menu_book Chapter 3

III. And here we have a glimpse of one of the finest harmonies in the social world. I allude to leisure. that leisure that the warlike and tyrannical classes arrange for themselves by the plunder of the workers, but that leisure which is the lawful and innocent fruit of past activity

and economy. In expressing myself thus I know that I shall shock many received ideas. But see, is not leisure an essential spring in the social machine? Without it, the world would never have had a Newton, a Pascal, a Fenlon. Mankind would have been ignorant of all arts, sciences, and of those wonderful inventions, prepared originally by investigations of mere curiosity. Thought would have been inert. Man would have made no progress. On the other hand,

if leisure could only be explained by plunder and oppression, if it were a benefit which could only be enjoyed unjustly, and at the expense of others, there would be no middle path between these two evils. Either mankind would be reduced to the necessity of stagnating in a vegetable and stationary life, in eternal ignorance from the absence of wheels to its machines, or else it would have to acquire these wheels at the price of inevitable injustice, and would necessarily

present the sad spectacle, in one form or another, of the anti-classification of human beings into masters and slaves. I defy any one to show me, in this case, any other alternative. We should be compelled to contemplate the divine plan which governs society, with the regret of thinking that it presents a deplorable chasm. The stimulus of progress would be forgotten, or, which is worse, this stimulus would be no other than injustice itself. But no, God has not left such a chasm

in his work of love. We must take care not to disregard his wisdom and power. For those whose imperfect meditations cannot explain the lawfulness of leisure, are very much like the astronomer, who said, at a certain point in the heavens there ought to exist a planet which will be at last discovered, for without it the celestial world is not harmony, but discord. Well, I say, that, if well understood, the history of my humble plane, although very modest,

is sufficient to raise us to the contemplation of one of the most consoling, but least understood, of the social harmonies. Is it not true that we must choose between the denial, or the lawfulness of leisure? Thanks to rent and its natural duration, leisure may arise from labor and saving. It is a pleasing prospect, which every one may have in view, a noble recompense, to which each may aspire. It makes its appearance in the world, it distributes itself proportionately

to the exercise of certain virtues. It opens all the avenues of intelligence, it ennobles, It raises the morals. It spiritualizes the soul of humanity, not only without laying any weight on those of our brethren whose lot in life devotes them to severe labor, but relieving them gradually from the heaviest and most repugnant part of this labor. It is enough that capitals should be formed, accumulated, multiplied, should be lent on conditions less and less burdensome,

that they should descend, penetrate into every social circle, and that by an admirable progression, after having liberated, the lenders, they should hasten the liberation of the borrowers themselves. For that end, the laws and customs ought to be favourable to economy, the source of capital. It is enough to say that the first of all these conditions is, not to alarm, to attack, to deny, that which is the stimulus of saving and the reason of its existence interest as long as we see nothing passing from hand to hand in the character of loan but provisions materials instruments

things indispensable to the productiveness of labor itself the idea thus far exhibited will not find many opponents who knows even that i may not be reproached for having made a great effort to burst what may be said to be an open door but as soon as cash makes its appearance as the subject of the transaction and it is this which appears most always immediately a crowd of objections are raised money it will be said will not reproduce itself like your sack of corn it does not assist labour like your plane it does not afford an immediate satisfaction like your house it is incapable by its nature of producing interest of multiplying itself and the remuneration it demands is a positive extortion who cannot see the sophistry of this who does not see that cash is only a transient form which men give at the time to other values to real objects of usefulness for the sole object of facilitating their arrangements

in the midst of social complications the man who is in a condition to lend scarcely ever has the exact thing which the borrower wants james it is true has a plane but perhaps william wants a saw they cannot negotiate the transaction favorable to both cannot take place and then what happens it happens that james first exchanges his plane for money he lends the money to william and william exchanges the money for a saw the transaction is no longer a simple one it is decomposed into two parts as i explained above in speaking of exchange but for all that it has not changed its nature it still contains all the elements of the direct loan james has still got rid of a tool which was useful to him william has still received an instrument which perfects his work and increases his profits there is still a service rendered by the lender which entitles him to receive an equivalent service from the borrower this just balance is not the less established by free mutual bargaining the very natural obligation to restore at the end of the term the entire value still constitutes the principle of the duration of interest at the end of a year says m

