by the government must be reproductive; which requires an increase of productive capacity;a condition excluded by our hypothesis; or; finally; the tax…payers must submit to a new tax in order to pay the debt;an impossible thing。  For; if this new tax were levied upon all citizens alike; half; or even more; of the citizens would be unable to pay it; if the rich had to bear the whole; it would be a forced contribution;an invasion of property。  Long financial experience has shown that the method of loans; though exceedingly dangerous; is much surer; more convenient; and less costly than any other method; consequently the government borrows;that is; goes on capitalizing;and increases the budget。
  Then; a budget; instead of ever diminishing; must necessarily and continually increase。  It is astonishing that the economists; with all their learning; have failed to perceive a fact so simple and so evident。  If they have perceived it; why have they neglected to condemn it?
  HISTORICAL COMMENT。Much interest is felt at present in a financial operation which is expected to result in a reduction of the budget。  It is proposed to change the present rate of increase; five per cent。  Laying aside the politico…legal question to deal only with the financial question;is it not true that; when five per cent。 is changed to four per cent。; it will then be necessary; for the same reasons; to change four to three; then three to two; then two to one; and finally to sweep away increase altogether?  But that would be the advent of equality of conditions and the abolition of property。  Now it seems to me; that an intelligent nation should voluntarily meet an inevitable revolution half way; instead of suffering itself to be dragged after the car of inflexible necessity。
  EIGHTH PROPOSITION。
  Property is impossible; because its power of Accumulation is infinite; and is exercised only over finite quantities。
  If men; living in equality; should grant to one of their number the exclusive right of property; and this sole proprietor should lend one hundred francs to the human race at compound interest; payable to his descendants twenty…four generations hence;at the end of six hundred years this sum of one hundred francs; at five per cent。; would amount to 107;854;010;777;600 francs; two thousand six hundred and ninety…six and one…third times the capital of France (supposing her capital to be 40;000;000;000); or more than twenty times the value of the terrestrial globe!
  Suppose that a man; in the reign of St。 Louis; had borrowed one hundred francs; and had refused;he and his heirs after him;to return it。  Even though it were known that the said heirs were not the rightful possessors; and that prescription had been interrupted always at the right moment;nevertheless; by our laws; the last heir would be obliged to return the one hundred francs with interest; and interest on the interest; which in all would amount; as we have seen; to nearly one hundred and eight thousand billions。
  Every day; fortunes are growing in our midst much more rapidly than this。  The preceding example supposed the interest equal to one…twentieth of the capital;it often equals one…tenth; one… fifth; one…half of the capital; and sometimes the capital itself。
  The Fourieristsirreconcilable enemies of equality; whose partisans they regard as SHARKSintend; by quadrupling production; to satisfy all the demands of capital; labor; and skill。  But; should production be multiplied by four; ten; or even one hundred; property would soon absorb; by its power of accumulation and the effects of its capitalization; both products and capital; and the land; and even the laborers。  Is the phalanstery to be prohibited from capitalizing and lending at interest?  Let it explain; then; what it means by property。
  I will carry these calculations no farther。  They are capable of infinite variation; upon which it would be puerile for me to insist。  I only ask by what standard judges; called upon to decide a suit for possession; fix the interest?  And; developing the question; I ask;
  Did the legislator; in introducing into the Republic the principle of property; weigh all the consequences?  Did he know the law of the possible?  If he knew it; why is it not in the Code?  Why is so much latitude allowed to the proprietor in accumulating property and charging interest;to the judge in recognizing and fixing the domain of property;to the State in its power to levy new taxes continually?  At what point is the nation justified in repudiating the budget; the tenant his farm…rent; and the manufacturer the interest on his capital?  How far may the idler take advantage of the laborer?  Where does the right of spoliation begin; and where does it end?  When may the producer say to the proprietor; 〃I owe you nothing more〃?  When is property satisfied?  When must it cease to steal?
  If the legislator did know the law of the possible; and disregarded it; what must be thought of his justice?  If he did not know it; what must be thought of his wisdom?  Either wicked or foolish; how can we recognize his authority?
  If our charters and our codes are based upon an absurd hypothesis; what is taught in the law…schools?  What does a judgment of the Court of Appeal amount to?  About what do our Chambers deliberate?  What is POLITICS?  What is our definition of a STATESMAN?  What is the meaning of JURISPRUDENCE?  Should we not rather say JURISIGNORANCE?
  If all our institutions are based upon an error in calculation; does it not follow that these institutions are so many shams?  And if the entire social structure is built upon this absolute impossibility of property; is it not true that the government under which we live is a chimera; and our present society a utopia?
  NINTH PROPOSITION。
  Property is impossible; because it is powerless against Property。
  I。 By the third corollary of our axiom; interest tells against the proprietor as well as the stranger。  This economical principle is universally admitted。  Nothing simpler at first blush; yet; nothing more absurd; more contradictory in terms; or more absolutely impossible。
  The manufacturer; it is said; pays himself the rent on his house and capital。  HE PAYS HIMSELF; that is; he gets paid by the public who buy his products。  For; suppose the manufacturer; who seems to make this profit on his property; wishes also to make it on his merchandise; can he then pay himself one franc for that which cost him ninety centimes; and make money by the operation?  No: such a transaction would transfer the merchant's money from his right hand to his left; but without any profit whatever。
  Now; that which is true of a single individual trading with himself is true also of the whole business world。  Form a chain of ten; fifteen; twenty producers; as many as you wish。  If the producer A makes a profit out of the producer B。  B's loss must; according to economical principles; be made up by C; C's by D; and so on through to Z。
  But by whom will Z be paid for the loss caused him by the profit charged by A in the beginning?  BY THE CONSUMER; replies Say。  Contemptible equivocation!  Is this consumer any other; then; than A; B。  C; D; &c。; or Z?  By whom will Z be paid?  If he is paid by A; no one makes a profit; consequently; there is no property。  If; on the contrary; Z bears the burden himself; he ceases to be a member of society; since it refuses him the right of property and profit; which it grants to the other associates。
  Since; then; a nation; like universal humanity; is a vast industrial association which cannot act ou