Visit ebookball.

com to download the full version and

explore more ebook or textbook

Automating the Processes of Selecting an

Appropriate Scheduling Algorithm and Configuring
the Scheduler Implementation for Time Triggered
Embedded Systems 1st edition by Ayman Gendy,
Michael Pont ISBN 3540876977 9783540876977
_____ Click the link below to download _____
https://ebookball.com/product/automating-the-processes-of-
selecting-an-appropriate-scheduling-algorithm-and-
configuring-the-scheduler-implementation-for-time-triggered-
embedded-systems-1st-edition-by-ayman-gendy-michael-pont-
isbn/

Explore and download more ebook or textbook at ebookball.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

The Advanced Electric Power Grid Complexity Reduction

Techniques for Reliability Modeling 1st edition by Ayman
Faza, Sahra Sedigh, Bruce McMillin ISBN 3540876977
9783540876977
https://ebookball.com/product/the-advanced-electric-power-grid-
complexity-reduction-techniques-for-reliability-modeling-1st-edition-
by-ayman-faza-sahra-sedigh-bruce-mcmillin-
isbn-3540876977-9783540876977-13416/

Modelling Support for Design of Safety-Critical Automotive

Embedded Systems 1st edition by DeJiu Chen, Rolf
Johansson, Henrik Lonn, Yiannis Papadopoulos, Anders
Sandberg, Fredrik Torner, Martin Torngren ISBN 3540876977
https://ebookball.com/product/modelling-support-for-design-of-safety-
9783540876977
critical-automotive-embedded-systems-1st-edition-by-dejiu-chen-rolf-
johansson-henrik-lonn-yiannis-papadopoulos-anders-sandberg-fredrik-
torner-martin-torngren-isb/

Resilience in the Aviation System 1st edition by Antonio

Chialastri, Simone Pozzi ISBN 3540876977 9783540876977

https://ebookball.com/product/resilience-in-the-aviation-system-1st-
edition-by-antonio-chialastri-simone-pozzi-
isbn-3540876977-9783540876977-13626/

Embedded System Design Embedded Systems Foundations of

Cyber Physical Systems and the Internet of Things 3rd
Edition by Peter Marwedel ISBN 331956045X 9783319560458
https://ebookball.com/product/embedded-system-design-embedded-systems-
foundations-of-cyber-physical-systems-and-the-internet-of-things-3rd-
edition-by-peter-marwedel-isbn-331956045x-9783319560458-15824/
Modeling and Analyzing Disaster Recovery Plans as Business
Processes 1st edition by Andrzej Zalewski, Piotr
Sztandera, Marcin Ludzia, Marek Zalewski ISBN 3540876977
9783540876977
https://ebookball.com/product/modeling-and-analyzing-disaster-
recovery-plans-as-business-processes-1st-edition-by-andrzej-zalewski-
piotr-sztandera-marcin-ludzia-marek-zalewski-
isbn-3540876977-9783540876977-13734/

A Formal Approach for User Interaction Reconfiguration of

Safety Critical Interactive Systems 1st edition by David
Navarre, Philippe Palanque, Sandra Basnyat ISBN 3540876977
9783540876977
https://ebookball.com/product/a-formal-approach-for-user-interaction-
reconfiguration-of-safety-critical-interactive-systems-1st-edition-by-
david-navarre-philippe-palanque-sandra-basnyat-
isbn-3540876977-9783540876977-11314/

The Art of The Art of Designing Embedded Systems 1st

edition by Jack Ganssle 9780080499352 008049935X

https://ebookball.com/product/the-art-of-the-art-of-designing-
embedded-systems-1st-edition-by-jack-
ganssle-9780080499352-008049935x-8874/

Real Time Embedded Systems Design Principles and

Engineering Practices 1st Edition by Xiaocong Fan
0128015071 9780128015070
https://ebookball.com/product/real-time-embedded-systems-design-
principles-and-engineering-practices-1st-edition-by-xiaocong-
fan-0128015071-9780128015070-17208/

A Linear Time Algorithm for the k Maximal Sums Problem 1st

Edition by Fredrik Bengtsson, Jingsen Chen ISBN
9783540305514
https://ebookball.com/product/a-linear-time-algorithm-for-the-k-
maximal-sums-problem-1st-edition-by-fredrik-bengtsson-jingsen-chen-
isbn-9783540305514-9960/
 Automating the Processes of Selecting an Appropriate
Scheduling Algorithm and Configuring the Scheduler
Implementation for Time-Triggered Embedded Systems

Ayman K. Gendy and Michael J. Pont

Embedded Systems Laboratory,

University of Leicester,
University Road, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK
{akg14,M.Pont}@le.ac.uk

Abstract. Predictable system behaviour is a necessary (but not sufficient)

condition when creating safety-critical and safety-related embedded systems.
At the heart of such systems there is usually a form of scheduler: the use of
time-triggered schedulers is of particular concern in this paper. It has been
demonstrated in previous studies that the problem of determining the task
parameters for such a scheduler is NP-hard. We have previously described an
algorithm (“TTSA1”) which is intended to address this problem. This paper
describes an extended version of this algorithm (“TTSA2”) which employs task
segmentation to increase schedulability. We show that the TTSA2 algorithm is
highly efficient when compared with alternative “branch and bound” search
schemes.

Keywords: Safety-related embedded systems, automatic code generation,

scheduler, time triggered.

1 Introduction
Developers creating software for use in the majority of “desktop” applications face a
very different set of challenges from those creating embedded software. For example,
the time interval within which the desktop system responds to a command may vary
significantly without causing a major problem: by contrast, even small variations in
timing behaviour (milliseconds or much less) in embedded systems may prove life
threatening in (for example) an industrial, automotive or medical system.
There are two common approaches used in building real-time embedded systems:
event-triggered (ET) and time-triggered (TT). The ET approach may prove cost
effective in cases where the system must handle many aperiodic and sporadic events
([4], [5]), since the conversion of such events to periodic events may reduce the
system utilisation. On the other hand “time-triggered systems are to be preferred with
respect to fault tolerance” [4] and are also considered as best match for supporting
safety critical applications ([1], [2], [3], [4]). In addition, it is widely recognised that
“Very safety critical systems, like X-by-wire require fault-tolerance and redundancy.
The implementation of such systems probably will fail without the framework of time-
triggered architectures” [5]. For these reasons, this paper focuses on systems with a
TT architecture.

M.D. Harrison and M.-A. Sujan (Eds.): SAFECOMP 2008, LNCS 5219, pp. 440–453, 2008.
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008
 Automating the Processes of Selecting an Appropriate Scheduling Algorithm 441

In most TT designs, an “offline” (also known as “pre-runtime”, or “static”)

schedule is considered the best choice ([6], [7], [12], [14], [3]). It has been
demonstrated in previous studies that the problem of testing the schedulability and
determining the scheduler and task parameters for a set of tasks for such a system is
NP-hard ([7], [8], [9], [10]). As part of an effort to address these problems we
previously introduced a novel two-stage heuristic search technique (“TTSA1”) which
is intended to support the configuration of TT schedulers for use with resource-
constrained embedded systems which employ a single processor [11]. In this paper,
we extend our TTSA1 technique. Our goal is to show that, with appropriate (static)
task execution behaviour, tasks may be cleanly segmented, allowing an increase in
schedulability, while meeting the constraints of a set of periodic tasks for use with
reliable embedded systems.
The remainder of this paper is organised as follows. In Section 2, we review
previous work in scheduler design and selection. In Section 3, we introduce and
describe a modified scheduling algorithm (“TTSA2”) which is used to automate the
process of scheduler selection and configuration. In Section 4, we describe the
process used to assess the TTSA2 algorithm and present the results obtained from this
assessment. Finally, in Section 5, we discuss the results, present our conclusions and
make some suggestions for future work.

2 Related Work
In this section we review previous work in this area.

2.1 Scheduling Safety Critical Resource-Constrained Embedded Systems

A wide range of software architectures can be used for real-time systems, ranging
from a simple scheduler to a full real-time operating system (RTOS).
For resource-constrained embedded systems, which have a very limited memory
and CPU performance, a simple form of “time triggered co-operative” (TTC) – a form
of cyclic executive – scheduler ([2], [8], [12], [14], [15]), “which has low run-time
overhead”[14], is often used. For safety-critical applications which have hard real-
time constraints, such as low jitter requirements, TTC architectures demonstrate very
low levels of task jitter [16], and can maintain their low-jitter characteristics even
when techniques such as dynamic voltage scaling (DVS) are employed to reduce
system power consumption [17].

2.2 Time Triggered Co-operative Scheduler (TTC)

The TTC implementation discussed in this paper executes each task in a predefined
time intervals which is derived from a scheduler “tick”. The scheduler tick is usually
signalled by an interrupt associated with the (periodic) overflow of a hardware timer.
At each tick the status of each task is updated and tasks which are due to run are
dispatched. The processor is then often placed in an “idle” mode, where it will
remain until the next tick (in order to reduce the system power consumption).
442 A.K. Gendy and M.J. Pont

2.3 Time Triggered Hybrid Scheduler (TTH)

Despite some attractive features, a TTC solution is not always appropriate. For
example a TTC system cannot respond to a critical external event while executing
specific task: this presents problems if the required response time is shorter than the
worst case execution time, “WCET”, of any of the system tasks [18].
In these circumstances, the TTC architecture can be replaced with a fully pre-
emptive architecture (for example, a rate monotonic or the earliest deadline first,
architecture [22]). Such an approach provides flexibility (and, possibly, portability),
but it will also tend to increase the system complexity and overhead when compared
to pre-run-time scheduling ([6], [7]).
In some designs the system responsiveness can be increased while maintaining the
minimal resource requirements, by allowing a limited level of pre-emption in the
system. This can be done by employing what we call a “time-triggered hybrid”
(TTH) scheduler ([3], [19]), and others have called a “multi-rate executive with
interrupts” [20]. The TTH can be seen as a rate-monotonic scheduler that supports a
single, short, high priority, pre-empting task, and a collection of co-operative tasks
(which have equal priority which is less than that of the pre-empting task).
The pre-empting task may be used for periodic data acquisition, typically by means
of an analogue-to-digital converter or similar device. Such requirements are common
in, for example, control systems [13], and applications which involve data sampling
and Fast-Fourier transforms (FFTs) or similar techniques: see, for example, the work
by Schlindwein et al. [21].

