Let's settle it, what is the Government? Is it not the collection of all government officials? There are therefore two classes of people in the world, that is: the government officials of all kinds who make up the Government, and the workers of all kinds who constitute society. This being said, are the workers living off government officials, or are government officials living off the workers? In other words, is society living off Government, or is Government living off society?

I am not a scholar, but a poor devil named John Doe; I am a worker and never could be but a worker.

Now, as a worker who pays taxes on my bread, on my wine, on my meat, on my salt, on my window, on my door, on the iron and steel in my tools, on my tobacco, etc., etc., I attach great importance to this question, and I repeat it:

Are workers living off government officials, or are government officials living off the workers?

You may ask me the reason why I attach importance to this question, and here it is:

For some time now, I have noticed a great propensity amongst everyone to request means of existence from Government.

Farmers tell Government: Give us premiums, education, better plows, finer races of cattle, etc.

Manufacturiers ask: Increase our profits on our cloths, on our fabric, on our iron goods.

Workers go: Give us jobs, wages and work implements.

I find these requests quite natural, and I would like the Government to be able to give all that is demanded from it.

But, to give it all, where does it take it all? Alas! It takes a little bit more on my bread, a little bit more on my wine, a little bit more on my meat, a little bit more on my salt, a little bit more on my tobacco, etc., etc.

In such a way that what it is giving to me, it is taking from me, and it cannot not be taking it from me. Wouldn't it be better if it gave less and took less?

For in the end, it never gives back everything that it takes. Even to take and to give, it needs agents who keep a part of what is taken.

Am I not being gullible to make with the Government the following bargain? I need work. In order to make me some you will take five francs on my bread, five francs on my wine, five francs on my salt and five francs on my tobacco. That will total twenty francs. You will keep six out of which to live, and you will create demand for my work with fourteen. Obviously I will be a little poorer than before; I will call upon you to put things right, and here is what you will do. You will do the same thing again. You will take another five francs on my bread, another five francs on my wine, another five francs on my salt and another five francs on my tobacco; which will total another twenty francs. Out of which you'll put another six francs in your pocket and you will win me fourteen other francs. When this is done, I will be one degree further in poverty. I will turn to you once again, etc.

Si maladia
Opiniatra
Non vult se guarire,
Quid illi facere?
— Purgare, saignare, clysterisare,
Repurgare, resaignare, reclysterisare.^[1]

John Doe! John Doe! I can hardly believe that you should have been foolish enough to submit yourself to this regime, just because some scribblers saw it fit to baptize it: Organization and Fraternity.

Notes

[1]: These verses could be translated as follows:

Ifay iseaseday
ubbornstay
ontway ebay uredcay,
Atwhay otay oday otay theay atientpay?
— omittingvay, oodlettingblay, enemaay,
omittingvay againay, oodlettingblay againay, enemaay againay

Of course, French is similar enough to latin that the original version can sound superficially as correct latin while being understandable in French (assuming familiarity with words from popular XVII^th century ``medecine´´). Which worked better in that original version since every French person then would have some vague familiarity with latin then (from compulsory attendance to catholic masses) without usually knowing enough to tell how bogus it is.

The original, approximately quoted from memory by Bastiat, is Molière's comedy Le malade imaginaire (The Imaginary Invalid), very well-known in France (still today), in which Molière mocks quack doctors, that is to say, about all ``doctors´´ in his pre-modern times. In a choreographed graduation ceremony at the end of his piece, doctors chant in affected pseudo-latin about their universal remedy: ``If a stubborn disease doesn't want to be cured, what to do to him [the patient]? induce vomit, bleed the patient, give him an enema, induce vomit again, bleed the patient again, give him an enema again. ´´