will you find an additional crown in a bag of a hundred pounds no certainly if the borrower puts the bag of one hundred pounds on the shelf in such a case neither the plane nor the sack of corn would reproduce themselves but it is not for the sake of leaving the money in the bag nor the plane on the hook that they are borrowed the plane is borrowed to be used or the money to procure a plane and if it is clearly proved that this tool enables the borrower to obtain profits which he would not have made without it if it is proved that the lender has renounced creating for himself this excess of profits we may understand how the stipulation of a part of this excess of profits in favour of the lender is equitable and lawful ignorance of the true part which cash plays in human transactions is the source of the most fatal errors i intend devoting an entire pamphlet to this subject from what we may infer from the writings of m prouton that which has led him to think that gratuitous credit was a logical and definite consequence of social progress

is the observation of the phenomenon which shows a decreasing interest almost in direct proportion to the rate of civilization in barbarous times it is in fact cent per cent and more then it descends to eighty sixty fifty forty twenty ten five four and three per cent in holland it has even been as low as two per cent hence it is concluded that in proportion as society comes to perfection it will descend to zero by the time civilization is complete in other words that which characterizes social perfection is the gratuitousness of credit when therefore we shall have abolished interest we shall have reached the last step of progress this is mere savastry and as such false arguing may contribute to render popular the unjust dangerous and destructive dogma that credit should be gratuitous by representing it as coincident with social perfection

With the reader's permission, I will examine in a few words this new view of the question. What is interest? It is the service rendered, after a free bargain, by the borrower to the lender, in remuneration for the service he has received by the loan. By what law is the rate of these remunerative services established?

By the general law, which regulates the equivalent of all services, that is, by the law of supply and demand. the more easily a thing is procured the smaller is the service rendered by yielding it or lending it the man who gives me a glass of water in the pyrenees does not render me so great a service as he who allows me one in the desert of sahara if there are many plains sacks of corn or houses in a country the use of them is obtained other things being equal on more favourable conditions than if they were few for the simple reason that the lender renders in this case a smaller relative service it is not surprising therefore that the more abundant capitals are the lower is the interest is this saying that it will ever reach zero

no because i repeat the principle of a remuneration is in the loan to say that interest will be annihilated is to say there will never be any motive for saving for denying ourselves in order to form new capitals nor even to preserve the old ones in this case the waste would immediately bring a void and interest would directly reappear in that the nature of the services of which we are speaking does not differ from any other thanks to industrial progress a pair of stockings which used to be worth six francs has successively been worth only four three and two no one can say to what point this value will descend but we can affirm that it will never reach zero unless the stockings finish by producing themselves spontaneously why because the principle of remuneration is in labor because he who works for another renders a service and ought to receive a service if no one is paid for stockings they would cease to be made and with the scarcity the price would not fail to reappear

The sophism, which I am now combating, has its roots in the infinite divisibility which belongs to value, as it does to matter. It appears at first paradoxical, but it is well known to all mathematicians that, through all eternity, fractions may be taken from a weight without the weight ever being annihilated. It is sufficient that each successive fraction be less than the preceding one, in a determined and regular proportion. There are countries where people

apply themselves to increasing the size of horses, or diminishing in sheep the size of the head. It is impossible to say precisely to what point they will arrive in this. No one can say that he has ever seen the largest horse, or the smallest sheep's head, that will ever appear in the world. But he may safely say that the size of horses will never attain to infinity, nor the heads of sheep to nothing. In the same way, no one can say to what point the price of