2.4 Scheduler Design and Configuration

When implementing a TTC or TTH scheduler, the system designer has to determine
some parameters (including the length of the tick interval, the order in which tasks
must be dispatched, and the initial delay - or phase - of each task). Inappropriate
choice of these parameters may affect systems reliability (by violating task
constraints) or lead to unnecessarily high levels of task jitter and / or to increased
system power consumption. It has been demonstrated in previous studies that the
problem of determining these parameters is NP-hard ([7], [8], [9], [10]).
In order to cope with this challenge, schedulability analysis and scheduler design
have been studied extensively over many years: see, for example, work by Liu and
Layland [22] through to work by Xu [7]. Researchers have proposed solutions based
on simulated annealing techniques [9], constraint programming heuristics [30], branch
and bound algorithm ([28]), and genetic algorithms [29].
None of the work summarised above relates directly to TTC / TTH architectures:
instead, most previous studies have tended to focus on “conventional” RT operating
systems (e.g. VxWorks: [29]). Such operating systems exceed the resource require-
ments available in the types of processor considered in this study.

2.5 The TTSA1 Scheduling Algorithm

In an effort to support creation of TTC / TTH designs we have previously introduced

a novel two-stage heuristic search technique, “TTSA1”, which is intended to support
the configuration of these time-triggered schedulers for use with resource-constrained
embedded systems which employ a single processor [11].
 Automating the Processes of Selecting an Appropriate Scheduling Algorithm 443

As noted above the TTSA1 algorithm helps to automate the process of both
scheduler selection and configuration. If a suitable scheduler is identified for a given
task set, TTSA1 attempts to determine the suitable scheduler parameters (the tick
interval) and task parameters (such as the task order and task offset). In determining
these parameters, TTSA1 aims to ensure that: (i) task constraints are met; (ii) power
consumption is “as low as possible”; (iii) a fully co-operative scheduler architecture is
employed whenever possible.
The input to TTSA1 is a list of task specifications and constraints. The algorithm
tests the schedulability of the given task set, first using the TTC scheduler. If the task
set cannot be scheduled with this scheduler, the process is repeated using the TTH
scheduler. The algorithm calculates a suitable tick interval, along with the task order
and the required offset value for each task if all the tasks are schedulable; otherwise a
list of the schedulable tasks is generated.
To achieve this result, TTSA1 begins by sorting the tasks according to two criteria:
a) task precedence, b) task deadline, laxity, period, WCET, or jitter. It is then
assumed that the first task will run with zero offset and the algorithm tries to find a
suitable offset for the second task, using the longest possible tick interval. If such an
offset is identified (and the constraints of both tasks are met), a third task is added to
the system and the process is repeated. We carry on in this way until all tasks have
been scheduled (if this proves possible).

3 The TTSA2 Scheduling Algorithm

In this section, we describe a modified version of the TTSA1 algorithm (“TTSA2”).
TTSA2 employs task segmentation to increase the number of task sets which can be
scheduled.

3.1 Overview

Despite its attractive features, the TTSA1 algorithm fails to find a suitable schedule
for a set of tasks in some cases. For example assume that for a given set all tasks
have deadlines equal to their periods. Assume also that this set includes two short
tasks (Task S1 and Tasks S2), and at least one long task (Task L).

Table 1. Task specifications for task set that cannot be scheduled with TTC/TTH

Task WCET (ms) Deadline (ms) Period (ms)

A 10 50 50
B 1 10 10
C 1 10 10

The TTSA1 algorithm fails to find a suitable schedule for this set if:
Deadline (S1) < WCET (S1) + WCET (L)
and
Deadline (S2) < WCET (S2) + WCET (L)
444 A.K. Gendy and M.J. Pont

Table 2. Task specifications for task set that can be scheduled with TTC/TTH

Task WCET (ms) Deadline (ms) Period (ms)

SA1 5 45 50
SA2 5 50 50
SB1 1 10 10
SC1 1 10 10

For example Task B and / or Task C shown in Table 1 will miss their deadlines
every time Task A runs if these three tasks are scheduled using TTC / TTH. To
overcome this situation, while still using a TTC / TTH architecture, long task(s) can
be divided into multiple short tasks ([3],[8], [16]): for example Task A can be divided
into two segments, Segment SA1 and Segment SA2, as shown in Table 2.
As previously indicated, testing the schedulability of a set of tasks and finding a
suitable scheduler for them (if any) is an NP-hard problem. The problem becomes
more complex if some parts of some tasks are required to exclude parts of other tasks
in the set. For example, it may be that Segment SA2 in Task A excludes Segment SB3
and Segment SC2 in Task B and Task C respectively, and Segment SB1 in Task B
excludes Segment SC1 in Task C.
In this section we extend our previous TTSA1 algorithm to deal with such
situations. We call the resulting algorithm TTSA2. The input to TTSA2 is a list of
task specifications and constraints, including critical-section boundaries.
The TTSA2 algorithm tests the schedulability of the given task set, first using the
TTC scheduler, if possible, otherwise it will try the TTH, considering each task as a
single segment. If the task set cannot be scheduled the process is repeated after
dividing one or more long tasks into two or more shorter tasks. The algorithm
calculates a suitable tick interval, the task order, the smallest number of task segments
along with the required offset value for each task and task segment if all the tasks are
schedulable; otherwise a list of the schedulable tasks and task segments is generated.
To achieve this result, TTSA2 begins (like TTSA1) by sorting the tasks according
to two criteria: a) task precedence, b) task deadline, laxity, period, WCET, or jitter. It
is then assumed that the first task will run as one segment with zero offset and the
algorithm tries to find a suitable offset for the second task (in one segment), using the
longest possible tick interval (the greatest common divisor of the task periods). If
such an offset is identified (and the constraints of both tasks are met), a third task is
added to the system and the process is repeated. We carry on in this way until all
tasks have been scheduled (if this proves possible). If a schedule cannot be found at
any stage the last task added to the design is removed and divided into two segments.
After adding the segmentation overhead and updating the segment deadlines (as
explained in the next subsections), the search proceeds (Fig. 1).
Please note that this search process is not exhaustive, and might be described as “best
characteristics first” approach: for example, it starts with a long tick interval (which is
known to reduce power consumption) and it gradually reduces the tick interval until it
matches the timing needs of the application (if ever). We proceed iteratively, stopping
the search when we have identified the first workable solution. We assume that -
because we have begun the search with “best characteristics” - any schedule identified
will represent a good (but not necessarily completely optimal) solution.
 Automating the Processes of Selecting an Appropriate Scheduling Algorithm 445

START
Arrange tasks;
// Common divisors of task periods in descending order
GCD[t] = {GCD1, GCD2, …, GCDm}, t=1, 2,,.., m;
Sched_Strategy = {TTC, TTH};

// First check schedulability using TTC strategy

Sched_Strategy_Index = 1;
DO{
Tick_index = 1;
DO{
Tick_Interval = GCD[Tick_index];
Add the first task as one segment with zero offset;
i = 1; Sched_Tasks = 1;
DO{
i++;
Add the next task, one segment at a time;
start segment with zero offset;
DO{
Sched[i] = Check_Sched(i, Tick_index,
Sched_Strategy_Index);
IF (Sched[i] = TRUE)
{ Sched_Tasks ++ ;}
ELSE
{
Increment offset of the last added segment;
Add the segmentation overhead;
}
} WHILE((constraints violated) and
(offset<=Period));
} WHILE (i < total number of tasks);
IF ( Sched_Tasks = total number of tasks )
{
Print task offsets, tick interval,
scheduler type;
EXIT;
}
ELSE
{ Tick_index++;}
} WHILE (Tick_index <= m )
Sched_Strategy++; // Try the TTH strategy
} WHILE (Sched_Strategy_Index <= 2);
Print list of scheduled and unscheduled tasks;
END

Fig. 1. Pseudo code for the TTSA2 algorithm

3.2 Adjusting the Segment Deadline

If Task T is divided into n segments, ST1, ST2.., STn, then the TTSA2 algorithm
calculates the deadline of each segment as follows:
Deadline (STn) = Deadline (T) . (1)

Deadline (STi-1) = Deadline (STi) – WCET (STi), where i = n, n-1, n-2…,2 . (2)
Please notice the deadline of Segment SA1 in Table 2 as an example.
To be able to divide long tasks into multiple short tasks accurate information about
the task WCET and the points at which the task can / cannot be pre-empted (the critical
446 A.K. Gendy and M.J. Pont

sections boundaries) must be specified. This can be done using techniques such as the
“single path programming paradigm” ([24], [25]) or code balancing techniques [23].

3.3 Adding Segmentation Overhead

If a task is divided into two or more segments, the TTSA2 algorithm takes
segmentation overhead into account. This overhead represents the time needed to
save the context of the current segment and the time needed to restore this context
when the next segment becomes ready to run. The time required for saving the
context (Context_Saving_overhead) may not be the same as that required for loading
the context (Context_Loading_overhead).
If Task T is divided into n segments, ST1, ST2.., STn, then the TTSA2 algorithm
updates the segments WCETs to reflect this overhead, as follows:
WCET (ST1) = WCET (ST1) + Context_Saving_overhead . (3)

WCET (STi) = Context_Loading_overhead + WCET (STi) +

(4)
Context_Saving_overhead, where i = 2, 3…, n-1.

WCET (STn) = Context_Loading_overhead +WCET (STn) . (5)

4 The Effectiveness of the TTSA2 Scheduling Algorithm

In this section the complexity and the effectiveness of the TTSA2 is evaluated. We
compare the performance of the TTSA2 with that of the “branch and bound”
algorithm (BaB), a standard benchmark which has been used previously to test the
effectives of heuristic algorithms[26].

