Comments on: Who Said It?

By: Name

Name — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 19:10:00 +0000

It’s apparently Otto Mallery – see http://antidismal.blogspot.com/2009/04/bastiat-quote-or-non-quote-2.html

By: t.ross

t.ross — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 11:20:47 +0000

Someone obviously said it 1st, and Bastiat has long been credited with it. It does sound like Bastiat and until someone can show that he didn't say it, I'm going to continue to credit him those wise and timely remarks.

By: Kevin Craig

Kevin Craig — Fri, 02 May 2008 02:22:35 +0000

John Paul – Single Tax – Land & Liberty: Monthly Journal for Land Value Taxation and Free Trade – 1919 – Page 64.

The press, cinema and radio must be used to show that goods and trade means peace,
friendship and prosperity and that if goods are not allowed to cross …

By: Jason Briggeman

Jason Briggeman — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 18:01:50 +0000

Following Kurt's tip, I found this on p. 10 of the Mallery book:

"If soldiers are not to cross international boundaries on missions of war, goods must cross them on missions of peace."

By: True_Liberal

True_Liberal — Thu, 17 May 2007 20:10:18 +0000

The present Middle East situation doesn't fit the goods/borders/soldiers paradigm, does it? We've been trading heavily in crude from the Persian Gulf states for many decades, and they've been the recipients of many Western goods.

And yet it seems the Western goods, people, and lifestyle presence there are the very kindling that have ignited the present war.

By: kurt

kurt — Mon, 14 May 2007 22:07:32 +0000

Try Otto Mallery's Economic Union and Durable Peace.

By: Brian Moore

Brian Moore — Mon, 14 May 2007 12:50:15 +0000

I think they full well understood what would happen. Didn't FDR want to provoke Japan to action?

By: Matt C.

Matt C. — Mon, 14 May 2007 09:01:14 +0000

I find amazing is that Hull would say such a thing. Here is why I am astonished. FDR basically forced the hand of the Japanese, so to speak. He wanted to cut them off from the rubber supply, so instead they went right for the throat. They invaded Singapore and Malaysia so that they could have a rubber supply.

It's a little ironic that someone from FDR's own cabinet would have realized that so late in the game.

By: Mathieu Bédard

Mathieu Bédard — Sun, 13 May 2007 19:23:39 +0000

I'm not sure if this is of any help, but it sounds like something Montesquieu would write;

Montesquieu, The Spirit of Laws pp. 389;

Between the two empires deserts were formed and armies were always stationed on the frontiers; so that instead of there being any commerce, there was not so much as communication between them. Ambition, jealousy, religion, national antipathy, and difference of manners completed the separation.

again pp.634;

But the indictions, the capitations and other imposts raised at the time of the emperors on the persons or goods of freemen had been changed into an obligation of defending the frontiers and marching against the enemy.

By: The Cynical Libertarian

The Cynical Libertarian — Sun, 13 May 2007 16:44:20 +0000

Interesting. I've read a little Bastiat, but I must read more.