Fermat's Library | Agrarian Justice annotated/explained version.

Thomas Paine was an English-American political activist/theorist, p...

Paine waited one year before publishing Agrarian Justice, hoping fo...

Liberty, Equality, Fraternity is the French motto that was first co...

François Noël Babeuf, commonly known as Gracchus Babeuf was a Frenc...

The Social condition of France during the 18th century was very mis...

This distinction is central to Paine's overall point. Basically, we...

The origins of social security can be traced to this proposal. The ...

Distinct from welfare, the guaranteed minimum income is for everyone.

Although average life expectancy was about 40 in England at the tim...

He is referring to William Pitt the Younger, a British politician ...

*Fun fact:* 1.00£ in 1795 is equivalent to 121.00£ in 2016. For mor...

Curious fact: Life expectancy at birth rose was about 40 by the lat...

The author believes that society can only change as a whole. Thus t...

This is a core concept of Thomas Paine thought **"the earth, in its...

Thomas Paine Paine viewed private property as necessary. At the sam...

iii

AUTHOR'S INSCRIPTION

To the Legislature and the Executive Directory

of the French Republic.

THE plan contained in this work is not adapted for any particular

country alone: the principle on which it is based is general. But as

the rights of man are a new study in this world, and one needing

protection from priestly imposture, and the insolence of oppression

too long established, I have thought it right to place this little work

under your safeguard. When we reflect on the long and dense night

in which France and all Europe have remained plunged by their

governments and their priests, we must feel less surprise than grief at

the bewilderment caused by the first burst of light that dispels the

darkness. The eye accustomed to darkness can hardly bear at first the

broad daylight. It is by usage the eye learns to see, and it is the same

in passing from any situation to its opposite.

As we have not at one instant renounced all our errors, we cannot

at one stroke acquire knowledge of all our rights. France has had the

honour of adding to the word Liberty that of Equality; and this word

signifies essentially a principal that admits of no gradation in the

things to which it applies. But equality is often misunderstood, often

misapplied, and often violated.

Liberty and Property are words expressing all those of our

possessions which are not of an intellectual nature. There are two

kinds of property. Firstly, natural property, or that which comes to us

from the Creator of the universe,--such as the earth, air, water.

Secondly, artificial or acquired property,--the invention of men. In

the latter equality is impossible; for to distribute it equally it would

be necessary that all should have contributed in the same proportion,

which can never be the case; and this being the case, every individual

would hold on to his own property, as his right share. Equality of

natural property is the subject of this little essay. Every individual in

the world is born therein with legitimate claims on a certain kind of

property, or its equivalent.

The right of voting for persons charged with the execution of the

laws that govern society is inherent in the word Liberty, and

constitutes the equality of personal rights. But even if that right (of

voting) were inherent in property, which I deny, the right of suffrage

would still belong to all equally, because, as I have said, all

individuals have legitimate birthrights in a certain species of

property.

I have always considered the present Constitution of the French

Republic the best organized system the human mind has yet

produced. But I hope my former colleagues will not be offended if I

warn them of an error which has slipped into its principle. Equality

of the right of suffrage is not maintained. This right is in it connected

with a condition on which it ought not to depend; that is, with a

proportion of a certain tax called "direct." The dignity of suffrage is

thus lowered; and, in placing it in the scale with an inferior thing, the

enthusiasm that right is capable of inspiring is diminished. It is

impossible to find any equivalent counterpoise for the right of

suffrage, because it is alone worthy to be its own basis, and cannot

thrive as a graft, or an appendage.

Since the Constitution was established we have seen two con-

spiracies stranded,--that of Babeuf, and that of some obscure

personages who decorate themselves with the despicable name of

"royalists." The defect in principle of the Constitution was the origin

of Babeuf's conspiracy. He availed himself of the resentment caused

by this flaw, and instead of seeking a remedy by legitimate and

constitutional means, or proposing some measure useful to society,

the conspirators did their best to renew disorder and confusion, and

constituted themselves personally into a Directory, which is formally

destructive of election and representation. They were, in fine,

extravagant enough to suppose that society, occupied with its

domestic affairs, would blindly yield to them a directorship usurped

by violence.

The conspiracy of Babeuf was followed in a few months by that

of the royalists, who foolishly flattered themselves with the notion of

doing great things by feeble or foul means. They counted on all the

discontented, from whatever cause, and tried to rouse, in their turn,

the class of people who had been following the others. But these new

chiefs acted as if they thought society had nothing more at heart than

to maintain courtiers, pensioners, and all their train, under the con-

temptible title of royalty. My little essay will disabuse them, by

showing that society is aiming at a very different end,--maintaining

itself.

We all know or should know, that the time during which a revo-

lution is proceeding is not the time when its resulting advantages can

be enjoyed. But had Babeuf and his accomplices taken into

consideration the condition of France under this constitution, and

compared it with what it was under the tragical revolutionary

government, and during the execrable reign of Terror, the rapidity of

the alteration must have appeared to them very striking and astonish-

ing. Famine has been replaced by abundance, and by the

well-founded hope of a near and increasing prosperity.

As for the defect in the Constitution, I am fully convinced that it

will be rectified constitutionally, and that this step is indispensable;

for so long as it continues it will inspire the hopes and furnish the

means of conspirators; and for the rest, it is regrettable that a

Constitution so wisely organized should err so much in its principle.

This fault exposes it to other dangers which will make themselves

felt. Intriguing candidates will go about among those who have not

the means to pay the direct tax and pay it for them, on condition of

receiving their votes. Let us maintain inviolably equality in the

sacred right of suffrage: public security can never have a basis more

solid.