4.1 Algorithm Complexity

Assume we have a set of n independent tasks and that each consists of s segments.
Investigating the schedulability of these tasks by means of a BaB algorithm requires
testing n paths, each of length n!, this has a complexity of O(n.n!) which is
“computationally intractable and cannot be used in practical systems when the
number of tasks is high”[27].
As noted elsewhere [11], the offset of each task can be any value in the range [0,
Period], in ticks. Taking all possible offset combinations (tn), where t is the period,
and considering each task as set of s segments, each may has different offset, the
complexity will increase to O(tn.s .n!).
By contrast, the TTSA2 algorithm does not try all paths. In addition, it does not
change the task or / and segment offset of a given task once it has been added
successfully to the schedule (that is, added without causing violation of the constraints
of any of the tasks and segments which have been included in the schedule
previously). The complexity of this algorithm is O(n.s.t).
 Automating the Processes of Selecting an Appropriate Scheduling Algorithm 447

4.2 Algorithm Performance

An empirical test was carried out to explore the performance of the TTSA2 algorithm.
The procedure and the results of this test are discussed in this section.

4.2.1 The Test Tools

The chosen hardware platform was an NXP (formerly Philips) LPC2129 micro-
controller running on a small evaluation board. The LPC2129 is based on an
ARM7TDMI core and is typical of modern (low cost) embedded processors. The
measurements of the scheduler overhead and the segmentation overhead were carried
out using this microcontroller. This overhead was taken into account while perf-
orming the scheduling selection and configurations.
To compare the performance of the TTSA2 with that of the BaB a simple (custom)
scheduler simulator was executed on a desktop PC.

4.2.2 Task Constraints

The constraints considered in this study are described in this section.
Jitter calculation
As far as we are concerned in this paper, a task’s jitter is the variation in the interval
between the start times of the task. The starting time of each task is recorded so that
the jitter statistics can be estimated. In the experiment discussed in the present paper,
the upper bound of task jitter is (pseudo) randomly generated according to Equation 6.
0 ≤ Jitter ≤ P(i) , where P(i) is the period of Task i. (6)

Precedence
If it is required that Task A precedes Task B, then, in any tick, Task B is allowed to
start its execution only after Task A completes its execution (e.g. see [28]).
In the current study, the precedence relation between any two tasks, A and B, is
(pseudo) randomly generated iff
P(A) = P(B) . (7)
and
P(A) ≥ ( WCET(A) + WCET (B) ) . (8)

Exclusion
If it is required that Segment SA2 in Task A excludes Segment SB3 in Task B, then, at
any tick, Segment SA2 is not allowed to pre-empt Segment SB3 and vice versa [28].
In the current study some tasks segments in each set were (pseudo) randomly
selected to have an exclusion relation between them.
Distance
The distance relation between any two tasks, A and B, can be defined as the minimum
distance between the completion of Task A and the start of Task B [29].
In the current study the precedence relation between two tasks was (pseudo)
randomly generated according to Equation 9.
448 A.K. Gendy and M.J. Pont

0 ≤ Distance(A, B) ≤ P(A) – (WCET(A) + WCET (B)) . (9)

given that:
P (A) = P (B) and P(A) ≥ (WCET(A) + WCET (B)) (10)

Latency
The latency relation between any two tasks, A and B, can be defined as the maximum
distance between the completion of Task B and the start of Task A [29].
In the current study the latency relation between two tasks was (pseudo) randomly
generated as follows:
If there are no distances constraint between Task A and Task B then:
(WCET(A) + WCET (B)) ≤ Latency(A, B) ≤ Max (P(A), P(B)) (11)
given that:
Max (P(A), P(B)) ≥ (WCET(A) + WCET (B)) . (12)
Otherwise:
(WCET(A) + WCET (B) + Distance (A,B)) ≤ Latency(A, B) ≤ P(A) . (13)

4.2.3 Dataset Used

To explore the effectiveness of this algorithm, 1000 sets of tasks were (pseudo)
randomly generated. Each set consisted of 3, 4 and 5 tasks specified by WCETs,
deadlines and periods. These specifications were generated according to the following
criteria:
0 < WCET(i) ≤ 2000 µs . (14)

WCET(i) < P(i) ≤ 10000 µs . (15)

WCET(i) ≤ D(i) ≤ P(i) . (16)

In order to simplify the calculations, task periods were (pseudo) randomly
generated at multiples of 1 ms (constrained by (15)). Task constraints of precedence,
exclusion, distance, latency, and upper bound of jitter were also (pseudo) randomly
generated and were in line with the findings from previous studies (e.g. see [28], [29])
and are (pseudo) randomly generated constrained by Equation 6 – Equation 16.

4.2.4 Results (Small Task Sets)

We tested the effectiveness of the TTSA2 algorithm when scheduling small sets of
tasks (each contains 3, 4, or 5 tasks) and compared the results with those from the
TTSA1 and the BaB algorithms. The results obtained from the BaB algorithm with /
without using task segmentation are recorded as BaB1 and BaB2 respectively.
Fig. 2 to Fig. 4. show the number of task sets that was found to be schedulable
using TTSA1, TTSA2, BaB1, and BaB2. Please note that the results obtained by
combining the (unique) results from TTSAx-EDF, TTSAx-LLF, TTSAx-Jitter,
 Automating the Processes of Selecting an Appropriate Scheduling Algorithm 449

TTSAx-RM, and TTSAx-SJF are shown in these figures as TTSAx-ALL, where x

equals 1 or 2 for TTSA1 and TTSA2. The number of trials until each algorithm
identified the set of tasks as schedulable/unschedulable and the total time are also
shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Number of trials and the total time

TTC TTH
3-task set
TTSA1 TTSA2 BaB1 BaB2 TTSA1 TTSA2 BaB1 BaB2

Minimum number of trials 2.00E+00 2.00E+00 2.00E+00 2.00E+00 2.00E+00 2.00E+00 2.00E+00 2.00E+00
Maximum number of trials 2.70E+02 5.80E+02 2.97E+03 4.66E+06 1.65E+02 3.30E+02 2.83E+03 1.99E+05
Average number of trials 2.46E+01 4.63E+01 3.51E+02 1.75E+04 1.59E+01 3.04E+01 1.97E+02 2.08E+03
Total number of trials 2.46E+04 4.63E+04 3.51E+05 1.75E+07 1.59E+04 3.04E+04 1.97E+05 2.08E+06
Total time (s) 4.00E+00 4.00E+00 3.90E+01 8.49E+02 2.50E+00 2.50E+00 2.50E+01 1.17E+02

TTC TTH
4-task set
TTSA1 TTSA2 BaB1 BaB2 TTSA1 TTSA2 BaB1 BaB2

Minimum number of trials 3.00E+00 3.00E+00 3.00E+00 3.00E+00 3.00E+00 3.00E+00 3.00E+00 3.00E+00
Maximum number of trials 2.65E+02 5.30E+02 7.23E+04 1.60E+08 2.65E+02 5.30E+02 4.21E+04 2.78E+07
Average number of trials 3.49E+01 7.01E+01 5.45E+03 5.30E+05 2.49E+01 4.99E+01 3.24E+03 1.13E+05
Total number of trials 3.49E+04 7.01E+04 5.44E+06 5.29E+08 2.49E+04 4.99E+04 3.23E+06 1.13E+08
Total time (s) 3.50E+00 4.50E+00 2.22E+02 1.73E+04 2.50E+00 4.50E+00 1.11E+02 4.17E+03

TTC TTH
5-task set
TTSA1 TTSA2 BaB1 BaB2 TTSA1 TTSA2 BaB1 BaB2

Minimum number of trials 4.00E+00 4.00E+00 4.00E+00 4.00E+00 4.00E+00 4.00E+00 4.00E+00 4.00E+00
Maximum number of trials 1.40E+02 3.14E+02 1.03E+06 1.21E+09 1.02E+02 2.26E+02 1.33E+06 1.98E+08
Average number of trials 4.04E+01 8.58E+01 8.84E+04 2.04E+07 2.93E+01 6.34E+01 5.41E+04 5.09E+06
Total number of trials 4.04E+04 8.58E+04 8.84E+07 2.04E+10 2.93E+04 6.34E+04 5.41E+07 5.09E+09
Total time (s) 2.50E+00 6.00E+00 3.69E+03 2.94E+06 2.50E+00 3.50E+00 5.26E+03 3.79E+05

From the results obtained it was noted that:

• TTSA2 found a suitable scheduler for more sets than TTSA1.
• Because TTSA2 tries to find a suitable (TTC or TTH) scheduler using the lowest
number of task segments, the results obtained from TTSA1 are found to be a
subset of the complete list of valid schedules identified by TTSA2. This means
that all the schedulers identified by both TTSA1 and TTSA2 have the same
scheduling overhead and power consumption.
• The results obtained from TTSA1 and TTSA2 (when overheads are taken into
account) are found to be a subset of the complete list of valid schedules
identified by BaB1 and BaB2, respectively. In addition, although TTSA1 and
TTSA2 test the schedulability using a subset of all the possible offset
combinations, they produce results which are similar to those obtained with the
BaB1 and BaB2 methods.
• The criteria used for adding the tasks to the TTSA1 and TTSA2 have an impact
on the schedulability of the set (different criteria may give different results).
450 A.K. Gendy and M.J. Pont

• Combining results from the variations of TTSA1 and variations of TTSA2

together gives results which are very close to those obtained from the BaB1 and
BaB2 respectively while requiring a much lower number of trials, and hence less
time (see Table 3).

