Principles of Political Economy, Vol. 1

Fundamental Ideas.

Section I.

Goods—Wants.

The starting point, as well as the object-point of our science is Man.49

Every man has numberless wants, physical and intellectual.50 51 Wants are either necessaries, decencies (AnstandsbedÜrfnisse) or luxuries. The non-satisfaction of necessary wants causes disease or death; that of the wants of decency endangers one's [pg 052] social position.52 The much greater number, and the longer continuance of his wants are among the most striking differences between man and the brute:53 wants such as clothing, fuel,54 tools, and those resulting from his much longer period of infancy; which last, together with other causes, has contributed so largely to make marriage necessary and universal. While the lower animals have no wants, but necessities, and while their aggregate-want, even in the longest series of generations, admits of no qualitative increase, the circle of man's wants is susceptible of indefinite extension.55 And, indeed, every advance in culture made by man finds expression in an increase in the number and in the keenness of his rational wants. No man who distinguishes himself in anything, but feels spurred thereto by a peculiar want; and this want is both the cause and the effect of the power which is peculiar to him. No one but the poet feels the want of poetizing; no one but the philosopher, of philosophizing. In every particular, intellectual or physical, in which the man is in advance of the child, he experiences new wants unknown to the child. Our education consists, for the most part, in awakening wants and providing for their satisfaction.

[pg 053]

Goods are anything which can be used, whether directly or indirectly, for the satisfaction of any true56 or legitimate human want,57 and whose utility, for this purpose, is recognized. Hence, the idea goods is an essentially relative one. Every change in man's wants, or knowledge, is accompanied by a rapid, corresponding change, either in the limits of the circle58 of goods, or in their relative importance. Thus, the tobacco plant has, probably, existed thousands of years. It became goods, however, only from the time that man recognized its use for smoking, snuffing etc., and experienced the want of it for these purposes. In a similar way, the limestone of the Solenhofen quarries has become goods, of considerable importance, only since the invention of lithography; decaying bones, only since that of bone-dust manure; caoutchouc since about 1825, and gutta-percha, only since 1844. On the other hand, charms,59 philters, and even relics, since the decay of faith in their efficacy, have lost the quality of goods. If the aggregate income of all mankind were, by some sudden revolution, to be equally divided among all, diamonds, for instance, would [pg 054] greatly decline in value, for the reason that it is dependent, in great part, on the wants generated by vanity, or by the desire of outshining others. Beer, tobacco etc., would rise in the scale as goods, because the circle of those to whose wants they minister would have been very greatly extended. On the whole, advancement in civilization has uniformly the effect, of itself, to increase the quantity and number of goods, the wants and knowledge of men being thereby increased. We should reach the ideal here, if all men experienced only true or legitimate wants, but these completely; if they could see their way, clearly, to the satisfaction of them, and find the means of satisfying them with just the amount of effort most conducive to their physico-intellectual development.60

Section II.

Goods.—Economic Goods.

By economy (Wirthschaft=husbandry or housekeeping), we mean the systematized activity of man, to satisfy his need (Bedarf=requisite) of external goods.61 This treatise is concerned only with economic goods (ends or means of economy).62 The greater the advance of civilization or human culture, [pg 055] the less apt are men to pursue the satisfaction of their wants, isolated from their fellows, or, in other words, to carry on their economies or husbandries apart from one another. The more numerous the wants of men, and the more different in kind their faculties are, the more natural does exchange63 become. Since all goods derive their character as goods from the fact that they are destined to satisfy human wants, the very possibility of exchange must greatly increase the possibility of things to become goods. Think of the machinist, whose products are used only by the astronomer, while the latter is never in a way to manufacture them for himself. (Hufeland.) Commerce is the series of combinations, created by the interchange of services: “a living net of relations, which wants and services are ever weaving and unweaving.” (Hermann.) As a rule, with an advance in civilization, there is an increase in the number of goods, which become economic goods, and in the number of economic goods which become commercial goods (objects or means promotive of commerce).64 But this is to be considered a real advancement only to the extent that that which is obtained is superior to that which was possessed before, in consequence of the specialization of callings or the greater division of labor (§ 48 ff.). When a little street Arab exacts money from a stranger for pointing out the way, we rightly censure him; but no one would find [pg 056] it improper if he should first fit himself to play the part of a guide, and then live by his calling.65

Section III.

Goods.—The Three Classes Of Goods.

