…comes from page 38 of Economic Sophisms by Frederic Bastiat (1964 Foundation for Economic Education ed., footnote omitted, original emphasis):
I confess that the wisdom and the beauty of these laws [of trade] evoke my admiration and respect. In them I see Saint-Simonianism: To each according to his capacity; to each capacity according to its production. In them I see communism, that is to say, the tendency of goods to become the common heritage of men; but a Saint-Simonianism, a communism, regulated by infinite foresight, and in no way abandoned to the frailty, the passions, and the tyranny of men.
JMM: I love this line because Bastiat is addressing two of his biggest critics in 1850’s France: the Saint-Simonianists (socialists) and the communists. Is Bastiat saying the goals of the socialists or the communists are ignoble? No. What he objects to are their methods (central planning, or leaving economic decisions “abandoned to the frailty, the passions, and the tyranny of men”).
Those of us who argue for freedom, of markets and of people, are often accused by our critics of not caring. Because we are not socialists, we do not care about the poor. Because we are not communists, we don’t care about the working man. Because we are not speech restrictions, we do not care about corruption in politics. Etc Etc. But nothing could be further from the truth! We care about these things; that’s why we argue for freedom. As Bastiat says, it is in these laws of trade and exchange (the economic laws) do we see the noble goals of communism and socialism accomplished without the ignoble aspects of frailty, passions, and tyranny that comes with socialism or communism.