4.2.5 Results (Large Task Set)

The results shown in Fig. 2. to Fig. 4. consider a maximum of 5 tasks. This is not an
unrealistic number for the resource-constrained systems we are concerned with in this
paper. However, this task set does not fully test the algorithm. In order to explore the
performance of TTSA2 on larger problems, 1000 new data sets were created. Each
data set consisted of 50 tasks, each with a maximum execution time of 2 ms and

Fig. 2. Number of Scheduled task sets (3 Fig. 3. Number of Scheduled task sets (4
interdependent tasks in each set) interdependent tasks in each set)

Fig. 4. Number of Scheduled task sets (5 Fig. 5. Number of Scheduled task sets (50
interdependent tasks in each set) interdependent tasks in each set)
 Automating the Processes of Selecting an Appropriate Scheduling Algorithm 451

maximum period of 200 ms. The task sets were (pseudo) randomly created according
to the constraints described previously. To reduce the length of the major cycle, task
periods were (pseudo) randomly generated as a multiple of 20 ms.
The results from this test are shown in Fig. 5. It took approximately 1 minute to
complete the schedulability test for one set of 50 tasks using TTSA2-EDF, and a total
of approximately 6 minutes to complete the test for TTSA2-All. It was not possible
to complete this search using a BaB approach as this would have required performing
a huge number of trials.

5 Discussion and Conclusions

It has been previously demonstrated that using offline, or pre-runtime, scheduling
helps in reducing the complexity of inspecting and verifying the timing behaviour of
safety critical embedded systems ([6], [7]).
In this paper we introduced a new offline scheduling algorithm, TTSA2, which
helps to automate the process of determining the parameters required to schedule a
given set of tasks in a resource-constrained embedded system employing a TTC or
TTH architecture. The TTSA2 algorithm tries to find a suitable scheduler for the set
of tasks by dividing each task into two or more segments. While searching for a
workable scheduler the proposed scheduling algorithm ensures that the CPU power
consumption is “as low as possible” (by choosing the longest possible tick interval),
and the task constraints as well as individual segment constraints are met (by
adjusting the segment offsets, tick interval, and task orders), using the lowest number
of segments. If the tasks cannot all be scheduled (for example, if some timing const-
raints of one or more tasks cannot be met), a list of the schedulable/unschedulable
tasks is generated. The algorithm improves on the performance of both a BaB search
and a previous version of this algorithm (TTSA1).
The algorithm can be used as part of a tool for automatic code generation for safety–
critical, resource-constrained embedded systems. Using such a tool will not only reduce
the time and effort required to develop such systems but will reduce the probability of
scheduling errors, which may cause serious damage (see [31] for an example), as well.
In the current work we assume that a task can be divided into two or more
segments only at certain points of time (the critical segment boundaries). Future work
needs to be done to determine more efficient way to find the points of time at which
task can be divided. In addition, other methods are needed to explore ways for
choosing the pre-empting task in the TTH scheduler, in order to improve the results.

References
1. Domaratsky, Y., Perevozchikov, M.: Highly dependable time-triggered operating system-
static scheduling approach and effective run-time implementations, Dedicated Systems
Magazine, pp. 77–84 (October-December 2000)
2. Kopetz, H.: Real-Time Systems, Design Principles for Distributed Embedded
Applications. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1997)
3. Pont, M.J.: Patterns For Time-Triggered Embedded Systems. Addison-Wesley, Reading
(2001)
452 A.K. Gendy and M.J. Pont

4. Scheler, F., Schröder-Preikschat, W.: Time-Triggered vs. Event-Triggered: A matter of

configuration? In: Dulz, W., Schröder-Preikschat, W. (eds.) MMB Workshop Proceedings
(GI/ITG Workshop on Non-Functional Properties of Embedded Systems Nuremberg, pp.
107–112. VDE Verlag, Berlin (2006) ISBN 978-3-8007-2956-2
5. Albert, A.: Comparison of Event-Triggered and Time-Triggered Concepts with Regard to
Distributed Control Systems, Embedded World 2004, Nuremberg, WEKA Verlag, pp.
235–252 (2004)
6. Xu, J.: Making Software Timing Properties Easier to Inspect and Verify. IEEE
Software 20(4), 34–41 (2003)
7. Xu, J., Parnas, D.L.: Priority Scheduling Versus Pre-Run-Time Scheduling. Int. Journal of
Time-Critical Systems 18, 7–23 (2000)
8. Baker, T.P., Shaw, A.: The Cyclic Executive Model and Ada. Real-Time Systems 1(1), 7–
25 (1989)
9. Tindell, K., Burns, A., Wellings, A.: Allocating Hard Real-Time Tasks: An NP-Hard
Problem Made Easy. Real-Time Systems 4(2), 145–165 (1992)
10. Baruah, S.K.: The Non-Preemptive Scheduling of Periodic Tasks Upon Multiprocessors.
Real-Time Systems 32(1-2), 9–20 (2006)
11. Gendy, A.K., Pont, M.J.: Automatically Configuring Time-Triggered Schedulers for Use
with Resource-Constrained, Single-Processor Embedded Systems. IEEE Trans. on
Industrial Informatics 4(1), 37–46 (2008)
12. Gangoiti, U., Marcos, M., Estévez, E.: Using Cyclic Executives for Achieving Closed
Loop Co-Simulation. In: Proc. of the Joint 44th IEEE Control and Decision Conference
and European Control Conference CDC-ECC 2005, Sevilla, pp. 3790 –4785 (2005)
13. Buttazzo, G.C.: Rate monotonic vs. EDF: Judgement day. Real-Time Systems 29(1), 5–26
(2005)
14. Huang, C., Chang, L., Kuo, T.: A Cyclic-Executive-Based QoS Guarantee over USB. In:
IEEE 9th Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium, Toronto,
Canada, May 27-30, 2003, pp. 88–95 (2003)
15. Burns, A.: Generating Feasible Cyclic Schedules. Control Engineering Practice 3(2), 151–
162 (1995)
16. Locke, C.D.: Software Architecture for Hard Real-Time Applications: Cyclic Executives
Vs. Fixed Priority Executives. Real-Time Systems 4(1), 37–52 (1992)
17. Phatrapornnant, T., Pont, M.J.: Reducing Jitter in Embedded Systems Employing A Time-
Triggered Software Architecture and Dynamic Voltage Scaling. IEEE Transactions on
Computers (Special Issue on Design and Test of Systems-On-a-Chip) 55(2), 113–124 (2006)
18. Allworth, S.T.: An Introduction to Real-Time Software Design. Macmillan, London (1981)
19. Maaita, A., Pont, M.J.: Using Planned Pre-Emption to Reduce Levels ff Task Jitter in a
Time-Triggered Hybrid Scheduler, UK Embedded Forum, Birmingham, UK, University of
Newcastle (2005)
20. Kalinsky, D.: Context Switch. Embedded Systems Programming 14(1), 94–105 (2001)
21. Schlindwein, F.S., Smith, M.J., Evans, D.H.: Spectral Analysis of Doppler Signals and
Computation of the Normalized First Moment in Real Time. Using a Digital Signal
Processor, Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing 26, 228–232 (1988)
22. Liu, C.L., Layland, J.W.: Scheduling Algorithms for Multiprogramming in a Hard Real-
Time Environment. Journal of the ACM 20(1), 40–61 (1973)
23. Gendy, A.K., Pont, M.J.: Towards a Generic Single-Path Programming Solution with
Reduced Power Consumption. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2007 International Design
Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering
Conference (IDETC/CIE 2007), Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, September 4-7 (2007)
 Automating the Processes of Selecting an Appropriate Scheduling Algorithm 453

24. Puschner, P., Burns, A.: Writing Temporally Predictable Code. In: Proc. 7th IEEE
International Workshop on Object-Oriented Real-Time Dependable Systems, pp. 85–91
(January 2002)
25. Puschner, P.: The Single-Path Approach Towards WCET-Analysable Software. In: Proc.
IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology, pp. 699–704 (December 2003)
26. Cucu, L., Sorel, Y.: Non-Preemptive Multiprocessor Scheduling for Strict Periodic
Systems with Precedence Constraints. In: Proc. 23rd Annual Workshop of the UK
Planning and Scheduling Special Interest Group, PLANSIG 2004, Cork, Ireland
(December 2004)
27. Buttazzo, G.: Hard Real-Time Computing Systems: Predictable Scheduling Algorithms
and Applications. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1997)
28. Xu, J., Parnas, D.L.: Scheduling Processes with Release Times, Deadlines, Precedence and
Exclusion Relations. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 16(3), 360–369 (1990)
29. Sandström, K., Norström, C.: Managing Complex Temporal Requirements in Real-Time
Control Systems. In: 9th IEEE Conf. Engineering of Computer-Based Systems. IEEE,
Sweden (2002)
30. Ekelin, C., Jonsson, J.: Evaluation of Search Heuristics for Embedded System Scheduling
Problems. In: Proc. Int. Conf. Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, Paphos,
Cyprus, pp. 640–654 (2001)
31. Reeves, G.: What Really Happened on Mars?, – Authoritative Account (1997),
http://research.microsoft.com
Other documents randomly have
different content
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Protection
and Communism
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Protection and Communism

Author: Frédéric Bastiat

Release date: November 10, 2013 [eBook #44144]

Most recently updated: October 23, 2024

Language: English

Credits: Produced by David Widger

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PROTECTION

AND COMMUNISM ***
PROTECTION and
COMMUNISM
From The French
 By Frederic Bastiat.

With a Preface, by The Translator

London:
John W. Parker And Son, West Strand

MDCCCLII.