All economic goods are divided into three classes:

A. Persons or personal services. It is entirely repugnant to the feeling of humanity to regard a man's person in its entirety as an instrument intended to satisfy the wants of another.66 [pg 057] Yet this happens wherever slavery exists; in its coarsest form, in cannibalism. Among civilized nations, we can speak, under this head, only of individual services or capabilities of persons; or, indeed, of the aggregate of the services rendered by them during a time determined at pleasure, or a short time.67

B. Things, both moveable and immovable.68

C. Relations to persons or things which may frequently be estimated just as accurately as material goods. (The res incorporales [pg 058] of the Roman law.) I need only mention what is called good-will, which freely, and to the advantage of customers themselves, but still with a limited amount of certainty, attaches to certain localities, and for which tavern-keepers, sometimes, as in theaters, dÉpÔts and clubs, pay so enormous a rent.69 When a newspaper is sold, the purchaser frequently buys nothing but the existing relations between his colaborers, subscribers etc. No small part of the value of a good business firm consists in the confidence with which it inspires all who deal with it, thus sparing them a world of care and trouble.70 A general may be of incalculable value to an army which he has himself helped organize. In another, or in the service of a country not his own, he might be entirely valueless, incapable of accomplishing anything.71 With the progress of civilization, as man becomes more social, the number of valuable relations increases, while that of legalized monopolies is wont to decrease. (SchÄffle.)72

[pg 059]

Section IV.

Of Value.—Value In Use.

The economic value of goods is the importance they possess for the purposes of man, considered as engaged in economy (housekeeping, husbandry.73)

Looked at from the point of view of the person who wishes to employ them in his use directly, doubtless the oldest point of view, value appears first as value in use; and here, according to the difference of subjective purposes it is intended to subserve, we may speak of production value or enjoyment-value; and of this last, in turn, as utilization-value, or consumption-value. The value in use of goods, is greater in proportion as the number of wants they are calculated to satisfy are more general and more urgent, and in proportion as they are gratified by them more fully, surely, durably, easily and pleasantly.74 Hence, it is seldom possible to find an accurate mathematical expression of the relation which exists between the value in use of different goods.75 Thus, it is possible to estimate the [pg 060] nutritive power of different kinds of goods, the value of wheat or of hay for instance, but not the goodness or quality of their taste, of the attractiveness of their appearance, etc.

But, the more men become used to comparing the aggregate of human wants, and the aggregate of the goods which minister to the satisfaction of these wants, as if they were two great wholes, gradually shading each into the other, the more does the value in use of the different kinds of goods assume, for purposes of social rating or estimation, a fungible character.76 If a new kind of goods be produced or discovered, which satisfies the same wants in a more complete manner than another, the latter, although it has suffered no change, generally loses in the value put upon it, especially if the new goods can be produced in any desired quantity. An instance of this is the change effected in the value of the dyers weed, woad, by the introduction of indigo.

Things present in quantities greater than the amount necessary to supply the want they satisfy, preserve their full value in use, to the limit of that want, after which they are simply an element of possible future value, dependent on an increase of the want; but they have no value for present use.77

The economic valuation of goods, however, is by no means exhausted, so far as the isolated individual housekeeper is concerned, by the mere establishing of its value in use. As the systematic effort of every rational individual in [pg 061] his household management is directed towards the obtaining, by a minimum of sacrifice of pleasure and energy, a maximum satisfaction of his wants, even an Adam or a Crusoe is, in his economy, compelled to estimate not only what the goods to be acquired accomplish (value in use) but also what they will cost—cost-value. Even the most indispensable kind of goods, for instance atmospheric air, is considered to have no value, when it can be obtained in sufficient quantity, without any sacrifice whatever.78

Section V.

Value.—Value In Exchange.

The value in exchange of goods, or the quality which makes them exchangeable against other goods, is based on a combination of their value in use with their cost-value, such as men in their intercourse with one another will make.79 Without value in use, value in exchange80 is unthinkable.

But there are many, and even indispensable goods which are not at all susceptible of being exchanged; for instance, the light and heat of the sun, the open sea etc.81 Other goods, [pg 062] although capable of being exchanged, have no value in exchange, because they exist in superabundance, and may be obtained by everyone, without trouble and without reward; for instance, drinking-water in most places, ice in winter, and wood in the primeval forest.82 Moreover, the idea of such “free goods” is in great part relative. The water of a river may, for drinking purposes, be “free” goods, and yet, for purposes of irrigation, have great value in exchange. (John Stuart Mill).