stockings, nor the interest of capitals, will come down. But we may safely affirm, when we know the nature of things, that neither the one nor the other will ever arrive at zero. For labor and capital can no more live without recompense than a sheep without a head. The arguments of M. Proutan, reduce themselves, then, to this. Since the most skilful agriculturalists are those who have reduced the heads of sheep to the smallest size, we shall have arrived at the highest

agricultural perfection, when sheep have no longer any heads. Therefore, in order to realize the perfection, let us behead them. I have now done with this wearisome discussion. Why is it that the breath of false doctrine has made it needful to examine into the intimate nature of interest. I must not leave off without remarking upon a beautiful moral, which may be drawn from this law. The depression of interest is proportioned to the abundance of

capitals. This law being granted, if there is a class of men to whom it is more important than any other, that capitals be formed, accumulate, multiply, abound, and superabound, it is certainly the class which borrows them directly or indirectly. It is those men who operate upon materials, who gain assistance by instruments, who live upon provisions, produced and economized by other men. Imagine, in a vast and fertile valley, a population of a thousand inhabitants,

destitute of all capital, thus defined. It will assuredly perish by the pangs of hunger. let us suppose a case hardly less cruel. Let us suppose that ten of these savages are provided with instruments and provisions sufficient to work and to live themselves until harvest time, as well as to remunerate the services of eighty laborers. The inevitable result will be the death of nine hundred human beings. It is clear, then, that since nine hundred and ninety men,

urged by want, will crowd upon the supports, which would only maintain a hundred, the ten capitalists will be masters of the market. They will obtain labor on the hardest conditions, for they will put it up to auction, or the highest bidder. And observe this, if these capitalists entertain such pious sentiments, as would induce them to impose personal privations on themselves, in order to diminish the sufferings of some of their brethren, this generosity, which attaches

to morality, will be as noble, in its principle, as useful in its effects. But, if duped by that false philosophy, which persons wish so inconsiderately to mingle with economic laws, they take to remunerating labor largely, far from doing good, they will do harm. They will give double wages, it may be. But then, forty-five men will be better provided for, whilst forty-five others will come to argument the number of those who are sinking into the grave. Upon this

supposition, it is not the lowering of wages which is the mischief. It is the scarcity of capital. Low wages are not the cause, but the effect of the evil. I may add that they are, to a certain extent the remedy. It acts in this way. It distributes the burden of suffering as much as it can, and saves as many lives as a limited quantity of sustenance permits. Suppose now, that instead of ten capitalists there should be a hundred, two hundred, five hundred. Is it not

evident that the condition of the whole population, and above all, that of the proletaires, will be more and more improved is it not evidence that apart from every consideration of generosity they would obtain more work and better pay for it that they themselves will be in a better condition to form capitals without being able to fix the limits of this ever-increasing facility of realizing equality and well-being would it not be madness in them to admit such doctrines and to act in a way which would drain the source of wages and paralyze the activity and stimulus of saving let them learn this lesson then doubtless capitals are good for those who possess them who denies it but they are also useful to those who have not yet been able to form them and it is important to those who have them not that others should have them yes if the proletaire knew their true interests they would seek with the greatest care what circumstances are and what are not favourable to saying in order to favour the former and to discourage the latter they would sympathise with every measure which tends to the rapid formation of capitals

they would be enthusiastic promoters of peace liberty order security the union of classes and peoples economy moderation in public expenses simplicity in the machinery of government for it is under the sway of all the circumstances that saving does its work brings plenty within the reach of the masses invites those persons to become the formers of capital who were formerly under the necessity of borrowing upon hard conditions they would repel with energy the warlike spirit which diverts from its true course so large a part of human labor the monopolizing spirit which deranges the equitable distribution of riches in the way by which liberty alone can realize it the multitude of public services which attack our purses only to check our liberty and in short those subversive hateful thoughtless doctrines which alarm capital prevent its formation oblige it to flee and finally to raise its price to the especial disadvantage of the workers who bring it into operation well and in this respect is not the revolution of february a hard lesson