CONTENTS
TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE.
PROTECTION AND COMMUNISM.
 TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE.
This translation will not, it is hoped, be unacceptable to the
English reader, particularly at the present moment, when it is not
improbable that, under certain circumstances, a great effort may be
made in this country to restore Protection—or, should that wild
attempt be considered impossible, to shift the public burdens in such
a manner as to effect, as far as possible, the same purpose in favour
of what is called the 'agricultural interest.' M. Bastiat's spirited little
work is in the form of a letter, addressed to M. Thiers—the
archenemy of free-trade, as he was of most propositions which had
for their object the true happiness of France. The present was only
one of a series of efforts made by M. Bastiat in favour of the cause
of freedom of commerce; and the English reader has already had an
opportunity of admiring the force of his arguments and the clearness
of his style, in Mr. Porter's* admirable translation of Popular
Fallacies, which is, indeed, a perfect armory of arguments for those
'who, although they may have a general impression favourable to
Free-trade, have yet some fears as to the consequences that may
follow its adoption.' What impression M. Bastiat may have produced
on the public mind of France it is not easy to conjecture, or how far
the recent violent changes in that country, presuming them to be at
all permanent, may prove favourable to Free-trade or otherwise. But
it is to be feared that there is an amount of prejudice and ignorance
in France, among the mass of her people, more inveterate and more
difficult to remove and enlighten than was the case in this country.
However, seed thus sown cannot remain altogether without fruit,
and the rapidity with which correct principles spread through a great
community, under apparently most unfavourable circumstances, is
such as frequently to astonish even those most convinced of the vast
power of truth.
 * Secretary of the Board of Trade, and author of the
Progress of the Nation.

The real object of M. Bastiat is to expose the unsoundness and

injustice of the system of Protection. He does this partly by a
dexterous reference to the theory of Communism, and shows, with
logical force and neat application, that the principles of the two are
in truth the same. The parallel thus drawn, so far from being fanciful
or strained, is capable of easy demonstration. But, in drawing it, M.
Bastiat rather assumes than proves that Communism is itself wholly
indefensible—that its establishment would be destructive of security
and property, and, consequently, of society—in a word, that it is
another term for robbery.
This is true, and obviously so, of Communism, in its more
extravagant form; and it is to this, of course, that M. Bastiat refers.
But it cannot be denied that there are many modifications of the
principle which embrace more or less truth, and which appear to
offer a corrective to that excessive competition or pressure of
numbers, the evils of which are patent, admitted, and deplored. That
the specific remedy proposed is vicious, that it would quickly make
matters much worse than they are, that it is, in fact, a fraud and a
mockery, does not prevent it from being, and naturally, captivating
to many who at present see no other way out of the difficulties and
the struggles by which they are surrounded: and who are tempted
to embrace it, not only as a relief to their present wants and
anxieties, but because it would, in their opinion, entail other
consequences, as connected with their social condition, particularly
grateful to their feelings. We further admit that such sentiments—
not in themselves irrational—founded on a legitimate desire for
improvement, and entertained by large and important classes—are
entitled to the most respectful consideration.
Whether some considerable melioration in the condition of our
labourers and artisans may not by degrees be effected by means of
combined labour, or co-operation, and the principle of partnership, is
no doubt one of the great questions to be solved by modern society,
but it is much too wide a one to be entered upon, however cursorily,
in this place. It is understood, however, that one of the most original
and powerful thinkers within the domain of statistics is at the
present moment engaged on this subject; and, if this be so, we shall
no doubt, before long, be in the possession of views of extreme
importance and interest.
We have, with deep regret, to add that M. Bastiat died during the
autumn of last year, after a long illness, in the south of Italy. By his
death, not only France, but the world also, has sustained a loss.
 PROTECTION AND COMMUNISM.
TO M. THIERS.
Sir,
Do not be ungrateful to the revolution of February. It may have
surprised, perhaps disturbed you, but it has also afforded you,
whether as an author, an orator, or a practised statesman, some
unexpected triumphs. Amidst these successes, there is one certainly
of no usual character. We not long ago read in La Presse, 'The
Association for the Protection of National Labour (the ancient
Mimerel Club)* is about to address a circular to all its
correspondents, to announce that a subscription is opened for the
purpose of promoting in manufactories the circulation of M. Thiers's
book upon Property. The association itself subscribes for 5000
copies.' Would that I had been present when this flattering
announcement met your eyes. It should have made them sparkle
with joy. We have good reason to say that the ways of Providence
are as infallible as they are impenetrable. For if you will bear with
me for a moment I will endeavour to prove that Protection, when
fully developed, and pushed to its legitimate consequences, becomes
Communism. It is sufficiently singular that a champion of Protection
should discover that he is a promoter of Communism; but what is
more extraordinary and more consoling still, is the fact that we find
a powerful association, that was formed for the purpose of
propagating theoretically and practically the principles of
Communism (in the manner deemed most profitable to its members)
now devoting the half of its resources to destroy the evil which it has
done with the other half.

* An association, Mr. Porter informs us, composed like that

assembling (or that did assemble, for we are not quite sure
whether it still exists,) at No. 17, New Bond Street,
 exclusively of producers, at least of the article sought to
be protected, and therefore of persons who believe
themselves to be interested in excluding from the home
market the productions of others.

I repeat it,—this is consoling. It assures us of the inevitable

triumph of truth, since it shows us the real and first propagators of
subversive doctrines, startled at their success, industriously
correcting with the proper antidote the poison they had spread.
This supposes, it is true, the identity of the principles of
Communism and of Protection, and perhaps you do not admit this
identity, though, to speak the truth, it seems to me impossible that
you could have written four hundred pages upon Property without
being struck by it. Perhaps you imagine that some efforts made in
favour of commercial freedom, or rather of free trade, the
impatience of a discussion without results, the ardour of the contest,
and the keenness of the struggle, have made me view (what
happens too often to all of us) the errors of my adversaries in
exaggerated colours. But, beyond question, according to my idea, it
requires but little effort to develop the principles you have been
advocating into those of Communism. How can it be that our great
manufacturers, landed proprietors, rich bankers, able statesmen,
have become, without knowing or wishing it, the introducers, the
very apostles of Communism in France? And why not, I would ask?
There are numerous workmen fully convinced of the right of labour,
and consequently Communists also without knowing or wishing it,
and who would not acknowledge the title. The reason of this is, that
amongst all classes interest biases the will, and the will, as Pascal
says, is the chief element of our faith. Under another name, many of
our working classes, very honest people be it observed, use
Communism as they have always used it, namely, on the condition
that the wealth of others should alone be liable to the law. But as
soon as the principle, extending itself, would apply the same rule to
their own property—oh! then Communism is held in detestation, and
their former principles are rejected with loathing. To express surprise
at this, is simply to confess ignorance of the human heart, its secret
workings, and how strong its inclination is to practise self-
deception.*

* The truth of this is found on all occasions where the

interests or the passions of men are concerned, and was
rather amusingly shown in many ways when the free-trade
measures of Sir R. Peel were being carried through. Then
every interest desired free-trade, except with reference to
the articles produced by itself.

No, Sir; it is not the heat of controversy, which has betrayed me in

seeing the doctrine of Protection in this light, for, on the contrary, it
was because I saw it in this point of view before the struggle
commenced that I am thus engaged. Believe me that to extend
somewhat our foreign commerce—a consequential result which,
however, is far from despicable—was never my governing motive; I
believed, and I still believe, that property itself was concerned in the
question; I believed, and I still believe, that our tariff of customs,
owing to the principle which has given it birth, and the arguments by
which it is defended, has made a breach in the very principle of
property itself, through which all the rest of our legislation threatens
to force itself. In considering this state of things, it seems to me that
a Communism, the true effect and range of which, (I must say this
to be just,) was not contemplated by its supporters, was on the
point of overwhelming us. It seems to me that this particular species
of Communism (for there are several kinds of it) flows logically from
the arguments of the protectionists, and is involved when those
arguments are pressed to their legitimate conclusion. It is upon this
ground, therefore, that it seems to me of the utmost importance to
meet the evil, for, fortified as it is by sophistical statements, and
sanctioned by high authority, there is no hope of eradicating the
error while such statements are permitted to take possession of and
to distract the mind of the public. It is thus that we view the matter
at Bordeaux, Paris, Marseilles, Lyons, and elsewhere, where we have
organized the free-trade association. Commercial freedom,
considered by itself, is without doubt a great blessing to the people;
but if we had only this object in view, our body should have been
named the Association for Commercial Freedom, or, more accurately,
for the Gradual Reform of the Tariffs. But the word 'free-trade'
implies the free disposal of the produce of labour, in other terms
'property' and it is for this reason that we have preferred it. We
knew, indeed, that the term would give rise to many difficulties. It
affirmed a principle, and from that moment all the supporters of the
opposite one ranged themselves against us. More than this, it was
extremely objectionable, even to some of those who were the most
disposed to second us, that is to say, to merchants and traders more
engaged in reforming the Customs than in overthrowing
Communism. Havre, while sympathizing with our views, refused to
enlist under our banner. On all sides I was told, 'Let us obtain
without loss of time some modification of our tariff, without
publishing to the world our extreme pretensions.' I replied, 'If you
have only that in view, exert your influence through your chambers
of commerce.' To this they answered, 'The word free-trade frightens
people, and retards our success.' Nothing is more true; but I would
derive even from the terror inspired by this word my strongest
arguments for its adoption. The more disliked it is, say I, the more it
proves that the true notion of property is obscured. The doctrine of
Protection has clouded ideas, and confused and false ideas have in
their turn supported Protection. To obtain by surprise, or with the
consent of the Government, an accidental amelioration of the tariff
may modify an effect, but cannot destroy a cause. I retain, then, the
word Free-trade, not in the mere spirit of opposition, but still, I
admit, because of the obstacles it creates or encounters—obstacles
which, while they betray the mischief at work, bear along with them
the certain proof, that the very foundation of social order was
threatened.
It is not sufficient to indicate our views by a word; they should be
defined. This has been done, and I here transcribe, as a programme,
the first announcement or manifesto of this association.
'When uniting for the defence of a great cause, the undersigned
feel the necessity of declaring their creed: of proclaiming the design,
the province, the means and the principles of their association.
 'Exchange is a natural right, like property. Every one who has
made or acquired any article should have the option either to apply
it immediately to his own use, or to transfer it to any one,
whomsoever he may be, who may consent to give him something he
may prefer to it in exchange. To deprive him of this power when he
makes no use of it contrary to public order or morality, and solely to
gratify the convenience of another, is to legalise a robbery—to
violate the principle of justice.
'Again, it is to violate the conditions of social order—for what true
social order can exist in the midst of a community, in which each
individual interest, aided in this by law and public opinion, aims at
success by the depression of all the others?
'It is to disown that providential superintendence which presides
over human affairs, and made manifest by the infinite variety of
climates, seasons, natural advantages and resources, benefits which
God has so unequally distributed among men to unite them by
commercial intercourse in the ties of a common brotherhood.
'It is to retard or counteract the development of public prosperity,
since he who is not free to barter as he pleases, is not free to select
his occupation, and is compelled to give an unnatural direction to his
efforts, to his faculties, to his capital, and to those agents which
nature has placed at his disposal.
'In short, it is to imperil the peace of nations, for it disturbs the
relations which unite them, and which render wars improbable in
proportion as they would be burdensome.
'The association has, then, for its object Free-trade.
'The undersigned do not contest that society has the right to
impose on merchandise, which crosses the frontier, custom dues to
meet national expenses, provided they are determined by the
consideration of the wants of the Treasury alone.
'But as soon as a tax, losing its fiscal character, aims at the
exclusion of foreign produce, to the detriment of the Treasury itself,
in order to raise artificially the price of similar national products, and
thus to levy contributions on the community for the advantage of a
class, from that instant Protection, or rather robbery, displays itself,
and this is the principle which the association proposes to eradicate
from the public mind, and to expunge from our laws, independently
of all reciprocity, and of the systems which prevail elsewhere.
'Though this association has for its object the complete
destruction of the system of protection, it does not follow that it
requires or expects such a reformation to be accomplished in a day,
as by the stroke of a wand. To return even from evil to good, from
an artificial state of things to one more natural, calls for the exercise
of much prudence and precaution. To carry out the details belongs
to the supreme power—the province of the association is to
propagate the principle, and to make it popular.
'As to the means which the association may employ to accomplish
its ends, it will never seek for any but what are legal and
constitutional.
'Finally, the association has nothing to do with party politics. It
does not advocate any particular interest, class or section of the
country. It embraces the cause of eternal justice, of peace, of union,
of free intercourse, of brotherhood among all men—the cause of
public weal, which is identical in every respect with that of the public
consumer.'
Is there a word in this programme which does not show an ardent
wish to confirm and strengthen, or rather perhaps to re-establish, in
the minds of men the idea of property, perverted, as it is, by the
system of Protection? Is it not evident that the interest of commerce
is made secondary to the interest of society generally? Remark that
the tariff, in itself good or evil in the financial point of view, engages
little of our attention. But, as soon as it acts intentionally with a view
to Protection, that is to say, as soon as it develops the principle of
spoliation, and ignores, in fact, the right of property, we combat it,
not as a tariff, but as a system. It is there, we say, that we must
eradicate the principle from the public mind, in order to blot it from
our laws.*