Salut et Fraternité.

Your former colleague,

THOMAS PAINE.

AUTHOR'S ENGLISH PREFACE.

THE following little Piece was written in the winter of

1795 and 96; and, as I had not determined whether to

publish it during the present war, or to wait till the

commencement of a peace, it has lain by me, without

alteration or addition, from the time it was written.

What has determined me to publish it now is, a

sermon preached by Watson, Bishop of Llandaff. Some

of my Readers will recollect, that this Bishop wrote a

Book entitled An Apology for the Bible, in answer to my

Second Part of the Age of Reason. I procured a copy of

his Book, and he may depend upon hearing from me on

that subject.

At the end of the Bishop's Book is a List of the

Works he has written. Among which is the sermon

alluded to; it is entitled: "The Wisdom and Goodness of

God, in having made both Rich and Poor; with an

Appendix, containing Reflections on the Present State

of England and France."

The error contained in this sermon determined me to

publish my AGRARIAN JUSTICE. It is wrong to say

God made rich and poor; he made only male and

female; and he gave them the earth for their inheritance.

Instead of preaching to encourage one part of

mankind in insolence . . . it would be better that Priests

employed their time to render the general condition of

man less miserable than it is. Practical religion consists

in doing good: and the only way of serving God is, that

of endeavouring to make his creation happy. All

preaching that has not this for its object is nonsense and

hypocracy.

THOMAS PAINE.

AGRARIAN JUSTICE.

TO preserve the benefits of what is called civilized life, and to

remedy at the same time the evil which it has produced ought to be

considered as one of the first objects of reformed legislation.

Whether that state that is proudly, perhaps erroneously, called

civilization, has most promoted or most injured the general happiness

of man, is a question that may be strongly contested. On one side, the

spectator is dazzled by splendid appearances; on the other, he is

shocked by extremes of wretchedness; both of which it has erected.

The most affluent and the most miserable of the human race are to be

found in the countries that are called civilized.

To understand what the state of society ought to be, it is

necessary to have some idea of the natural and primitive state of

man; such as it is at this day among the Indians of North America.

There is not, in that state, any of those spectacles of human misery

which poverty and want present to our eyes in all the towns and

streets in Europe. Poverty therefore, is a thing created by that which

is called civilized life. It exists not in the natural state. On the other

hand, the natural state is without those advantages which flow from

agriculture, arts, science, and manufactures.

The life of an Indian is a continual holiday, compared with the

poor of Europe; and, on the other hand it appears to be abject when

compared to the rich. Civilization therefore, or that which is so

called, has operated two ways to make one part of society more

affluent, and the other more wretched, than would have been the lot

of either in a natural state.

It is always possible to go from the natural to the civilized state,

but it is never possible to go from the civilized to the natural state.

The reason is, that man in a natural state, subsisting by hunting,

requires ten times the quantity of land to range over to procure

himself sustenance, than would support him in a civilized state,

where the earth is cultivated. When, therefore, a country becomes

populous by the additional aids of cultivation, art, and science, there

is a necessity of preserving things in that state; because without it

there cannot be sustenance for more, perhaps, than a tenth part of its

inhabitants. The thing, therefore, now to be done is to remedy the

evils and preserve the benefits that have arisen to society by passing

from the natural to that which is called the civilized state.

In taking the matter upon this ground, the first principle of civili-

zation ought to have been, and ought still to be, that the condition of

every person born into the world, after a state of civilization

commences, ought not to be worse than if he had been born before

that period. But the fact is, that the condition of millions, in every

country in Europe, is far worse than if they had been born before

civilization began, or had been born among the Indians of North-

America at the present day. I will shew how this fact has happened.

It is a position not to be controverted that the earth, in its natural

uncultivated state was, and ever would have continued to be, the

common property of the human race. In that state every man would

have been born to property. He would have been a joint life proprie-

tor with the rest in the property of the soil, and in all its natural

productions, vegetable and animal.

But the earth in its natural state, as before said, is capable of

supporting but a small number of inhabitants compared with what it

is capable of doing in a cultivated state. And as it is impossible to

separate the improvement made by cultivation from the earth itself,

upon which that improvement is made, the idea of landed property

arose from that inseparable connection; but it is nevertheless true,

that it is the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself,

that is individual property. Every proprietor, therefore, of cultivated

land, owes to the community a groundrent (for I know of no better

term to express the idea) for the land which he holds; and it is from

this groundrent that the fund proposed in this plan is to issue.

It is deducible, as well from the nature of the thing as from all the

histories transmitted to us, that the idea of landed property

commenced with cultivation, and that there was no such thing as

landed property before that time. It could not exist in the first state of

man, that of hunters. It did not exist in the second state, that of

shepherds: neither Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, nor Job, so far as the

history of the Bible may be credited in probable things, were owners

of land. Their property consisted, as is always enumerated, in flocks

and herds, and they travelled with them from place to place. The

frequent contentions at that time, about the use of a well in the dry

country of Arabia, where those people lived, also shew that there was

no landed property. It was not admitted that land could be claimed as

property.

There could be no such thing as landed property originally. Man

did not make the earth, and, though he had a natural right to occupy

it, he had no right to locate as his property in perpetuity any part of

it; neither did the creator of the earth open a landoffice, from whence

the first title-deeds should issue. Whence then, arose the idea of

landed property? I answer as before, that when cultivation began the

idea of landed property began with it, from the impossibility of

separating the improvement made by cultivation from the earth itself,

upon which that improvement was made. The value of the

improvement so far exceeded the value of the natural earth, at that

time, as

Comments