is it not evident that the insecurity it has thrown into the world of business on the one hand and on the other the advancement of the fatal theories to which i have alluded and which from the clubs have almost penetrated into the regions of the legislature have everywhere raised the rate of interest is it not evident that from that time the proletaires have found greater difficulty in procuring those materials instruments and provisions without which labour is impossible is it not that which has caused stoppages and do not stoppages in their turn lower wages thus there is a deficiency of labour to the proletaire from the same cause which loads the objects they consume with an increase of price in consequence of the rise of interest high interest low wages means in other words that the same article preserves its price but that the part of the capitalist has invaded without profiting himself that of the workmen

a friend of mine commissioned to make inquiry into parisian industry has assured me that the manufacturers have revealed to him a very striking fact which proves better than any reasoning can how much insecurity and uncertainty injure the formation of capital it was remarked that during the most distressing period the popular expenses of mere fancy had not diminished the small theatres the fighting lists the public-houses and tobacco depots were as much frequented as in prosperous times in the inquiry the operatives themselves explain this phenomenon thus what is the use of pinching who knows what will happen to us who knows that interest will not be abolished who knows but that the state will become a universal and gratuitous lender and that it will wish to annihilate all the fruits which we might expect from our savings well i say that if such ideas could prevail during two single years it would be enough to turn our beautiful france into a turkey misery would become general and endemic and most assuredly the poor would be the first upon whom it would fall workmen they talk to you a great deal upon the artificial organization of labor do you know why they do so

because they are ignorant of the laws of its natural organization that is of the wonderful organization which results from liberty you are told that liberty gives rise to what is called the radical antagonism of classes that it creates and makes to clash two opposite interests that of the capitalists and that of the proletaire but we ought to begin by proving that this antagonism exists by a law of nature and afterwards it would remain to be shown how far the arrangements of restraint are superior to those of liberty for between liberty and restraint i see no middle path again it would remain to be proved that restraint would always operate to your advantage and to the prejudice of the rich but no this radical antagonism this natural opposition of interests does not exist it is only an evil dream of perverted and intoxicated imaginations no a plan so defective has not proceeded from the divine mind to affirm it we must begin by denying the existence of god and see how by means of social laws and because men exchange amongst themselves their labors and their productions see what a harmonious tie attaches the classes one to the other

there are the landowners what is their interest that the soil be fertile and the sun beneficent and what is the result that corn abounds that it falls in price and the advantage turns to the profit of those who have no patrimony there are the manufacturers what is their constant thought to perfect their labour to increase the power of their machines to procure for themselves upon the best terms the raw material and to what does all this tend to the abundance and the low price of produce that is that all the efforts of the manufacturers and without their suspecting it result in a profit to the public consumer of which each of you is one it is the same with every profession well the capitalists are not exempt from this law they are very busy making schemes economizing and turning them to their advantage this is all very well but the more they succeed the more do they promote the abundance of capital and as a necessary consequence the reduction of interest now who is it

that profits by the reduction of interest is it not the borrower first and finally the consumers of the things which the capitalists contribute to produce it is therefore certain that the final result of the efforts of each class is the common good of all you are told that capital tyrannizes over labor i do not deny that each one endeavors to draw the greatest possible advantage from his situation but in this sense he realizes only that which is possible now it is never more possible for capitalists to tyrannize over labor than when they are scarce for then it is they who make the law it is they who regulate the rate of sale never is this tyranny more impossible to them than when they are abundant for in that case it is the labor which has the command away then with the jealousies of classes ill-will unfounded hatreds unjust suspicions these depraved passions injure those who nourish them in their hearts this is no declamatory morality it is a chain of causes and effects which is capable of being rigorously mathematically demonstrated

it is not the less sublime in that it satisfies the intellect as well as the feelings i shall sum up this whole dissertation with these words workmen laborers proletaires destitute and suffering classes will you improve your condition you will not succeed by strife insurrection hatred and error but there are three things which cannot perfect the entire community without extending these benefits to yourselves these things are peace liberty and security End of section three. Recording by Katie Riley. February 2010.