But, goods, to obtain value in exchange, must, in addition to their value in use, a value which must be recognized83 by a certain number of persons, at least, have the capacity of becoming the exclusive property of some one individual, and therefore of being alienated or transferred; and this alienation or transfer must be desired because of the difficulty to become possessed of them in any other way.84

[pg 063]

Section VI.

Value.—Alleged Contradiction Between Value In Use And Value In Exchange.

Recent, and especially socialistic,85 writers have alluded to the great “contradiction” between value in use and value in exchange. This contradiction, however, vanishes when the above idea of economy, and the two sides or aspects, which economic value presents, are kept steadily in view. It is said, for instance, that a pound of gold has a much greater value in exchange than a pound of iron; while the value in use of iron, is incomparably greater than that of gold. I question [pg 064] this latter statement. True it is, that the need of iron is much more universal and urgent than the need of gold. On the other hand, a pound of gold yields satisfaction to the want of that metal, much greater than is yielded by a pound of iron, to the want of iron. We may speak of a contradiction between value in use and value in exchange, at the farthest, only in case the existing quantity of an article in trade, which can be done without, is not estimated correspondingly lower than the whole existing supply of a thing which is indispensable. But this is a case which cannot often occur. When, for instance, wheat is very dear, as in years of scarcity, people prefer to pay a very high price for it rather than to dispense, even in part, with its use; and so of all the necessaries of life. As people progress in economic culture, they become more expert in adapting the value in exchange of related goods, not only to their cost-value, but also to their value in use.86 87

The lower the state of a nation's economy, the more isolated men live from one another, the greater is the prominence given by them to value in use, as compared with value in exchange, a fact which makes a valuation of resources, which shall be universally applicable, a more difficult matter.88 89 90

[pg 065]

Section VII.

Resources Or Means (VermÖgen).

Resources, or means, in the sense in which we here use the term, are the aggregate of economic goods owned by a physical or legal person, after deduction is made of the person's debts, and all valuable and rightful claims have been added.91 Hence, there are private resources, corporative resources, municipal resources, etc., state resources, national resources and the world's resources. In estimating the resources of a whole people, it is, of course, necessary to make deduction of the debts due by the individual members of the nation to their fellow countrymen.

[pg 066]

Section VIII.

Valuation Of Resources.

It has often been made a question, whether the valuation of resources should be based on the value in use, or the value in exchange of their constituent parts.92 The latter has, of course, no interest, except in so far as we are concerned with the possibility of obtaining the control of part of the resources, or means, of another, by the surrender of a part of one's own goods. In estimating the value of private resources, which require to be made continually an object of trade, this point is, of course, of the greatest importance. If certain of their component elements, lands, for instance, belonging to a fidei commissum, are incapable of entering immediately into the market, at least the revenue they yield is measured by its value in exchange.

It is quite otherwise, even with the resources of a whole nation. Such resources are, evidently, much more independent, and have much less need of being exchanged against their equals, than private resources. The foreign commerce, of the greatest and most advanced nations, has, hitherto, been but a small quota of their internal commerce.93 A valuation, [pg 067] therefore, based on value in exchange, however interesting it might be to enable us to determine how property is shared by the different classes and persons that compose the nation, would afford but little information concerning the absolute amount of the national wealth. This, of course, applies in a much higher degree to the resources of the whole world.

If, now, we were to estimate the resources of an entire people, or even of the world, by summing up the value in exchange of their several component parts, many very important elements would be left out of the account entirely; as for instance, harbors, navigable streams, numberless relations which have, indeed, no value in exchange whatever, but which are of the highest importance, because promotive of the economy of the nation. The same may be said of made roads of every description, the politico-economical value of which may be much greater than the value in exchange of their stock, than their cost of production etc. The increase of the value in exchange of any of the branches of the resources of a physical or legal person contributes towards really enriching the nation or the world, only in case that the increased value in exchange is based on an increased utility in quality or quantity. Should an earthquake suddenly dry up a number of our springs, and thus give value in exchange to the drinking water from the remaining ones, we should, indeed, witness the introduction of a new object into the list of exchangeable goods; the owners of springs would be able to command a larger portion of the national resources, but at the expense of the rest of the population; and the whole country would have become poorer in goods by the catastrophe. Even the value in exchange of the national resources would not be increased; for all other goods, which, hitherto, as compared with water, had an unlimited capacity for exchange, would lose just as much of that capacity as water had gained, as compared with them.94 On the other hand, if a new mineral [pg 068] spring should be discovered, the great value in use of the water of which gave it value in exchange, the resources of the nation would be really increased, not only in point of utility, but in exchange value; for no other goods, formerly known, would, in consequence of the discovery, lose in their exchange power.95

Section IX.