* As Mr. Porter says, in one of his excellent notes on M.

 Bastiat's work on Popular Fallacies, 'The true history of
all progress in regard to great questions, involving change
in social policy, is here indicated by M. Bastiat. It is in
vain that we look for such change through the enlightenment
of what should be the governing bodies. In this respect, all
legislative assemblies, whether called a Chamber of Deputies
or a House of Commons, are truly representatives of the
public mind, never placing themselves in advance, nor
lagging much behind the general conviction. This is not,
indeed, a new discovery, but we are much indebted to Mr.
Cobden and the leading members of the Anti-Corn-Law League
for having placed it in a point of view so prominent that it
can no longer be mistaken. Hereafter, the course of action
is perfectly clear upon all questions that require
legislative sanction. This can only be obtained through the
enlightenment of the constituency; but when such
enlightenment has been accomplished—when those mainly
interested in bringing about the change have once formed
their opinion in its favour, the task is achieved.'

It will be asked, no doubt, why, having in view a general principle

of this importance, we have confined the struggle to the merits of a
particular question.
The reason of this, is simple. It is necessary to oppose association
to association, to engage the interests of men, and thus draw
volunteers into our ranks. We know well that the contest between
the Protectionists and Free-traders cannot be prolonged without
raising and finally settling all questions, moral, political,
philosophical, and economical, connected with property. And since
the Mimerel Club, in directing its efforts to one end, had weakened
the principle of property, so we aimed at inspiring it with renewed
vigour, in pursuing a course diametrically opposite.
But what matters it what I may have said or thought at other
times? What matters it that I have perceived, or thought that I have
perceived, a certain connexion between Protection and Communism?
The essential thing is to prove that this connexion exists, and I
proceed to ascertain whether this be so.
You no doubt remember the time when, with your usual ability,
you drew from the lips of Monsieur Proudhon this celebrated
declaration, 'Give me the right of labour, and I will abandon the right
of property.' M. Proudhon does not conceal that, in his eyes, these
two rights are incompatible.
 If property is incompatible with the right of labour, and if the right
of labour is founded upon the same principle as Protection, what
conclusion can we draw, but that Protection is itself incompatible
with property? In geometry, we regard as an incontestable truth,
that two things equal to a third are equal to each other.
Now it happens that an eminent orator, M. Billault, has thought it
right to support at the tribune the right of labour. This was not easy,
in the face of the declaration which escaped from M. Proudhon. M.
Billault understood very well, that to make the state interfere to
weigh in the balance the fortunes, and equalize the conditions, of
men, tends towards Communism; and what did he say to induce the
National Assembly to violate property and the principles thereof? He
told you with all simplicity that he asked you to do what, in effect,
you already do by your tariff. His aim does not go beyond a
somewhat more extended application of the doctrines now admitted
by you, and applied in practice. Here are his words:—
'Look at our custom-house tariff? By their prohibitions, their
differential taxes, their premiums, their combinations of all kinds, it
is society which aids, which supports, which retards or advances all
the combinations of national labour; it not only holds the balance
between French labour, which it protects, and foreign labour, but on
the soil of France itself it is perpetually interfering between the
different interests of the country. Listen to the perpetual complaints
made by one class against another: see, for example, those who
employ iron in their processes, complaining of the protection given
to French iron over foreign iron; those who employ flax or cotton
thread, protesting against the protection granted to French thread,
in opposition to the introduction of foreign thread; and it is thus with
all the others. Society (it ought to be said, the government) finds
itself then forcibly mixed up with all these struggles, with all the
perplexities connected with the regulation of labour; it is always
actively interfering between them, directly and indirectly, and from
the moment that the question of custom duties is broached, you will
see that you will be, in spite of yourselves, forced to acknowledge
the fact and its cause, and to take on yourself the protection of
every interest.
'The necessity which is thus imposed on the government to
interfere in the question of labour, should not, then, be considered
an objection to the debt which society owes to the poor workmen.'
And you will remark well that in his arguments, M. Billault has not
the least intention of being sarcastic. He is no Free-trader,
intentionally disguised for the purpose of exposing the inconsistency
of the Protectionists. No; M. Billault is himself a Protectionist, bonâ
fide. He aims at equalizing our fortunes by law. With this view, he
considers the action of the tariffs useful; and being met by an
obstacle—the right of property—he leaps over it, as you do. The
right of labour is then pointed out to him, which is a second step in
the same direction. He again encounters the right of property, and
again he leaps over it; but turning round, he is surprised to see you
do not follow him. He asks the reason. If you reply—I admit in
principle that the law may violate property, but I find it inopportune
that this should be done under the particular form of the right of
labour, M. Billault would understand you, and discuss with you the
secondary question of expediency. But you raise up, in opposition to
his views, the principle of property itself. This astonishes him; and
he conceives that he is entitled to say to you—Do not act with
inconsistency, and deny the right of labour on the ground of its
infringement of the right of property, since you violate this latter
right by your tariffs, whenever you find it convenient to do so. He
might add, with some reason, by the protective tariffs you often
violate the property of the poor for the advantage of the rich. By the
right of labour, you would violate the property of the rich to the
advantage of the poor. By what chance does it happen that your
scruples stop short at the point they do?
Between you and M. Billault there is only one point of difference.
Both of you proceed in the same direction—that of Communism:
only you have taken but one step, and he has taken two. On this
account the advantage, in my eyes at least, is on your side; but you
lose it on the ground of logic.
 For since you go along with him, though more slowly than he
does, he is sufficiently well pleased to have you as his follower. This
is an inconsistency which M. Bitlault has managed to avoid, but,
alas! to fall himself also into a sad dilemma! M. Billault is too
enlightened not to feel, indistinctly perhaps, the danger of each step
that he takes in the path which ends in Communism. He does not
assume the ridiculous position of the champion of property, at the
very moment of violating it; but how does he justify himself? He
calls to his aid the favourite axiom of all who can reconcile two
irreconcilable things—There are no fixed principles. Property,
Communism—let us take a little from both, according to
circumstances.
'To my mind, the pendulum of civilization which oscillates from the
one principle to the other, according to the wants of the moment,
but which always makes the greater progress if, after strongly
inclining towards the absolute freedom of individual action, it fells
back on the necessity of government interference.'
There is, then, no such thing as truth in the world. No principles
exist, since the pendulum ought to oscillate from one principle to the
other, according to the wants of the moment. Oh! metaphor, to what
a point thou wouldst bring us, if allowed!
But as you have well said, in your place in the Assembly, one
cannot discuss all parts of this subject at once, I will not at the
present moment examine the system of Protection in the purely
economic point of view. I do not inquire then whether, with regard to
national wealth, it does more good than harm, or the reverse. The
only point that I wish to prove is, that it is nothing else than a
species of Communism. MM. Billault and Proudhon have commenced
the proof, and I will try and complete it.
And first, What is to be understood by Communism? There are
several modes, if not of realizing community of goods, at least of
trying to do so. M. de Lamartine has reckoned four. You think that
there are a thousand, and I am of your opinion. However, I believe
that all these could be reduced under three general heads, of which
one only, according to me, is truly dangerous.
 First, it might occur to two or more men to combine their labour
and their time. While they do not threaten the security, infringe the
liberty, or usurp the property of others, neither directly nor indirectly,
if they do any mischief, they do it to themselves. The tendency of
such men will be always to attempt in remote places the realization
of their dream. Whoever has reflected upon these matters knows
these enthusiasts will probably perish from want, victims to their
illusions. In our times, Communists of this description have given to
their imaginary elysium the name of Icaria,* as if they had had a
melancholy presentiment of the frightful end towards which they
were hastening. We may lament over their blindness; we should try
to rescue them if they were in a state to hear us, but society has
nothing to fear from their chimeras.

* This, as most of our readers are aware, is an imaginary

country at the other side of the world, where a state of
circumstances is supposed to exist productive of general
happiness—moral and physical—to all. The chief creator of
this modern Utopia, from which indeed the idea is
confessedly taken, is M. Cabet, whose book was published
during the year of the late revolution in France. It is
meant to be a grave essay on possible things, but could only
be considered so, we venture to think, in Paris, and only
there in times of unusual excitement. The means by which M.
Cabet and his followers suppose their peculiar society could
be established and maintained, are beyond conception false,
ludicrous, and puerile.

M. Cabet was obliged to leave France for a grave offence,

but found a refuge and no inconsiderable number of followers
in America, where, by the side of much that is excellent and
hopeful, flourishes, perhaps, under present circumstances,
as a necessary parallel, many of the wild and exploded
theories of the world.

Another form of Communism, and decidedly the coarsest, is this:

throw into a mass all the existing property, and then share it equally.
It is spoliation becoming the dominant and universal law. It is the
destruction, not only of property, but also of labour and of the
springs of action which induce men to work. This same Communism
is so violent, so absurd, so monstrous, that in truth I cannot believe
it to be dangerous. I said this some time ago before a considerable
assembly of electors, the great majority of whom belonged to the
suffering classes. My words were received with loud murmurs.
I expressed my surprise at it. 'What,' said they, 'dares M. Bastiat
say that Communism is not dangerous? He is then a Communist!
Well, we suspected as much, for Communists, Socialists, Economists,
are all of the same order, as it is proved by the termination of the
words.' I had some difficulty in recovering myself; but even this
interruption proved the truth of my proposition. No, Communism is
not dangerous, when it shows itself in its most naked form, that of
pure and simple spoliation; it is not dangerous, because it excites
horror.
I hasten to say, that if Protection can be and ought to be likened
to Communism, it is not that which I am about to attack.
But Communism assumes a third form:—
To make the state interfere to, let it take upon itself to adjust
profits and to equalize men's possessions by taking from some,
without their consent, to give to others without any return, to
assume the task of putting things on an equality by robbery,
assuredly is Communism to the fullest extent. It matters not what
may be the means employed by the state with this object, no more
than the sounding names with which they dignify this thought.
Whether they pursue its realization by direct or indirect means, by
restriction or by impost, by tariffs or by the right of labour; whether
they call it by the watchword of equality, of mutual responsibility, of
fraternity, that does not change the nature of things; the violation of
property is not less robbery because it is accomplished with
regularity, order, and system, and under the forms of law.
I repeat that it is here, at this juncture, that Communism is really
dangerous. Why? Because under this form we see it incessantly
ready to taint everything. Behold the proof! One demands that the
state should supply gratuitously to artisans, to labourers, the
instruments of labour,* that is, to encourage them to take them
from other artisans and labourers. Another wishes that the state
should lend without interest; this could not be done without violating
property. A third calls for gratuitous education to all degrees;
gratuitous! that is to say, at the expense of the tax-payers.**

* By this phrase we believe is meant much more than the

English words might indicate—the supplying all the capital
necessary to start the artisan in the world.

** We think, with Adam Smith and most others, that education

and religious instruction may fairly and properly, if the
occasion requires, be excepted from this rule, on the ground
that as they are most beneficial to the whole of society—
their effects not stopping short with the persons receiving
the immediate benefits—'they may, without injustice, be
defrayed by the general contribution of the whole society.'
We by no means say, however, that this public support should
supersede voluntary contribution.

A fourth requires that the state should support the associations of

workmen, the theatres, the artists, See. But the means necessary for
such support is so much money taken from those who have
legitimately made it. A fifth is dissatisfied unless the state artificially
raises the price of a particular product for the benefit of those who
sell it; but it is to the detriment of those who buy. Yes, under this
form, there are very few people who at one time or an other would
not be Communists. You are so yourself; M. Billault is; and I fear
that in France we are all so in some degree. It seems that the
intervention of the state reconciles us to robbery, in throwing the
responsibility of it on all the world; that is to say, on no one; and it is
thus that we sport with the wealth of others in perfect tranquillity of
conscience. That honest M. Tourret, one of the most upright of men
who ever sat upon the ministerial bench, did he not thus commence
his statement in favour of the scheme for the advancement of public
money for agricultural purposes? 'It is not sufficient to give
instruction for the cultivation of the arts. We must also supply the
instruments of labour.' After this preamble, he submits to the
National Assembly a proposition, the first heading of which runs
thus:—
'First—There is opened, in the budget of 1849, in favour of the
Minister of Agriculture and Commerce, a credit of ten millions, to
meet advances to the proprietors and associations of proprietors of
rural districts.' Confess that if this legislative language was rendered
with exactness, it should have been:—
'The Minister of Agriculture and Commerce is authorized, during
the year 1849, to take the sum of ten millions from the pocket of the
labourers who are in great want of it, and to whom it belongs, to put
it in the pocket of other labourers who are equally in want of it, and
to whom it does not belong.'
Is not this an act of Communism, and if made general, would it
not constitute the system of Communism?
The manufacturer, who would die sooner than steal a farthing,
does not in the least scruple to make this request of the legislature
—'Pass me a law which raises the price of my cloth, my iron, my
coal, and enable me to overcharge my purchasers.' As the motive
upon which he founds this demand is that he is not content with the
profit, at which trade unfettered or free-trade would fix it, (which I
affirm to be the same thing, whatever they may say,) so, on the
other hand, as we are all dissatisfied with our profits, and disposed
to call in the aid of the law, it is clear, at least to me, that if the
legislature does not hasten to reply, 'That does not signify to us; we
are not charged to violate property, but to protect it,' it is clear, I say,
that we are in downright Communism. The machinery put in motion
by the state to effect the object may differ from what we have
indicated, but it has the same aim, and involves the same principle.
Suppose I present myself at the bar of the National Assembly, and
say, 'I exercise a trade, and I do not find that my profits are
sufficient: consequently I pray you to pass a law authorizing the tax-
collectors to levy, for my benefit, only one centime upon each French
family,' If the legislature grants my request, this could only be taken
as a single act of legal robbery, which does not at this point merit
the name of Communism. But if all Frenchmen, one after the other,
made the same request, and if the legislature examined them with
the avowed object of realizing the equality of goods, it is in this
principle, followed by its effects, that I see, and that you cannot help
seeing, Communism.
 Whether, in order to realize its theory, the legislature employs
custom-house officers or excise collectors, imposes direct or indirect
taxes, encourages by protection or premiums, matters but little.
Does it believe itself authorized to take and to give without
compensation? Does it believe that its province is to regulate profits?
Does it act in consequence of this belief? Do the mass of the public
approve of it?—do they compel this species of action? If so, I say we
are upon the descent which leads to Communism, whether we are
conscious of it or not.
And if they say to me, the state never acts thus in favour of any
one, but only in favour of some classes, I would reply—Then it has
found the means of making Communism even worse than it naturally
is.
I know, Sir, that some doubt is thrown on these conclusions by the
aid of a ready confusion of ideas. Some administrative acts are
quoted, very legitimate cases in their way, where the intervention of
the state is as equitable as it is useful; then, establishing an
apparent analogy between these cases, and those against which I
protest, they will attempt to place me in the wrong, and will say to
me—'As you can only see Communism in Protection, so you ought to
see it in every case where government interferes.'
This is a trap into which I will not fall.
This is why I am compelled to inquire what is the precise
circumstance which impresses on state intervention the communistic
character.
What is the province of the state? What are the things which
individuals ought to entrust to the Supreme Power? Which are those
which they ought to reserve for private enterprise? To reply to these
questions would require a dissertation on political economy.
Fortunately I need not do this for the purpose of solving the problem
before us.
When men, in place of labouring for themselves individually,
combine with others, that is to say, when they club together to
execute any work, or to produce a result by an united exertion, I do
not call that Communism, because I see nothing in this of its
peculiar characteristic, equalizing conditions by violent means. The
state takes, it is true, by taxes, but it renders service for them in
return. It is a particular but legitimate form of that foundation of all
society, exchange. I go still further. In intrusting a special service to
be done by the state, it may be made beneficial, or otherwise,
according to its nature and the mode in which it is effected.
Beneficial, if by this means the service is made with superior
perfection and economy, and the reverse on the opposite
hypothesis: but in either case I do not perceive the principle of
Communism. The proceeding in the first was attended with success;
in the second, with failure, that is all; and if Communism is a
mistake, it does not follow that every mistake is Communism.
Political economists are in general very distrustful on the question
of the intervention of government. They see in it inconveniences of
all sorts, a discouragement of individual liberty, energy, foresight,
and experience, which are the surest foundations of society. It often
happens, then, that they have to resist this intervention. But it is not
at all on the same ground and from the same motive which makes
them repudiate Protection. Our opponents cannot, therefore, fairly
turn any argument against us in consequence of our predilections,
expressed, perhaps, without sufficient caution for the freedom of
private enterprise, nor say, 'It is not surprising that these people
reject the system of Protection, for they reject the intervention of
the state in everything.'
First, it is not true that we reject it in everything: we admit that it
is the province of the state to maintain order and security, to enforce
regard for person and property, to repress fraud and violence. As to
the services which partake, so to speak, of an industrial character,
we have no other rule than this: that the state may take charge of
these, if the result is a saving of labour to the mass of the people.
But pray, in the calculation, take into account all the innumerable
inconveniences of labour monopolized by the state.
Secondly, I am obliged to repeat it, it is one thing to protest
against any new interference on the part of the state on the ground
that, when the calculation was made, it was found that it would be
disadvantageous to do so, and that it would result in a national loss;
and it is another thing to resist it because it is illegitimate, violent,
unprincipled, and because it assigns to the government to do
precisely what it is its proper duty to prevent and to punish. Now
against the system called Protection these two species of objections
may be urged, but it is against the principle last mentioned, fenced
round as it is by legal forms, that incessant war should be waged.
Thus, for example, men would submit to a municipal council the
question of knowing whether it would be better that each family in a
town should go and seek the water it requires at the distance of
some quarter of a league, or whether it is more advantageous that
the local authority should levy an assessment to bring the water to
the marketplace. I should not have any objection in principle to
enter into the examination of this question. The calculation of the
advantages and inconveniences for all would be the sole element in
the decision. One might be mistaken in the calculation, but the error,
which in this instance may involve the loss of property, would not be
a systematic violation of it.
But when the mayor proposes to discourage one trade for the
advantage of another, to prohibit boots for the advantage of the
shoemaker, or something like it, then would I say to him, that in this
instance he acts no longer on a calculation of advantages and
inconveniences; he acts by means of an abuse of power, and a
violent perversion of the public authority; I would say to him, 'You
who are the depositary of power and of the public authority to
chastise robbery, dare you apply that power and authority to protect
it and render it systematic?'
Should the idea of the mayor prevail, if I see, in consequence of
this precedent all the trading classes of the village bestirring
themselves, to ask for favours at the expense of each other—if in
the midst of this tumult of unscrupulous attempts I see them
confound even the notion of property, I must be allowed to assume
that, to save it from destruction, the first thing to do is to point out
what has been iniquitous in the measure, which formed the first link
of the chain of these deplorable events.
It would not be difficult, Sir, to find in your work passages which
support my position and corroborate my views. To speak the truth, I
might consult it almost by chance for this purpose. Thus, opening
the book at hap-hazard, I would probably find a passage
condemning, either expressly or by implication, the system of
Protection—proof of the identity of this system in principle with
Communism. Let me make the trial. At page 283, I read:—
'It is, then, a grave mistake to lay the blame upon competition,
and not to have perceived that if the people are the producers, they
are also the consumers, and that receiving less on one side,' (which
I deny, and which you deny yourself some lines lower down,) 'paying
less on the other, there remains then, for the advantage of all, the
difference between a system which restrains human activity, and a
system which places it in its proper course, and inspires it with
ceaseless energy.'
I defy you to say that this argument does not apply with equal
force to foreign as to domestic competition. Let us try again. At page
325, we find:
'Men either possess certain rights, or they do not. If they do—if
these rights exist, they entail certain inevitable consequences....
But more than this, they must be the same at all times; they are
entire and absolute—past, present, and to come—in all seasons; and
not only when it may please you to declare them to be, but when it
may please the workmen to appeal to them.'
Will you maintain that an iron-master has an undefined right to
hinder me for ever from producing indirectly two hundredweight of
iron in my manufactory, for the sake of producing one hundred-
weight in a direct manner in his own? This right, also, I repeat,
either exists, or it does not. If it does exist, it must be absolute at all
times and in all seasons; not only when it may please you to declare
it to be so, but when it may please the iron-masters to claim its
protection.
 Let us again try our luck. At page 63, I read,—
'Property does not exist, if I cannot give as well as consume it.'
We say so likewise. 'Property does not exist, if I cannot exchange
as well as consume it;' and permit me to add, that the right of
exchange is at least as valuable, as important in a social point of
view, as characteristic of property, as the right of gift. It is to be
regretted, that in a work written for the purpose of examining
property under all its aspects, you have thought it right to devote
two chapters to an investigation of the latter right, which is in but
little danger, and not a line to that of exchange, which is so boldly
attacked, even under the shelter of the laws.
Again, at page 47:—
'Man has an absolute property in his person and in his faculties.
He has a derivative one, less inherent in his nature, but not less
sacred, in what these faculties may produce, which embraces all that
can be called the wealth of this world, and which society is in the
highest degree interested in protecting; for without this protection
there would be no labour; without labour, no civilization, not even
the necessaries of life—nothing but misery, robbery, and
barbarism.'*