Wealth.

The possession of large and also of potentially lasting resources; objectively, such resources themselves, we call wealth. But it must be large in a two-fold sense; large as compared with the rational wants of its possessor, and large, also, as compared with the resources of other people, especially with the resources of those in the same condition of life. To be called rich, it is not enough “to have a sufficiency,” (the individual side); it is necessary to have more than others.96 If all men were possessed [pg 069] of a great deal, but all of an exactly equal amount, each would be compelled, it may be conjectured, to be his own chimney-sweep, his own scavenger and “boot-black.” And how could anyone, then, be properly called wealthy? This is the social side of the idea of wealth.97 Hence, a person, with the same resources, might be very wealthy in a provincial town, while, in the capital, he could enjoy only moderate comfort.98

[pg 070]

Section X.

Wealth.—Signs Of National Wealth.

We should have a very imperfect idea of the wealth of a people (§ 8) if we should estimate it at the value in exchange [pg 071] of the sum99-total of the component parts of the national resources. By the following signs, however, an approximative notion of the value in use of the resources of a nation may be obtained:

A. When, even the lower classes, who compose everywhere the greatest portion of the people, are comfortable, in a condition worthy of human beings. Thus, C. Dupin is surprised at the great quantities of meat, butter, cheese and tea entered on the accounts of the poor-houses in England, and the great [pg 072] care taken to have these of the best quality.100 A good symptom of such a state of things is a high average duration of human life, especially when there is a relatively large number of births. (§ 246.)

B. When a considerable outlay, devoted to the satisfaction of the more refined wants, is voluntarily made, and by those only possessed of a proper economic sense. Thus, in England, the various mission, bible, and tract societies had, in 1841, an aggregate income of £630,000. The expeditions in search of Franklin cost over a million pounds sterling. The state outlay also belongs to this category, provided, that taxes are collected and loans obtained, without any noticeable oppression. The sum of 20,000,000 pounds sterling, voted, in 1833, by the British Parliament for the abolition of slavery, is one of the happiest signs of the national wealth of England.101

C. A large number of valuable buildings, and permanent improvements; for instance, roads of every description, works for purposes of irrigation and drainage. Thus, in London, from September, 1843, to September, 1845, there were constructed squares and streets with an aggregate length of 11.1 geographical miles. The number of newly built houses in London, between 1843 and 1847, was nearly 27,000. And so, in England and Wales there are 492 geographical miles of navigable canals, while their navigable rivers are estimated to have a length of only 449 miles. The number of miles of railroad, in the British Empire, in 1865, was 2,897 geographical miles, and they cost 459 million of pounds; in 1870, it was 3,270 geographical miles, at an aggregate cost of 650 millions sterling.

D. The frequent occurrence of heavy commercial payments, which finds expression especially in the magnitude and costliness of the most usual medium of exchange. Thus, all payments are made in England in paper (for sums of at least five [pg 073] pounds sterling) or in gold coin. Silver is used only as small change, like copper in most other countries. (Infra, § 118, seq.)102

E. Frequent loans to foreign nations. Hence, Storch divides all countries into borrowing or poor countries, loaning or rich countries, and independent countries which hold a middle place between the two former.103

Section XI.

Of Economy (Husbandry).

All normal economy 104 (husbandry) aims at securing a maximum of personal advantage with a minimum of cost or outlay.105 And there are always two intellectual incentives at the foundation of this economy. There is, first, self-interest, the positive manifestation of which is the effort to acquire as much of the world's goods as possible, and the negative expression of which, the effort to lose as little of them as possible—acquisitiveness—saving. Self-interest, losing its moral, and assuming a guilty, character, degenerates into egotism; acquisitiveness, into covetousness; and the disposition to save, into avarice—the solipsismus of Kant. The incentive to ameliorate one's condition is common to all men, no matter how varied [pg 074] the form or different the intensity of its manifestation. It guides us all from the cradle to the grave. It may be restricted within certain limits, but never entirely extinguished. It is, in the domain of economy, what the instinct of self-preservation is to our physical existence, a powerful principle of creation, preservation and of renewed life (I. Thessal., 4, 11, seq.).106 Then there is the incentive of the demand of God's voice within us, the voice of conscience, whether we call it, in philosophic outline “the adumbration of the ideas of equity, right, benevolence, of perfection and inner freedom,” or, framing our lives in accordance with them, the striving after the Kingdom of God.107 It matters not, how much the image of God may have been disfigured in most men, there is no one in whom the longing for it has so far disappeared as to leave no trace behind. This puts bounds to our self-interest, and [pg 075] transmutes it into an earthly means to enable us to approximate to an eternal ideal.

As, in the structure of the world, the apparently opposing tendencies of the centrifugal and centripetal forces produce the harmony of the spheres, so, in the social life of man, self-interest and conscience produce in him the feeling for the common good.108 This sentiment of the common interest is the foundation on which rise in successive gradation, the life of the family, of the community, of the nation and of humanity, the last of which should be coincident with the life of the Church. It, alone, can realize the kingdom of heaven on earth. Through this sentiment alone can religion be made active and moral. Only through it, can self-interest be made really sure and always to the purpose. Even the most calculating mind must acknowledge, that numberless institutions, relations etc., are useful and even necessary to many individuals, which can be established or maintained only from a sense of the general welfare, for the reason that no one individual could make the sacrifice required to establish or maintain them. And so, since commerce has wrought the interests of all men into one great piece of net-work, the best means of obtaining wherewith to satisfy our own wants is to help others satisfy theirs. Self-interest causes every one to choose the course in life in which he shall meet with the least competition and the most abundant patronage; in other words, that which answers to the most pressing and least satisfied want of the community. As a rule, the physician who cures the greatest number of patients with the greatest skill, and the manufacturer who produces the best goods cheapest, will grow to be the richest. It is, moreover, easy to see that, according as the circle of common interests grows smaller, it approximates to self-interest; and [pg 076] to “the Kingdom of God”109 as it grows larger. And yet, all these circles respectively condition one another. Cosmopolitanism or church-zeal, without love of country; patriotism, without fidelity to the community in which one lives, or love of one's family, are more than suspicious. The reverse is also true. This is a chief connecting link between the great apparent opposites.110 111

[pg 077]

Section XII.

Economy.—Grades Of Economy.

Thanks to this feeling for the common weal, the eternal and destructive war—the bellum omnium contra omnes—which an unscrupulous self-interest would not fail to generate among men engaged in the isolated prosecution of their own economic interests, ceases in the higher, well-ordered organization 112 of society. On it are based the various forms of economy in common: family-economy, corporation or association-economy, [pg 078] municipal economy, and national economy.113 And these forms of economy in common are so essentially the condition and complement of individual economy, that the latter, without them, could either not be maintained at all, or, at least, only in the very lowest stage of civilization.

Although the higher science of Political Economy has, nearly always, been conceived114 as treating of the aggregate national activity of a people, there have been many, recently, who consider Political Economy as no real whole, but only as a mere abstraction. This is true, especially of many unconditional free-trade theorizers, partly from a repugnance toward the governmental guardianship of private businesses or economy. It is true, also, of certain philosophers who consider the idea, “the people,” as merely nominal.115 There are, however, [pg 079] two things necessary to warrant us to call a thing made up of a number of parts, one real whole: the parts and the whole must have a reciprocal action upon one another, and the whole, as such, must have a demonstrable action of its own. (Drobisch.) In this sense, “the people” is, unquestionably, a [pg 080] reality, and not alone the individuals who constitute the “people.” Besides, it is truly said that all husbandry or economy supposes a will (“systematized activity” etc., supra, § 2). Such a will is ascribed to individuals, to legal persons, to the state, but not, however, to “the people,” as a whole. But this will need not be an entirely conscious one, as is plain from the case of the less gifted and less cultured individuals engaged in household economy. The systemization in the public economy of a people finds its clearest expression in economic laws, and in the institutions of the state. But it finds expression, also, without the intervention of the state, in the laws established by use, and by the opinions of jurists or courts, in community of speech, of customs and tastes etc.: things which have an important economic meaning, which depend on the common nature of the land, of race and history, and which influence the state, at least as much as they are influenced by it.116 117

The most that can be said, at present, so far as an economy of mankind, or a world-economy, is concerned, is, that it may be shown that important preparations have been made for it. We are approaching more nearly to it by the ways of the more and more cosmopolitan character of science, the increasing international coÖperation of labor, the improvement in the means of transportation, growing emigration, the greater love of peace, and the greater toleration of nations etc.

[pg 081]

Section XIII.