* This is a happy exposure of the inconsistency of M.

Thiers. But we have had recently, and in the sitting of the
late National Assembly, a curious example of the perversion
of his extraordinary powers, in the speeches, full of false
brilliancy, to the legislature of France, in condemnation of
the principles of Free-trade. His statements were coloured,
or altogether without foundation; the examples which he
adduced, when looked into, told against him, and his logic
was puerile. Yet he found an attentive and a willing
auditory. Indeed, the prejudices of the French on this
subject, mixed up as they are with so many influences
operating on their vanity, are still inveterate; and it was,
as it always has been, M. Thiers's object to reflect
faithfully the national mind. His aim never was the noble
one of raising and enlightening the views of his countrymen,
but simply to gain an influence over their minds, by
encouraging and echoing their prejudices and keeping alive
their passions.

Well, Sir, let us make a comment, if you do not object, on this

text.
 Like you, I see property at first in the free disposal of the person;
then of the faculties; finally, of the produce of those faculties, which
proves, I may say as a passing remark, that, from a certain point of
view, Liberty and Property are identical.
I dare hardly say, like you, that property in the produce of our
faculties is less inherent in our nature than property in these
faculties themselves. Strictly speaking, that may be true; but
whether a man is debarred from exercising his faculties, or deprived
of what they may produce, the result is the same, and that result is
called Slavery. This is another proof of the identity of the nature of
liberty and property. If I force a man to labour for my profit, that
man is my slave. He is so still, if, leaving him personal liberty, I find
means, by force or by fraud, to appropriate to myself the fruits of his
labour. The first kind of oppression is the more brutal, the second
the more subtle. As it has been remarked that free labour is more
intelligent and productive, it may be surmised that the masters have
said to themselves, 'Do not let us claim directly the powers of our
slaves, but let us take possession of much richer booty—the produce
of their faculties freely exercised, and let us give to this new form of
servitude the engaging name of Protection.'
You say, again, that society is interested in rendering property
secure. We are agreed; only I go further than you; and if by society
you mean government, I say that its only province as regards
property is to guarantee it in the most ample manner; that if it tries
to measure and distribute it by that very act, government, instead of
guaranteeing, infringes it. This deserves examination.
When a certain number of men, who cannot live without labour
and without property, unite to support a common authority, they
evidently desire to be able to labour, and to enjoy the fruits of their
labour in all security, and not to place their faculties and their
properties at the mercy of that authority. Even antecedent to all form
of regular government, I do not believe that individuals could be
properly deprived of the right of defence—the right of defending
their persons, their faculties, and their possessions.
 Without pretending, in this place, to philosophise upon the origin
and the extent of the rights of governments—a vast subject, well
calculated to deter me—permit me to submit the following idea to
you. It seems to me that the rights of the state can only be the
reduction into method of personal rights previously existing. I
cannot, for myself, conceive collective right which has not its root in
individual right, and does not presume it. Then, in order to know if
the state is legitimately invested with a right, it is incumbent on us
to ask whether this right dwells in the individual in virtue of his being
and independently of all government.
It is upon this principle that I denied some time ago the right of
labour. I said, since Peter has no right to take directly from Paul
what Paul has acquired by his labour, there is no better foundation
for this pretended right through the intervention of the state: for the
state is but the public authority created by Peter and by Paul, at
their expense, with a defined and clear object in view, but which
never can render that just which is in itself not so. It is with the aid
of this touchstone that I test the distinction between property
secured and property controlled by the state. Why has the state the
right to secure, even by force, every man's property? Because this
right exists previously in the individual. No one can deny to
individuals the right of lawful defence—the right of employing force,
if necessary, to repel the injuries directed against their persons, their
faculties, and their effects. It is conceived that this individual right,
since it resides in all men, can assume the collective form, and
justify the employment of public authority. And why has the state no
right to equalize or apportion worldly wealth? Because, in order to
do so, it is necessary to rob some in order to gratify others. Now, as
none of the thirty-five millions of Frenchmen have the right to take
by force, under the pretence of rendering fortunes more equal, it
does not appear how they could invest public authority with this
right.
And remark, that the right of distributing* the wealth of
individuals is destructive of the right which secures it. There are the
savages. They have not yet formed a government; but each of them
possesses the right of lawful defence. And it is easy to perceive that
it is this right which will become the basis of legitimate public
authority. If one of these savages has devoted his time, his strength,
his intelligence to make a bow and arrows, and another wishes to
take these from him, all the sympathies of the tribe will be on the
side of the victim; and if the cause is submitted to the judgment of
the elders, the robber will infallibly be condemned. From that there
is but one step to the organization of public power. But I ask you—Is
the province of this public power, at least its lawful province, to
repress the act of him who defends his property in virtue of his
abstract right, or the act of him who violates, contrary to that right,
the property of another? It would be singular enough if public
authority was based, not upon the rights of individuals, but upon
their permanent and systematic violation! No; the author of the book
before me could not support such a position. But it is scarcely
enough that he could not support it; he ought perhaps to condemn
it. It is scarcely enough to attack this gross and absurd Communism
disseminated in low newspapers. It would perhaps have been better
to have unveiled and rebuked that other and more audacious and
subtle Communism, which, by the simple perversion of the just idea
of the rights of government, insinuates itself into some branches of
our legislation, and threatens to invade all.

* It is not easy here, and in some other places, to convey

the exact meaning without using circuitous language.

For, Sir, it is quite incontestable that by the action of the tariffs—by

means of Protection—governments realize this monstrous thing of
which I have spoken so much. They abandon the right of lawful
defence, previously existing in all men, the source and foundation of
their own existence, to arrogate to themselves a pretended right of
equalizing the fortunes of all by means of robbery, a right which, not
existing before in any one, cannot therefore exist in the community.
But to what purpose is it to insist upon these general ideas? Why
should I show the absurdity of Communism, since you have done so
yourself (except as to one of its aspects, and, as I think, practically
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookball.com