Political Economy.—The Economic Organism.

The idea conveyed by the word organism, is doubtless, one of the most obscure of all ideas; and I am so far from desiring to explain 118 by that idea, the meaning of public or national economy, that I would only use the word organism as the shortest and most familiar expression of a number of problems, which it is the purpose of the following investigation to solve.

There are two points, especially, of importance here. In the motion of any machine, it is possible to distinguish with the utmost accuracy, between the cause and the effect of the motion: the blowing of the wind, for instance, is simply and purely, the cause of the friction of the mill-stones in a wind-mill, and is not in the least influenced or conditioned by the latter. But, in the public economy of every people, patient thought soon shows the observer, that the most important simultaneous events or phenomena mutually condition one another. Thus, a flourishing state of agriculture is impossible without flourishing industries; but, conversely, the prosperity of the latter supposes the prosperity of the former, as a condition precedent. It is as in the human body. The motions of respiration are produced by the action of the spinal cord; and the spinal cord, in turn, continues to work only through the blood, that is, [pg 082] by the help of respiration. In all cases like this, we are forced, when accounting for phenomena, to move about in a circle, unless we admit the existence of an organic life, of which every individual fact is only the manifestation.119 120

It is, also, undeniable, that human insight into the operation and utility of a machine must always precede the existence of the machine itself. This human insight is parent to the plan, and the plan, in turn, is parent to the machine. The very reverse of this is true in the case of organisms, those “divine machines” as Leibnitz called them. Men had digested food and reproduced their kind, thousands of years before physiologists had attained to a true theory of digestion or reproduction. I do not, indeed, by any means, pretend, that the public economy of nations is governed by natural necessity, in the same degree, as for instance, the human body. We shall find, however, that the minute arbitrary variations usual here and there in the course of its development, generally compensate for one another, in accordance with the law of large numbers. Here, too, we find harmonies, frequently of wonderful beauty, which existed long before any one dreamt of them; innumerable [pg 083] natural laws,121 whose operation does not depend on their recognition by individuals, and, over which, only he can obtain power who has learned to obey them. (Bacon)122 123 124 But [pg 084] it should never be lost sight of, that the natural laws governing the public economy of a people, like those of the human mind, are distinguished in one very essential point from those of the material world. They have to do with free rational beings, who, because they are thus free and rational, are responsible to God and their conscience, and constitute in their aggregate a species capable of progress.

Section XIV.

Origin Of A Nation's Economy.

The public economy of a people has its origin simultaneously with the people. It is neither the invention of man nor the revelation of God. It is the natural product of the faculties and propensities which make man man.125 Just as it may be shown, that the family which lives isolated from all others, contains, in itself, the germs of all political organization,126 so may it be demonstrated, that every independent household management contains the germs of all politico-economical activity. The public economy of a nation grows with the nation. With the nation, it blooms and ripens. Its season of blossoming and of maturity is the period of its greatest strength, and, at the same time, of the most perfect development [pg 085] of all its more important organs.127 In respect to it, the economic endeavors of any epoch may be said to be represented by two great parties, the one progressive, the other, conservative. The former would hasten the period of the nation's richest and most varied development, the latter postpone its departure as long as possible; and hence it comes, that a people's economic decline is sometimes taken for progress, by the former class, and their progress for decline, by the latter. As a rule, the union and equilibrium of these parties are wont to be the greatest at the period of maturity, because, then, intelligence and the spirit of sacrifice for the common good are most general.128

Finally, the public economy of a nation declines with the people. (Infra, § 263 ff.)

Section XV.

Diseases Of The Social Organism.

If the public economy of a people be an organism, we must expect to find that the perturbations, which affect it, present some analogies to the diseases of the body physical. We may, therefore, hope to learn much that may be of use in [pg 086] practice, from the tried methods of medicine.129 In the diseases of the body economic, it is necessary to distinguish accurately, between the nature of the disease and its external symptoms, although it may be necessary to combat the latter directly, and not merely with a view to alleviation. Following the example of the physician, we should particularly direct our attention to the curative method which nature itself would pursue, were art not to intervene. “The curative power of nature is no peculiar power; it is the result of a series of happy adjustments, by means of which the morbid perturbation itself sets in motion the springs which may either destroy the evil or paralyze its action. It is, in fact, nothing but the original power which formed the body and preserves its life in contact with the external causes of perturbation and the internal disorder provoked by these causes.” (Ruete.)

[pg 087]

Clyx.com